![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks for uploading File:Barberton HS logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 04:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I removed it because it isn't the school's seal. The seal has "Barberton City Schools" around the edge, not "Barberton High School", so if anything it would be on the school district article (which currently does not exist) since it's the logo of the district. It's also likely not copyrighted since there are no copyrightable elements in the image. Trademarked, most likely, copyrighted, no. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 05:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
hey, {{ rfpp}} shouldn't be substituted, as this causes problems with the archiving script. Rami R 16:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Howdy, you're back!! Where have you been? Are you back for good now? :D Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 21:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment and support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
They are a block evading sock of another User who is already blocked for 72 hours for block evasion. The block lengths should be increasing, shouldn't they? The Mark of the Beast ( talk) 22:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I'd glad that this article has finally been protected; I requested it twice... is there any way you can look into this user as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.8.56.118 ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.85.129 ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.80.173
All are most likely the same person, and while he/she doesn't refresh to evade bans, they've largely been the reason for the dispute, and have refused to participate in the discussion process. Further, he/she responds to warnings and explanations of WP by leaving his/her own warnings ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3AWilliamsburgland&action=historysubmit&diff=464075101&oldid=463884073) and making up his/her own protocol. Trying to host a civil discussion has been infuriating with this user.
Any assistance would be great. -- Williamsburgland ( talk) 15:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
As you've apparently noticed, ( 119.152.84.228 ( talk · contribs · info · WHOIS)) and new account ( Hinahanif90 ( talk · contribs)) are adding links to an external page hosting PDFs of one of Umera Ahmad's novel ( Pir-e-Kamil) as well as on various other pages ( [1], [2], [3], [4]) sometimes under the guise of being a source, sometimes as an EL. The page brings up considerable copyright violation concerns for me as there is no indication if they are free, have permission from the publisher or author, copyright status or if a charge is applied. I have reverted multiple times on multiple pages as well as warned both twice now ( here and here) and raised this at the RPP page ( [5]). However, I'm at the 3RR and the tag-teaming (which gives every appearance of a single person promoting a website) means I can't just continue to revert. Protection probably isn't ideal but it's the only solution I can think of that doesn't involve me getting blocked for edit warring. The spam blacklist page suggested a page block and I was over at WP:AIV when I noticed your protection of the pages in question. Would you consider a block or should I look into another solution? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/ complex 19:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Malinaccier, a few hours ago I requested Semi-protection for the Thomas Macdonough page, as it had at least 8 cases of vulgar vandalism since Nov.16., yet the request was declined for -- "not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection." These are the examples:
11:24, 19 November 2011 : who was gay and had a 2 inch penis
08:18, 16 November 2011? : ==sex life==
08:17, 16 November 2011 : ==First SEX War==
07:55, 16 November 2011 : ==Other sex life==
07:53, 16 November 2011 : At the beginning of the sex life in 1812
07:49, 16 November 2011 : ==War of raping==
07:46, 16 November 2011 : He raped his sister
There are other cases also. These edits not only involved the body of text but the section titles as well. Isn't this considered disruptive? I would like to know how much vandalism a page has to endure to be 'enough' , and what constitutes 'recent' . It is not right that editors have to stand over articles and guard them like this. Don't quite understand why IP users are given more consideration than Wikipedia articles and the editors who have given their time and effort to create these articles. I am hoping that perhaps you didn't notice all of these examples and will reconsider your decision as it is only a matter of time before this happens again. . Best of regards, -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 22:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Apparently no one wants to wait til deals are official before trying to add the player to roster. I'm surprised no one has tried to add Pujols to the roster as well. Jose Reyes deal should be official later today. Wednesday Dec 7, he will be formally introduced to media in Dallas at winter meetings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BravesInsider13 ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
The Marlins finally announced the deal to be official here. So now you can unprotect that page. Tom Danson ( talk) 17:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at WP:Requests for page protection#Škoda Auto's talk page. —
SMcCandlish
Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ
Contribs.
05:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from making inappropriate threats in the future. Ebikeguy ( talk) 15:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts and advice in this matter. Ebikeguy ( talk) 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
The issue that led to this article's page protection is resolved with consensus. Can it be unblocked now? Dan56 ( talk) 22:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
IP came back on Serama to post the exact same text about one bloke. Chipmunkdavis ( talk) 10:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks for uploading File:Barberton HS logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 04:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I removed it because it isn't the school's seal. The seal has "Barberton City Schools" around the edge, not "Barberton High School", so if anything it would be on the school district article (which currently does not exist) since it's the logo of the district. It's also likely not copyrighted since there are no copyrightable elements in the image. Trademarked, most likely, copyrighted, no. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 05:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
hey, {{ rfpp}} shouldn't be substituted, as this causes problems with the archiving script. Rami R 16:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Howdy, you're back!! Where have you been? Are you back for good now? :D Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 21:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment and support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
They are a block evading sock of another User who is already blocked for 72 hours for block evasion. The block lengths should be increasing, shouldn't they? The Mark of the Beast ( talk) 22:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I'd glad that this article has finally been protected; I requested it twice... is there any way you can look into this user as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.8.56.118 ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.85.129 ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/94.230.80.173
All are most likely the same person, and while he/she doesn't refresh to evade bans, they've largely been the reason for the dispute, and have refused to participate in the discussion process. Further, he/she responds to warnings and explanations of WP by leaving his/her own warnings ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3AWilliamsburgland&action=historysubmit&diff=464075101&oldid=463884073) and making up his/her own protocol. Trying to host a civil discussion has been infuriating with this user.
Any assistance would be great. -- Williamsburgland ( talk) 15:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
As you've apparently noticed, ( 119.152.84.228 ( talk · contribs · info · WHOIS)) and new account ( Hinahanif90 ( talk · contribs)) are adding links to an external page hosting PDFs of one of Umera Ahmad's novel ( Pir-e-Kamil) as well as on various other pages ( [1], [2], [3], [4]) sometimes under the guise of being a source, sometimes as an EL. The page brings up considerable copyright violation concerns for me as there is no indication if they are free, have permission from the publisher or author, copyright status or if a charge is applied. I have reverted multiple times on multiple pages as well as warned both twice now ( here and here) and raised this at the RPP page ( [5]). However, I'm at the 3RR and the tag-teaming (which gives every appearance of a single person promoting a website) means I can't just continue to revert. Protection probably isn't ideal but it's the only solution I can think of that doesn't involve me getting blocked for edit warring. The spam blacklist page suggested a page block and I was over at WP:AIV when I noticed your protection of the pages in question. Would you consider a block or should I look into another solution? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/ complex 19:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Malinaccier, a few hours ago I requested Semi-protection for the Thomas Macdonough page, as it had at least 8 cases of vulgar vandalism since Nov.16., yet the request was declined for -- "not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection." These are the examples:
11:24, 19 November 2011 : who was gay and had a 2 inch penis
08:18, 16 November 2011? : ==sex life==
08:17, 16 November 2011 : ==First SEX War==
07:55, 16 November 2011 : ==Other sex life==
07:53, 16 November 2011 : At the beginning of the sex life in 1812
07:49, 16 November 2011 : ==War of raping==
07:46, 16 November 2011 : He raped his sister
There are other cases also. These edits not only involved the body of text but the section titles as well. Isn't this considered disruptive? I would like to know how much vandalism a page has to endure to be 'enough' , and what constitutes 'recent' . It is not right that editors have to stand over articles and guard them like this. Don't quite understand why IP users are given more consideration than Wikipedia articles and the editors who have given their time and effort to create these articles. I am hoping that perhaps you didn't notice all of these examples and will reconsider your decision as it is only a matter of time before this happens again. . Best of regards, -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 22:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Apparently no one wants to wait til deals are official before trying to add the player to roster. I'm surprised no one has tried to add Pujols to the roster as well. Jose Reyes deal should be official later today. Wednesday Dec 7, he will be formally introduced to media in Dallas at winter meetings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BravesInsider13 ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
The Marlins finally announced the deal to be official here. So now you can unprotect that page. Tom Danson ( talk) 17:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at WP:Requests for page protection#Škoda Auto's talk page. —
SMcCandlish
Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ
Contribs.
05:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from making inappropriate threats in the future. Ebikeguy ( talk) 15:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts and advice in this matter. Ebikeguy ( talk) 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
The issue that led to this article's page protection is resolved with consensus. Can it be unblocked now? Dan56 ( talk) 22:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
IP came back on Serama to post the exact same text about one bloke. Chipmunkdavis ( talk) 10:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |