Jump to content

User talk:Tintle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tintle (talk | contribs) at 13:44, 18 October 2010 (→‎Attempt at intimidation: ~~~~). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Alert: Historicalidentity (talk | contribs) is posting dialog and other information from fiction sources such as dime novels and comic books as historical events, a violation of Wiki's TOS.

Tintle (talk) 00:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem corrected. The violation was promptly handled by Wikipedia.(talk) 17:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for correcting that masked forward!Tintle (talk) 15:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pawnee Bill & Signatures

Thanks for starting the Pawnee Bill article. It's a much needed addition to wikipedia. In wikipedia, the practice is to not sign articles or article edits, as the wikipedia is a free, open source project. If you have any further questions, please follow the link above. steventity 14:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Gordon-may.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gordon-may.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Gordonlillie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gordonlillie.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

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

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Jusjih 15:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Miller Brothers 101 Ranch Wild West Show, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Miller Brothers 101 Ranch. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I encourage you to have This article picked up as part of WikiProject Oklahoma.(talk) 20:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

THe Ranch needs to be a separate article from the Miller Brothers 101 Ranch Show. This way a more knowledgeable person can provide an article on the Ranch (including the wild west show). Jcmcapital (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It has been suggested that I communicate my suggestions about the 101 Ranch article directly to you. Why I do not understand, but I promised that I’d give it a try.

To this point, I recommend that you/we change the image (The Miller Brothers 101 Ranch Wild West Show wagons) to this:

101 ranch Wild West Show Brochure.

. It is more suitable for the subject.

I also recommend that you/we expand the presentation on the 101 Ranch Oil Company and E. W. Marland to this: “The ranch also held extensive oil reserves that were discovered by oil exploration pioneer E. W. Marland who in 1908 founded the 101 Ranch Oil Company. The company’s 1911 oil discovery in North Eastern Oklahoma opened up oil development in a great region in the Eastern and North Central Oklahoma and lead to the founding of the Marland Oil Company, later renamed the Continental Oil Company, Conoco”. This is from the Wikipedia page on the 101 Ranch Oil Company. It offers a broader presentation. Perhaps a footnote referencing the 1960 Moody’s credit rating page (on the Continental Oil Company) would be appropriate. I am writing and expanding the section on the 101 Ranch (not the Wild West Show). I’ll deliver and edit the page when it is ready.Jcmcapital (talk) 02:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason Wikipedia editors instructed you to contact me directly is because Wikipedia strives to present accurate, scholarly information. A scholarly article is based on works written by scholars in order to report research results. Academic papers, as well as scholarly books and articles are the preferred sources of historical data. They are characterized by publication by a professional society, association, or press. Such as the University of Oklahoma. There is a vast difference between a scholarly work and popular writings based on hearsay and written by lay people. Scholars and published academics have established credentials in their field. Wikipedia is not an avenue for lay people to publish hagiography. Lay people who wish to publish this type of thing may want to consider getting their own website. Then they can publish anything that occurs to them, regardless of its basis in fact. An example of misrepresentation is that hand drawn brochure. It is a colored drawing that does not represent the facts. The photographic evidence provided is representative of the actual Miller Brothers 101 Ranch Show.--Tintle (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right! I have done some original research, and discovered that what I produced on the 101 Ranch was not good (in fact is was very poor). (Other than what I offered on the 110 Ranch Oil Company and Marland Oil). I will offer a more proper Ranch presentation later.Jcmcapital (talk) 15:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your note about the acreage is not correct. It should read: Founded on the Cherokee Strip in 1870’s by Colonel George W. Miller, a Confederate veteran and one of the earliest cattlemen in the area, the 101 Ranch grew from a Cherokee Strip cattle ranch operating on 50,000 acres leased Indian lands to include 110,000 acres of which, by 1932, 17,492 were owned by the Miller family with the rest being leased from the Ponca, Pawnee, Otoe, Indians in Kay, Noble, Osage and Pawnee Counties. (This is from Collings' book).Jcmcapital (talk) 02:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you submit your original research in academic format to a peer-reviewed journal then you can have it published. Try American Historical Review, Journal of American History, or Great Plains Quarterly.--Tintle (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the portion on the ranch (not the show) was not original research. It was footnoted from Collings' work of 1937. That should work here! Please help me understand what is the problem with using Collings' work and footnoting it? ThanksJcmcapital (talk) 00:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The expansion on the 101 Ranch Oil Company is fully supported by the Moody's footnote and my own family files (all of which have been donated to the CONOCO museum in Ponca City).Jcmcapital (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not allow the use of "family files". Probably there are genealogy sites where you can post your family records. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research --Tintle (talk) 15:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Service awards proposal

Master Editor Hello, Tintle! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.

If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Buffalo train.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Buffalo train.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 01:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Buffalo displays

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Buffalo displays. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Buffalo Hunting. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Buffalo Hunting - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. RJaguar3 | u | t 01:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Pawnee Bill Ranch, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.pawneebillranch.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Pawnee Bill Ranch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 01:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt at intimidation

anon account set up called Historicalidenity is vandalizing many pages. Thank you for your help in this matter .

As an administrator, let me inform you that edits such as this are completely unacceptable, regardless of your motivation. There are many ways to handle disputes, but attempting to intimidate other editors is not one of them. Looie496 (talk) 03:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]