Archived talk from 2004.

Was the Cornell Review not set up with money from Scaife?

As phrased, the article seemed to imply Scaife had personal involvement in the establishment of the Review or her sister publications. It would be more correct to say the Review received support from the Collegiate Network, which at the time was operated by the Institute for Educational Affairs, which received primary financial support from the Scaife Family Foundation (and the Olin and Bradley Foundations). However, I deemed that level of detail unnecessary as the article is about Coulter, not the Review.

I don't think it did imply that, but YMMV. I've re-insterted that she received funding from the Collegiate Network, and left it at that. The problem is that the name is very dodgy - it sounds like a non-partisan, almost official organisation, which is why I think it was worth noting that it was set-up by Scaife.

I was very impressed by your Daegu subway fire article. Can you give references to your sources, which seem to be well-informed?

As an aside, I may do some edits about the station fire protection provision (sprinklers) based on a report I have somewhere (of a visit by Mersey fire brigade/Mersey Tunnels to the site a month after the fire).

Once again, a very neat piece of work.

Ecb 22:03, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment! I will recompile the list of sources and post them; they are mostly English-language Chosun Ilbo articles. Choster 18:18, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I removed your addition saying Seal Beach was in northern Orange County. If you check a map for the county, It is cities such as La Habra, Brea, Placentia, and Fullerton that are part of the northern-most section of the county. Seal Beach is at the western-most reach of the county. I am glad you did the edit because it reminded me that I had wanted to make a few additions and changes to the Seal Beach article. gK 05:01, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That is precisely why I said "northern Orange County" not "North Orange County." If you look on a map, Seal Beach is clearly in the northern half of OC (for that matter, so is Huntington Beach). If you divide the county into quadrants instead of halves of course, your point is quite valid. But it's not important to me. Another possible designation is "beach cities." —choster

Keep up the good work on categorization. Just a reminder, make sure you alphabetize people by their surname if it is in the article title. For example, for the Jay Kim article, categorize it as [[Category:Korean Americans|Kim, Jay]]. If you have any comments/questions, please reply to my talk page. — J3ff 05:35, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk)