SamH

I am a Wikipedian from England. I found Wikipedia in April 2004 and started editing shortly after. I edit any articles that I feel I can improve but most of my contributions are on automobile related articles. I am a member of WikiProject Formula One and Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles. Until July 2004 I went under the username ''999''. I agree to multi-licence my text contributions to Wikipedia as described below:

SamH

Hi, I renamed your user account to SamH. Please drop me a note if something went wrong. -- User:JeLuF 17:49, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC) ==Re: Renault Laguna== Nice work on this article. It is certainly NPOV now - I've removed the NPOV message. User_talk:Akadruid)">User:Akadruid|akaDruid (User talk:Akadruid) 11:43, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC) == Schumacher revert == I thought the sentence ending "...leaves many fans to feel the sport has been debased" was rather POV. I'll revert myself and edit that sentence accordingly. User:Rdsmith4— User:Rdsmith4 | User talk:Rdsmith4 15:15, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Article Licensing == Hi, I've User:rambot#Free the Rambot Articles project to get users to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (''CC-by-sa'') v1.0 and v2.0 Creative Commons Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The ''CC-by-sa'' license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at ''minimum'' those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information: *User talk:Ram-Man#Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered *Wikipedia:Multi-licensing *User:rambot#Free the Rambot Articles project To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "" template into their user page, but there are other options at Wikipedia:Template messages/User namespace#Licensing Templates. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page: :Option 1 :I agree to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below: : OR :Option 2 :I agree to Wikipedia:Multi-licensing all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below: : Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "" with "". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. ''Please let me know'' what you think at my User talk:Ram-Man. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- User:Ram-Man ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new comment]| User talk:Ram-Man == Pic copyrights == You wrote: ''I noticed you've not added any copyright info to those images yet. If you've just been busy, then no worries, but it would be good if you'd do them sometime in the near future. If you're not sure what to do, then leave a message on my talk page and I'll try to help. Thanks, SamH 10:44, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)'' :These pics were taken from a car hobbyist web forum on which I participate, and were placed in a "member's cars" photo page there. I do not know who took them, although because they are amateur photos, I'm almost certain the person who took the photos is also the copyright holder. :As such, feel free to remove them. Perhaps there is an argument to be made for fair use of the pics, but I'm not prepared nor interested to make it. :With best regards, :--User:Ryanaxp 15:56, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC) ==Volkswagen Golf Plus== Thank you for moving my Golf Plus info back under Golf V: it makes a lot more sense there. I was always rather curious why someone had shifted it to where it was before that edit. User:Stombs 10:06, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC) == Ford GT40 image == I have my doubts, because: # The user is inexperienced enough not to have a user page and has only a touch over 300 edits. This suggests possibly too new to "know the ropes" about what's allowed wrt. images. # The image contains no source information. It's not enough to put "ford gt40 gfdl" on an image description page. One should say who the image belongs to, and thus who released it under that license. If it's the user's own image, he should say so. # The image appears to be a professional quality studio image, and thus seems a bit unlikely to be GFDL. Rarely are commercial images released under GFDL; if we can use them, it is generally under fair use or a more general free license. History and practice says that here we do not always take users' opinions of image sources and licenses at face value. This is because we don't just care about legal protection, but actual freedom, as much as we can. User:Morven 11:27, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC) :The other reason I was 'quick on the trigger' was that the article already had two perfectly good images, so it would not be without. User:Morven 11:28, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC) I took that picture in the Black Hawk auto museum. It, along with all the cars on display, is light in such a way as to give it a studio like look. User:Seano1 21:15, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC) :Thank you for the clarification, and I hope no hurt feelings. There should be no problem having it on the article at all, then. User:Morven 00:52, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC) == Picture Copyright == The pictures I posted are, I think, publicity shots, however, as I can't be 100% sure would it be better if I removed them in favour of ones I can guarantee are? --User:Mrbusy 12:24, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Possible request for help == Sam- I was wondering if you might be able to monitor something and help me with a proble. I seem to be under attack from a user with many identities on Wikipedia. This all stems back to an edit war that I have found myself in over the Article on Ohio Wesleyan University, which I was trying to keep on an NPOV course. I've tried to be a good Wikipedian, however I have found myself in a tight spot. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Stude62 user: stude62 user talk:stude62 14:59, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) ==Re: user: stude62 == Dear Sam- I feel obliged to respond to the post by user user: stude62. His behaviour lately makes me rather uncofmortable. I believe he wants me to stop making any contributions to any articles, especially the OWU one. For example, last night, all I did, with the exception of correcting a few typos and 2 other minor edits, I added a table of majors at Ohio Wesleyan. Immediately after this, user: stude62 posted several complaints that the page "needs to be protected", that "I'm making it POV". How and why, user: stude62 never states, so it is hard for me to argue with with at this point. In fact, I believe he himself introduced numerous factual errors about the university (he himself is not in any way related to it, so it is questionable where he gets his information in the first place) and extraordinary number of typos. I am sorry to post this here but it is hard for me to see this user complain and seek help when he is simply not right here. He has threatened me on several occasions. I have been quite civil with him specifically. User:Pnikolov 17:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Re: Stude62 == I do edit only under Pnikolov and Rananim. I used the second one because RriCk banned it for some reason awhile back. I don't think the controversy is about the two usernames at all. Frankly, I don't know what it is about. user: stude62 just posted: "No revert war, but over the past several weeks we have worked hard to get the article to a NPOV state, and now its been edited to Plamen's liking, not facts. Again, I'm just trying to ensure that entry is factual and correct for everyone, not just one persons feelings. user: stude62 user talk:stude62 00:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)" I will be more than happy if he states JUST ONE THING that shows how my edits are to my liking and not factual. All I did was added Ohio Wesleyan's majors. It seems user: stude62 does not like Wesleyan for some reason which he does not wish to disclose and therefore lies. I can't think of anything else. I am not in a fight with anyone. All I want to do is improve Wikipedia and this guy is not letting me do it because he constantly posts lies here and there. I'd be more than happy if you jump in and help. User:Pnikolov 03:04, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Nash Motors == Sam- Could you take a look at the Nash Motors entry. Someone edited it (ID's under their DNS number) and took some liberties with it. I tried to fix it and added what i could come across as far as Nash Healy's were concerned. Any help appreciated, thanks - user: stude62 user talk:stude62 02:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) == audi a6 image == You're right... it is however, a promotional image. I've already updated it and put the source as well. I've been meaning to update a few images, but I'm a bit behind on it. I'm busy also updating the Formula 1 drivers/cars/teams/circuits list. User:Diego440 22:53, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

See other meanings of words starting from letter:

S

SB | SC | SD | SE | SF | SG | SH | SI | SJ | SK | SL | SM | SN | SO | SP | SR | SS | ST | SU | SW | SX | SY | SZ |

Words begining with SamH:

SamH
SamH
Samhaein
Samhain
Samhain
Samhainophobia
Samhain_(band)
Samhain_albums
Samhain_Live_'85-'86
Samhain_Live_'85-'86
Samhan
Samhan
Samhan
Samhazai
Samhita
Samhitas
SAMHSA