User talk:Tom/Archive6

politician stubs

I'd been waiting to see if someone would revert all of them. After making the changes to the pics a few months ago, I thought about it myself at times, but some other users seemed to like them while others didn't. If anyone switches back any of your reversions, I'll ask them to discuss on the main talkpage for the US politician stub cat so we can establish uniformity. Personally, I have been leaning to state seals for politicians, but the flags are fine if everyone else agrees. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 04:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Susan Sontag

Tom, how is it that someone who declares the white race to be the "cancer of human history" fails to meet your standard of objectively qualifying as racist? Is there something rather biased and onerously-non-NPOV about acknowledging it? Would it also be non-NPOV to call Hitler a racist? I'd appreciate if you'd discuss this on the Susan Sontag talk page, where I've already touched upon this issue.

Thanks, 20.137.68.52 18:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Kappes; Who makes you the expert ?

The information you keep reverting to is inaccurate ab initio. You appear to be afraid to allow the truth on this individual. Just because it is in the newspaper doesn't mean it is accurate. And, just because there aren't media stories to cite to doesn't mean it isn't accurate. Check with Mr. Kappes, he can't deny any of this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Toothteller (talk • contribs) at 01:20 UTC on July 12, 2006.

Brain tumor

Hi, just a note, the CT scan on brain tumor is breast cancer metastatic to the brain. (I know most things related to breast tend to be vandalism, but this is not!) Cheers -- Samir धर्म 07:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I've wiki-linked the word metastasis which should clarify the concerns. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 17:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Robert Milligan McLane

Tomf688: You posted that Robert Milligan McLane was chair of the Democratic National Committee on his biography page. He is not listed on the list of DNC Chairs, and his online bio does not mention the position. Could you please provide a reference to this data, especially the time period that he served? I was trying to clean up DNC list (fix links, made a table, added home states, etc.) and became confused when I saw Gov. McLane's name in the DNC catagory. If you could help clear up my confusion I would be appreciative. Thanks.WVhybrid 20:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for setting me straight, Tomf688 and John K. Also thanks for the table format change. I am slowly picking up the many format functions. Now on to the Republican list B-).WVhybrid 01:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

DNC Chairs

See here. This site, while not explicitly sourced, has normally proved accurate when compared with more authoritative sources. john k 23:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Japanese American internment

Greetings. I'd like to request that you unprotect the page. If you review my comments on the talk page, they'll show that I'm concerned about these edits. Should you browse the talk archives, you'll see that a similar (but smaller scale) edit war occurred about two years ago (as well as some of my comments on those edits). I've looked at some of the sources that these editors have provided, and I am satisfied that they contradict or complicate more than a few of the statements in the article in its current (protected) revision. I agree that the article presented by the unregistered editors is an editorial mess, but as I've written in several places, there are numerous claims in the current revision that are also in need of citations. When the page is unprotected, it needs--at a minimum--RfC ASAP. Also, the article needs NPOV until these disputes can be resolved. But the protection status of the page is causing a lot of smoke, hopefully no fire, but very little light, either. --ishu 21:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

User:History Student is making noises about resuming editing, as editor is unable to offer consensus on others' points, nor able to achieve consensus on own points. I suppose we'll have to wait until the revert war ensues before admins can take action. --ishu 16:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

abuse

tom -- you were abusing your privileges. please don't do it again Justforasecond 20:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

you've abused your privileges and i called you on it. now please stop harassing me. Justforasecond 23:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Tom Angelis Page

Hello.... I'm new to wikipedia and am still trying to figure out what I am allowed to put on the Tom Angelis wikipedia page. Please stop deleting my work. I am willing to abide by the rules but your not helping. I am the webmaster for www.tomangelis.com. Tom is running for County Executive in my county.

Here's the problem tom, as you may already know politics can get dirty. Tom has been having a real bad problem with people against him, posting untrue statement about him that could hurt his campaign. What do YOU propose I do about this?

Honestly... i'd rather keep the page protected so that nobody can edit it. Is that possible? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jkpcguru (talk • contribs) at 17:49, July 21, 2006.

AIDS

Excuse me, why did you change this? Attic Owl 14:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Attic Owl 21:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

One More Thing: How far do I have to go before I could become an administrator? Attic Owl 21:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

No President/No Vice President

So, you're saying from March 3rd Midnight (pre-20th Amendment) until March 4th Noon EST, the United States of America had No President & No Vice President? For 12 hours the nation's top two executive offices were vacant? GoodDay 22:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

This is frustrating, Septentrionalis agrees with me, that March 4th is correct and he'll provide the evidence. Meanwhile, your'e saying leave it at March 3rd. Again, what about those 12 hours? Did the Presidential & VP terms begin as Midnight March 3/4 OR at NOON EST March 4th? The scary thing is, there's references out there that support both dates. GoodDay 23:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Noon is more definite than the evidence permits, but it is clear that Herbert Hoover was president on the morning of March 4, 1933; see Talk:Herbert Hoover. I will be consulting actual secondary sources before going further. Please stop reverting. Septentrionalis 23:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

That's a tertiary source. It is not preferable to Susan Kennedy's book on the banking crisis, or to a printed biography of Hoover or Roosevelt. I do not see how to make the full NPOV acknowledgement of uncertainty in this context; but we should not prefer a compilation to historians. Septentrionalis 23:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Further more, I remember reading US President books (can't remember which), describing March 3rd, 1845 (the day President Tyler signed the bill making Florida a state), as Tyler's last FULL DAY in office (NOT his last day) suggesing Tyler's term continued into March 4th, 1845. GoodDay 23:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Midnight judges is a metaphor; Adams nominated them on March 2. See Marbury v. Madison. Septentrionalis 23:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

For more evidence on this subject, see Talk:Woodrow Wilson#March 4, 1921. Congress adjourned immediately before noon on the 4th, and Wilson was still President. Septentrionalis 18:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you; that is absolutely clear. Noon, March 4, Washington time; but the Congressional record accounts for those twelve hours as an extension of the legislative day of March 3. The qualification should be explained in those articles where it is on topic; the biographies of the Presidents are not such places, and should say March 4, as the Senate Report on Presidential terms does:

From 1789 through 1937, presidential and vice presidential terms ended on March 4 of every year following a presidential election, a date set by the Second Congress.

Regards, Septentrionalis 15:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI, lots of additional evidence on this topic has been compiled at Talk:List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States which you might want to take a look at. You are right about the bioguide as giving the dates as March 3, but I believe that is a function of a limitation on their database (not being able to hold two names as occupying the same office on the same date) rather than a substantive comment on the legal end of the terms. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your further input on the article talk page. I've responded there. I will add that you are right about the CongBio database listing both outgoing and incoming Members for January 3, so I withdraw "technical database limitations" as a reason that the CongBio dates are (in my opinion) off by half a day. Regards, and as indicated, I will try to post some further evidence based on the Congressional Record after I can get to a library. Newyorkbrad 01:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

It may well reflect what the e-mail actually addresses; that Congress counted the morning of March 4 as part of the legislative day of March 3. This is an artificial convention, which it would be misleading to follow. Congress quite regularly adjourned just before noon, March 4, Washington time. March 4, 1917 is discussed at the list of Presidents; March 4, 1921 is discussed on Talk:Woodrow Wilson. Septentrionalis 01:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Allan Lichtman headshot.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Allan Lichtman headshot.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Bush approval ratings

please update the bush approval rating on george w bush's page as of the latest month Thank You! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.173.11 (talk • contribs) 20:35, August 8, 2006 Please update as of today's date. Thanx! --4.232.126.2 17:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Crystal Gail Mangum

Nice edit on the CGM page. You found a decent compromise to the situation. I realize that you feel that the dispute was pety, but to those who have served the distinction can be monumental. Again, thanks for throwing your level headedness into the fray. Mutant Zero 21:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

i left this on university of maryland, college park talk page

Point of Failure

I'm a student at U of M, and neither I, nor any of my friends, have never seen this plaque mentioned in the wiki warning students about the legend. I really don't think there actually is one. Can someone confirm? Perhaps I'm just blind. User:70.108.29.250 21:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Tom Angelis

I was wondering why the Tom Angelis Page has been deleted but all the rest of the candidates pages were allowed to remain up? It dosent seam fair to allow some and block others. (Phil Bissett, David G. Boschert, John R. Leopold, George F. Johnson, IV, Dennis Callahan) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay-Z23 (talk • contribs)

Hi, this article was restored but left protected. That doesn't seem like what was intended. --Dhartung | Talk 18:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Please Update G.W. Bush Approval Rating Chart

Would you be so kind as to update the George W. Bush Approval rating chart please? Thanks. Btw, is there a certain application or program you use to create and update said chart?

--Ai.kefu 00:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

parent/child categories

Thanks for your advice re categorizations. I figured since all these darned overlapping categories exist, I might as well use them all.

But I understand your point and will no longer do so.

Thanks again. HOT L Baltimore 23:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

habeas corpus vote in U.S. Senate, September 28, 2006

I noticed that you deleted all mention of the "torture compromise" achieved by Senator John McCain, despite the fact that it was front-page news for several days in the United States, and despite the fact that McCain's change of heart was critical in swaying other Senators. There were (literally) thousands of articles on this subject both in the United States and around the world. If you had reduced the amount of copy, I might understand, and could accept your editing as NPOV — however, I regard your wholesale deletion of this news item, which by all accounts was a significant change of direction for McCain, as coarse censorship. I am restoring accordingly, and would be happy to discuss the issue on the Talk pages per Wikipedia practice. Sandover 00:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

User Page Layout

Hi, I shamelessly stole your layout. But I have a question. How do you change the userboxes on the right? For example, if I wanted to add |mathie| to the box, how would I do it? (Feel free to edit my userpage). --Mysmartmouth 02:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! I LOVE YOU! --Mysmartmouth 01:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Graphic Designer's Barnstar

Awarded for your help with the design of my userpage, as well as the excellent design of yours. --Mysmartmouth

Vice Presidents Dawes, Coolidge and Humphrey

Every single thing I put in those articles were well reserched. The original article on Hubert Humphrey was rather opinionated, especially with the Tom Leherer song, (which by the way was a favorite of my mother's). The part about the 1968 elections was completely wrong, as one might find out by reading Theodore H. White's "making of the president: 1968." The part about HHH and Tom Dodd waiting around while LBJ dickered in August of 1964 was in his MoTP:1964, as well as Newsweek, Time and Humphrey's memiors.

Humphrey's 1952 race for the presidency is mentioned in the Congressional quarterly: Congress and the nation: 1945-1964. So is his race for the vice presidency in 1956.

As to Dawes, the US Senate's history of the Vice Presidency (1990, US government printing office) expicitly tells of the anecdote about Coolidge being insulted if Dawes got a second nomination in 1928, and the part about his boycotting Cabinet meetings and his intemperate inaugural address was in there too, as well as Facts on File's encyclopedia of the vice presidency. Wikipedia is the only place I've seen where Dawes' service as first head of the RFC wasn't mentioned.

AS to Calvin Coolidge, the article barely even mentions that he was vice president. That Coolidge was not very popular among the members of the Harding Administration and was going to be replaced in 1924 is mentioned in all major biographies. Okay, the "stink of teapot dome wafting..." might have been a little over the top, but the scandal was just about to break and dammit, Harding's death WAS mysterious. I've read that it was a heart attack in one book, food poisoning in another and all sort of other causes.

Please put my revisions back as they were. I worked hard on them

Ericl

Your Removed important information on Scott Rolle

You removed important information from the scott rolle page that better illustrates where he is from. It would be more appropriate to address where he was born, where he grew up and other familial information before address his current run for Attorney General in Maryland. I would ask that you not delete that information.

Thank You.

Editing

Hello, I'm responding back to you comments. I'm not predicting the future, because I'm only making these edits for congressmen who are not running for reelection and therefore will see their terms end on 1-3-07. All other congressmen, I am leaving alone, even if they are predicted to lose the race.

Part 2

I see that you changed everything back, although I must disgree with your actions. Wikipedia actually does attempt to predict the future in many instances and, if what I wrote shall be removed, then so should all of these others. Just take a look at the year 2007. Many, many things are predicted to occur and a lot of these dates could change at any moment. So when I get time I will be changing them all back to 2007 and placing (expected date) at the end, since that seems to be what makes "predicting the future" acceptible on this site.

And do not take that last comment out of context. I am not some newbie who is looking for justification for my edits. I've observed that over the year a half that I've edited this site on various user names. I also plan on placing 2007 as the start date on newly elected politicians as soon as they are elected, but again, to keep you and the couple other complainers happy, I will place (expected date) on the page.

Image:Richard Dannatt, NATO photo portrait.jpg

Instigated by Jimbo Wales, fair-use policy has recently changed. We are no longer permitted to use a non-free image to depict a living person. I believe that Image:Richard Dannatt, NATO photo portrait.jpg no longer adheres to WP:FUC and have tagged the image as such. These changes to the policy are new, however, and may possibly not apply to that particular image. Essentially, if you can provide evidence that a free image could not reasonably be created, it would be appropriate to use a copyrighted image. I don't think that's the case here but I'm letting you know what's going on just in case. --Yamla 19:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

new RFC

You may be interested to know that an RFC has recently been initiated regarding Fair use images of Canadian politicians. Many images of Canadian public figures are about to be deleted, including ones you have uploaded. Please feel free to participate. - Mcasey666 05:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Bush approval image

I noticed your name there, and I think the graph is already outdated, could you update it? --Nielswik_(talk) 12:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Quentin Tarantino.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Quentin Tarantino.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok 16:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bush approval ratings line graph.png

Could you please update it? October has passed, so it would fit right in. Also please upload a SVG if you got one. --80.63.213.182 21:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

re: Talk:Saddam Hussein#unprotect this

You're right, of course; I just found it amusing that the anonymous user who was demanding the article be unprotected was clearly interested in vandalizing it, based on his edits to Guilt and Guilty. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 18:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh, the anon who requested the unprotection went back and laughed that we actually did it: Talk:Saddam Hussein#unprotect this -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 15:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use is not an issue for the Saddam portrait. Internationally the copyright holdings for images produced by old regime Iraq are not recognized. We are free to use the photo. 172 | Talk 21:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jwebb-Annandale.jpg

Sorry, I'm not very familiar with Wikipedia's rather complicated policies towards licensing issues, and I didn't see the section on non-free Creative Commons licenses. I just changed the licensing tag to the correct one on the image, so I guess it will be deleted. Would you object to moving the 2006 senate campaign photo (the one you removed) to the top of the article instead? Schi 21:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

BOT - Regarding your recent protection of Image:Rumsfeld1 crop.jpg:

You recently protected[1] this page but did not give a protection summary. If this is an actual (not deleted) article, talk, or project page, make sure that it is listed on WP:PP. VoABot will automatically list such protected pages only if there is a summary. Do not remove this notice until a day or so, otherwise it may get reposted. Thanks. VoABot 21:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Bush approval ratings line graph

Hello, has this graph been updated? I just read of a new Newsweek poll that puts Bush's approval rating at 31%, the lowest ever for that particular poll...

Thanks!

Image:Ted kulongoski.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ted kulongoski.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 00:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Texasgovbush.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Texasgovbush.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 03:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that you don't view my actions as good faith. I promise you that I am acting in what I believe to be Wikipedia's best interests, and while I recognize that you disagree with my interpretation of said interests and don't expect to be able to convince you otherwise, I implore you to accept that, whether my actions are right or wrong, I have only good intentions. Sound okay? "Agree to disagree", and all that.

Also, if you prefer that I no longer notify you when I tag one of the images you uploaded, I will respect that. Just let me know. —Chowbok ☠ 16:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. I definitely don't want to annoy anybody any more than I already am. I'll do it that way from now on. (It was never meant as "you're so dumb I'm going to keep telling you this"

, more like laziness on my part. But I can see how it could get irritating.)—Chowbok ☠ 21:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

110th Congress delegation templates

I don't think these templates are really necessary, since they will be duplicating the information presented in the FedRep templates (i.e. Template:MD-FedRep) come January 3. Further, we can't create these templates for every new Congress since they will severely crowd the pages of long-serving Congressmen. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to use more than one on any Congressman's page if you don't want. But frankly, I think the idea of having a template to represent only the current Congress is the wrong way to go. It's recentism. Then you run into situations like now where we're not allowed to represent the 110th Congress until January which I don't think is helpful or encyclopedic. Having templates for the individual Congresses can be especially helpful for one-term Congressmen, of which I think there are quite a few. Worst case, they can all be deleted in January... —Wknight94 (talk) 01:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

More replaceable fair use images

• Image:Wayne Curry.jpg
• Image:Bob riley of alabama.jpg
• Image:Jennifer Granholm.jpg
• Image:Joe Manchin official portrait.jpg

—Chowbok ☠ 23:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Corbis Random Revert

Tomf688. I spent a few days with a different moderator for our CORBIS entry, putting up information encyclopedic entries to the CORBIS company. We finally got to an informational, non-marketing fluff entry with robust data on the company and its officers and you randomly reverted it to an old company completely disregarding the discussion and work put into getting it to a good Wiki entry. (Corbis Home site modled after entries from yahoo, google, cnet entries, the FPF informational PDF, the divisions of the company, etc..etc...

I am at a loss to understand why one would throw away the work I and the Wiki moderator did to make this a viable entry with good Wikipedia value.

Kindly, gillettorg

Thanks

Thanks for telling me how to upload images properly on the 24th November 2006 DrKiernan 13:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)