User talk:StationNT5Bmedia

Disclaimer

StationNT5Bmedia

StationNT5Bmedia

The views and opinions expressed by participants do not necessarily reflect those of the StationNT5Bmedia, it's staff, management, or operators. Although Wikipedia takes it's presence on the world wide web very seriously, the contributions to the free encyclopedia are made by online volunteers, whose experience and qualification vary widely. Wikipedia administrators randomly access files for content in their watch lists, including the duly noted incomplete article below that was being created by this editorial site. It is under review, and although the content R. Weldon Smith, & much of the information has been retreived, and is being handled in an acceptablility policy of the Wikipedian community. That is by the cumulative efforts of many online volunteer administrators, a new article may exist (or not). As the knowledge pool of the internet expands, differentiation is needed between digital and print publication. The cost of each can be estimated, but the value should also be considered.StationNT5Bmedia 19:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

StationNT5Bmedia User Page

Theses external links for the benefit of visitors

• [1]About StationNT5Bmedia in partnership
• [2]Volunteer administration with non-profit advocates
• [3]Health Sciences & other links spanning 25 years of media
• [4]View a 2006 publication and scroll down for a Free Preview
• [5]Browse a 2007 publication with a Free Preview

Courtesy & common sense

Please do not hack this page. New discussions are currently taking place here. This User_talk page is being provided by Wikipedia, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. Additions to User_talk pages by convention are entered at the bottom of the page. Have you ever heard the expression The first shall be last, and the last shall be first. Be sensible. Thanks.StationNT5Bmedia 04:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Pupilometer

Sure, go ahead with any changes you feel are necessary. My only contribution to the page was to fix some dab links, I'm not really competent to comment on the subject matter. Tevildo 17:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, all I did was add some links and wikify, but if you have sources to back up what you're doing, then absolutely change it. --Nsevs • Talk 02:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Unsynchronous Non-sense

So then what you're getting at is unsynchronous means a manual transmission without synchronizers, while non-synchronous refers to the transmission as well as the associated parts such as clutch brake? Leedeth 21:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Who introduced the term unsynchronous? After trying to find anything on the term, I question if it was introduced inside Wikipedia, and isn't an encyclopedic topic. I propose that unsychronous is something other that what has been cited in the other articles. I propose unsychronous doesn't belong at all. StationNT5Bmedia 02:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

**Non-synchronous** ( - not - X - unsynchronous - )

The terminology found in the driver's manuals refers to "non-synchronous" transmissions. Again, I can find no references at all used, other than inside Wikipedia, for the term "unsynchronous". The term "unsynchronous" would be a typo, unless the term is adopted elsewhere by some authority (ie. public safety). The historical documentation for transmissions hasn't used the term "unsynchronous" in the past. I believe the term was introduced inside of Wikipedia as dis-information. The use of the term that is "non-synchronous transmission", on the other hand, has been found throughout driver's manuals in commercial driver's license regulatory documentation for at least the past 3 decades that I know of, and probably as far back as the invention of automatic transmissions during the late 1960's. StationNT5Bmedia 01:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the non-synchronous transmission article

I'm not sure what you call exhaustive cleanup, but I had the cleanup tag there for a reason. I should've been more specific but the article needs a lot of copyediting, specifically in its tone. Also, Wikipedia is not a manual, so "How to synchronize a non-synchronous transmission" should rather be named "How synchronization works", yes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leedeth (talk • contribs) 07:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I just realized I forgot to sign my commment... --Leedeth 18:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be within the scope of WP, because manual transmission talks about the internals. The new heading "How non-synchronization works" doesn't really fit since you can't really make a transmission "non-synchronize". Perhaps "User synchronization", or maybe "How user synchronization works"? --Leedeth 01:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:A Future Wilderness

A tag has been placed on Template:A Future Wilderness requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SalviaLyrataCutAwaySF.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:SalviaLyrataCutAwaySF.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 01:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Above image

Did you mean to add this GNU template {{GFDL}} Polly (Parrot) 01:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:SalviaLyrataCutAwaySF.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:SalviaLyrataCutAwaySF.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:SalviaLyrataCutAwaySF.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 02:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Lens Clock article maintenance

The original author of the lens clock article has found some commercial references not in the original references section, and his own links missing. Because the wikipedia encourages an open editorial method, over time it seems regular maintenance of particular educational article will be necessary to discourage the wholesale use of commercial advertising in an otherwise academic environment. I will have to consult with the author about the removal of reference URLs StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 02:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I wrote you a message about this at Talk:Lens clock. I suggest we discuss this further there. I think there are things you have misunderstood, and there are probably things I am not understanding. In particular I would like to know more about the references that were removed, to see if they can be made suitable. Wikipedia's policy on references is at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources. The references that were removed did not comply with these guidelines, because they were merely links to organizational home pages, not links to specific relevant content.

Please note also Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. The "original author" of an article has no special claim over it. All articles are a collective effort. One person starts an article, someone else copyedits it and adds wikilinks or mathematical typesetting if necessary. Others come along and add new sections or prune material that is not needed. In the end, the article becomes better than any one of us could have produced on our own.--Srleffler (talk) 03:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Aspheric lens, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Without a source, I can't help repair the text into something understandable. Dicklyon (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:AsphericLensTrace.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AsphericLensTrace.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. JaGa^talk 01:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I've flagged the image for speedy deletion. StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 16:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Salvia lyrata

Hi! I saw the dispute between you and First Light and just wanted to leave a few notes and questions on your talk page. I noticed this edit. In reply, I must point you to WP:OR WP:SYNTH, and WP:NOT. It is not necessarily Wikipedia's duty to warn readers of a plant's toxicity unless that toxicity is notable with respect to the plant. Further, it doesn't matter where First Light resides; suggesting that he has no business editing the page simply because he doesn't live near the Texas Gulf Coast is anathema to Wikipedia. I understand your concern, but you must understand that the references you're using do not seem to support the text you wrote. Again, Wikipedia is not a publisher or original ideas. And you say you've talked to local organizations about this - which ones? Do they have this information published in newsletters, pamphlets, their websites? Are they reliable sources? Forgive me if you've already noted the answers to these questions, but I haven't yet seen them. I'd like to help the dispute resolution here and I believe the answers to these questions may get to the point. Thanks, --Rkitko ^(talk) 12:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi StationNT5Bmedia, I noticed that at User talk:SB Johnny you mentioned that your source is "excerpts of correspondence with Texas A&M University". Based on that, the material can't be added to the article, because personal correspondence is most definitely not a Reliable Source, according to Wikipedia's standards. I sincerely suggest you spend some time reading WP:RS to learn more about what can be used for Wikipedia articles. But also, why don't you write to the person who you are corresponding with at Texas A & M? If there is a reliable, third-party published expert source for this, they could tell you in an instant. If you can find such a published source, probably in an academic journal, that meets the standards at WP:RS, the material can be appropriately presented in the article. First Light (talk) 21:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Salvia lyrata. For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 06:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Student Livestock Projects Lost $Millions at 2009 Houston Livestock Show

4H & FFA student livestock projects that weren't allowed to show had to be removed from the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo. Those passing the scrutiny of sifting committees that screen projects before judging, and were allowed to show went either to market $2000.00 or more below cost, or went on to the arena for further elimination. Cumulatively, 68% of all livestock projects were eliminated before going to show, meaning they were invited to leave without any monetary compensation, and the others remaining were allowed to sell there livestock at or below market value. A yearling market steer at current auction could sell for less than $1.00/pound, or less than $1000.00 total bid. Buyers set the bid. FFA students pay over $900.00 to begin with a 500-600 lb steer from a registered breeder, and over a 6 month period try to increase muscle weight to over 1000 lbs. They then have invested several thousands of USD to bring the yearling steer to the livestock show of their choice. Many of them, seniors in high school, are raising a market steer to try & raise money for their next year's college tuition. The Houston Livestock Show 2009 was from March 3 - 22, and almost ever contestant lost over two thousand dollars of their estimated four to five thousand dollar cost. Add up the number of entries, and their lost capital, and the figures speak for themselves...$millions ($1,000,000.00)s wasted on animal projects at the 2009 Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo. Wouldn't you rather support the LULAC, PRCA, & PBRA boycotts of this rodeo's wasteful tactics & big brother governemental bailouts? Media Center Director Suzanne Brack said these organizations weren't "big" enough to make any difference with the 50,000/night attendance during the 3 week annual HLSR. Attendance in 2008 topped a million people. How about you? Are you big enough to support a boycott of any particular evening at the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo? StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 19:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:RayTracing.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:RayTracing.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 05:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

${\frac {1}{f}}=(n-1)\left[{\frac {1}{R_{1}}}-{\frac {1}{R_{2}}}+{\frac {(n-1)d}{nR_{1}R_{2}}}\right]$

File:HouseCarPiano.JPG missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:HouseCarPiano.JPG is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

See details of file permissions edited 04:01, 13 September 2010 StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 04:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Ronald Ultimate.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ronald Ultimate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen2 (talk) 17:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

photo associated with article on author

File photo associated with articles under Wikipedia Deletion Review/Log/2007 June 24 by talk etal, undeleted & history merge for GFDL 2007 July 1 04:28 UTC category: living persons, science fiction, paperback novels, memoirs . . . 2nd article assoc: A Modern Wilderness, ISBN 978-1-4259-7731-3 3rd article assoc: A Future Wilderness, ISBN 978-1-4259-9901-8 StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 20:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:HouseCarPiano.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:HouseCarPiano.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Diannaa ^(Talk) 03:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

There are no file permission problems with File:HouseCarPiano.jpg

This posting can only be a result of over-zealous actions using extreme stringence in interpreting open-source permissions strained by editorial administrative policies, therfore challenging unnecessary tags to affect speedy deletion of otherwise notable material, only to create schisms among contributing editors and participants. StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 13:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)