User talk:Hob/Archive2

Hello HOB

Thanks for the work on IPT. There are a lot of things to learn around Wikipedia and I really value your effort. I think your idea about having it in experimental cancer treatment is good. I was trying to distinguish between "insulin potentiation" as a methodology and cancer treatment using potentiated drugs - I believe they are very distinct

Polish theater

The text is from http://www.poland.gov.pl/ "The Minister of Foreign Affairs owns full and unrestricted property copyright to and in the promotional materials displayed on the www.poland.gov.pl website in all language versions, including in particular: logotypes, texts, photos, tables and graphs, covering all fields of exploitation and directed to an unlimited number of transmissions. The said materials may be used by governmental and non-governmental institutions for the promotion of Poland, in compliance with the directions of Polish foreign policy. They may not be used by Polish and foreign natural and legal persons for obtainment of financial gain."

National Film School in Łódź - i have add the list of directors, befor the copyvio-tag - see [1]

--Witkacy 30 June 2005 21:28 (UTC)

Hello, Hob!

I moved the List of minicomic artists to another page, and pared the list to names I clearly feel should be included... in my case, almost all 1980s era names... hopefully someone will fill in some current names, as I will when I delve back into the genre.

Thanks for the tips, btw... there's bit to learn here!

Will Dockery

-- The Netherlands/Shadowville cross cultural exchange project http://www.kannibaal.nl/shadowville.htm

Trying to get AIDS as a Featured Article

Hi there! In an effort to make the article here on AIDS the best possible before trying to submit it as a "Featured Article", I've looked up some active submitters in the last month or so and found you. Please, take a little time to go by the AIDS article and it's Talk page to see how you can help. One rather large source of confusion and complication, the References/External Links section, has just been cleaned and polished, thus your experience should be much more tolerable in general ;).

AIDS is a very serious world wide issue; never before have we needed to spread AIDS education as much as we do now. We need as many people as possible working together to make this article on AIDS the best it can be. Hope to see your contributions soon! JoeSmack (talk) 17:53, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

The Dreams Our Stuff Is Made Of

Thanks a lot for your observations with regard to my article on this book. NPOV is something that I struggle with, but I'm trying to do better. I've rewritten the article - would you mind having another look and telling me what you think?

Superhero

As a contributor to the above article, would you mind looking through it and seeing if you can provide any references? The reason I ask is that at WPT:CMC we are trying to get more comics articles given Featured Article status. Thanks for any help you could provide. Steve block talk 15:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight

As a member of WikiProject Comics, I thought you might be interested in the Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight we have set up. Please feel free to vote on the articles listed, although bear in mind that a vote for a particular article means you are pledging to help improve the article. The goal of the collaboration is to improve articles to Featured Article status, as we feel Comics is under-represented in that area. Thanks for your help. Steve block talk 15:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your interest, fairness, and attention to detail. Please do not ever hesitate to criticize or speak freely, I got tuff skin and am a big boy and can handle it. I will take to heart you suggestions which I find very helpful. Indeed, I am a firm believer in the collaborative/cooperative spirit of Wikipedia's articles, which is what makes it most interesting. And I firmly believe controversies can occur and be disgussed, without personal rancor. As to my use of sarcasm, I prefer to call it dry wit or understatement, and no personal offense is intended. Again, thanks for you helpful input & attention. nobs 18:11, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Venona Project

What is the point of trying to have a discussion over text on the Talk:VENONA project page if User:Nobs01 argues endlessly in circles on that page, while continuing the same debates, concerning the same language and cites, over and over, on numerous pages, such as Talk:Harry Magdoff and espionage and Talk:Harry Magdoff? It is a complete waste of time. At the very least, having created a RfC, please drop in a note from time to time about the process and content of the debate.--Cberlet 17:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Dear Sir: I've noticed you mentioned twice that my comments are "off point". Let me call your attention to when an editor expresses a POV in a discussion, it can be responded to or countered with a varying POV. I prefer to speak from a neutral position on Talk pages as well as my "editing style" within articles. If I care to express a view or opinion, it has long been a habit (i.e. pre-Wikipeida), to preface my personal views with disclaimer, clearly citing a statement as a view or opinion held by myself. Most of the substance I discuss is drawn from common knowledge. Thank you so much for your attention to these interesting discussions. nobs 00:42, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose you are familiar with the un-declassified endnotes to the defunct NACIC CI Reader vol.3 chap1, or the issues surrounding proper citations for a Federal Agency Report with an unnamed editor, nor mixing secondary citations with primary source citations, or standard MLA style citations pertaining to an intext citation, however Cberlet and myself have worked extrememly tirelessly at least to identify the problem areas and lay them upon the table.

This is not an issue of personalities, nor ideology (at least on my part); it is simply a tireless process to arrive at factual material that can be verified, and eliminate flaws. And solid progress has been made. nobs 04:40, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Myla Goldberg copyvio

_ _ I'm not an expert, so my reason is a long story:
_ _ My impression is that the lawyers say the copyvio version can't be left in the history of the article; this would make sense, since the general public is still able to access it & this may still impair the copyright holder's ability to exploit their work. It's also in the spirit of the claim by the publishers' orgs that Google would be violating their copyrights by giving search results (but not docs) based on searches of their copyright protected material, which i understand Google has backed off in response to.
_ _ The instruction used to be not to edit after recognizing a copyvio, and my understanding is that the purpose of that was to avoid wasting effort of either the would-be editor or the developers; since the offending article would be deleted completely, and if the new version was worth the effort it took to save it, a developer had to simulate the history of the non-copyvio edits, faking the time stamps, in order to give the attribution that GFDL requires.
_ _ You'll notice that instructions 1 & 4 still make a similar request, tho i've not noticed anywhere near as much angst about them being ignored lately. My understanding is that the offending version is still removed from the page history, and the difference is that it's now easier to do, i.e., the undelete tool now provides the ability to specify which versions to undelete, and the response to a well-founded copyvio tag is to delete the article, then selectively undelete, leaving deleted the violating version(s). To my understanding, rewriting w/o using a copyvio tag fails to make this occur, and the effect of my tagging it will be that when its entry goes off the copyvio list, someone will have dropped the version you complained about on the talk page but have undeleted yr later replacement edits.
_ _ Unless you want to dive into the WP namespace to research the thing, why don't we both watchlist it and see if i'm right?
--Jerzy•t 00:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A good plan IMO.
--Jerzy•t 01:16, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Huh! Thanks!
--Jerzy•t 19:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IPT Low Dose

Hi HOB,

THanks for the input - there is a lot of stuff to learn around Wikipedia.

In the two articles, Insulin Potentiation Therapy was started well before I came onto this. I was atttempting to distinguish between IPT as a method that involves the use of insulin in affecting cellular function and cancer treatment that uses IPT.

Anything you can do to add to this would be great.

Cheers!

V for Vendetta

The 'V is Marvelman' thing is something Moore did initially agree to but quickly realised it was utter nonsense and also, it wouldn't have worked. However Dave Lloyd still assumed this was so for a few episodes (hence the panels mentioned) more but agreed with Moore that the idea was a bit rubbish. Skinn often comments at conventions about this, he also agrees it would have been a terrible idea.

There's a load more about V's creation i'll stick up in due course but i need to sort out the entry for The Valiant comic first and that's going to take a while.

I've known Dez Skinn for nearly 20 years and still take much of what Dez says with a pinch of salt, however Dave Lloyd has backed up in various fanzines Skinn's comments (including one Fantasy Advertiser interview from the late 80's) and Moore has begrudgingly admitted some of Skinn's (i don't think we need to touch too much upon the Moore/Skinn problems on here) ideas over the years. The origins of V are worth expanding in due course, especially it's original concept as a basic adventure strip. If i can find my stash of old Lion and Valiant comics i can get their entries dealt with before exanding upon V's. Logan1138 19:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

sorry about the state of the Marvelman stuff, i meant to go back and clean it up but forgot. Logan1138 11:20, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Why was the RfC for Talk:VENONA project, Joseph McCarthy, Elizabeth Bentley placed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, and not at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography? Thank you. nobs 19:01, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reconstruction Finance Corportation

When a federal agency is infiltrated with 6 to 24 agents in the service of a foreign government, and the head of the agency himself/herself is an agent of a foreign government; and documentation exists from investigations that a foreign government used the agency to shape policy, that agency then can be listed in the various espionage categories. Yes, more narative is needed in the article, and will be supplied upon review of all source material. Thank you. nobs 20:14, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AIDS

Hi

I have seen you adding good stuff to both the HIV and AIDS articles (amongst others). I thought you'd like to know that AIDS has been nominated for a Medicine Collaboration of the Week and we could do with your support and help in making the AIDS article of decent quality for December 1, 2005. Can we count on your support? --Bob 18:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

GDFL and fair use

I've asked around and managed to turn up meta:Do fair use images violate the GFDL? in which Jimbo states:

Remember that the GNU FDL works inside the framework of copyright law. The GNU FDL is a way for authors to conditionally give up some of the rights they have under copyright. It is not a claim to be able to impose additional restrictions above and beyond what copyright grants. Since fair use is legitimate in copyrighted works, an author may use fair use. But this doesn't preclude that author from releasing the work under the GNU FDL, because the GNU FDL does not pretend to impose additional restrictions beyond copyright, but rather to merely give up some rights of restriction that are normally a part of copyright.

I hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make. Steve block [[User talk:steve block|talk]] 16:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

British comic

You voted for British comic to be the comics collaboration, and since it now is, we'd appreciate your help in working on it to get it to Featured article status. Please discuss what needs to be done on Talk:British comic#Collaboration and thanks in advance. Steve block talk 14:22, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PML

Thanks for the compliment, but I must confess that I only read the abstracts before adding them, so if you've got better or more balanced resources you can find, I'd have no objections to you removing what I added. By the way, I am not an expert by any means on the topic, but the "Medication" section of the eMedicine article seemed to imply that HAART worsens PML.--Arcadian 04:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nurse Topics

Hi - see you have been added to Nurse Category. I, as a UK GP, have just created pages on Health Visitor and District Nurse, both are stubs and clearly from my UK & doctor perspectives. Not sure if equivalent community posts exist in the USA, but if so could you have a look at the article and offer any comments please. David Ruben ^Talk 01:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up on my broken blog link, fixed now :) Greenman 21:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Recall?

I'm sorry, I don't know quite what you meant by this. Would you mind elaborating? —Ilyan e p (Talk) 04:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks for the clarification. I think that if in most of these cases it came to a vote that bluntly said 'do you want x off of the ArbCom' we wouldn't see a majority voting to take them off. For example, the Kelly Martin case; I think that most of the people there opposing either just support userboxes or want Kelly to apologize, no more. Agreed on your other points though. —Ilyan e p (Talk) 05:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) As per lack of experience; I've almost been here 3 years, do you mean an issue with my age? —Ilyan e p (Talk) 05:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you for clarifying and responding. Hope to see you around :) —Ilyan e p (Talk) 05:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my usertalk Sgactorny 03:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have a response. And I do thank you for your service as a nurse. You are overworked, disrespected, and severely underpaid. It's awful. Sgactorny 15:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sgactorny RfC

Hi, I have filed an RfC to complain about user:Sgactorny abusive behavior. If you have something to add, or simply want to endorse it please go here. Thanks. Nrets 04:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Moore

Alan Moore has been selected as the comics collab of the month. Please stop by and see what you can contribute! ike9898 02:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carol Tyler and p.c. as a reference

You bring up an important issue, which I have not seen a good discussion of. Is personal communication with an expert ever acceptable as a citable source in Wikipedia? I think that you are right that it doesn't strictly fit the verifability policy, but I think there may be some subtilties to this issue. I've started a thread on this here. I hope you will weigh in. (Or if you have seen this discussed before, suggest where I should look) ike9898 00:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

apology

Hey- I do have a genuine disagreement with some things, but I usually am not such an antagonistic wikipedian. Sorry if I came off a little hostile. Call it a mood. See you around. ike9898 23:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]