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. |
Re Bob Dylan -- another admin has blocked the IP for a WP:3RR violation.
Re Menstruation slang -- I think there's enough there to avoid a speedy delete. Post it for deletion at WP:AFD if you like. Thanks, NawlinWiki 16:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, The Evil Spartan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}}
after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
Friday
(talk) 16:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Alright. First, why would you link Los Angeles Dodgers to 2007 Los Angeles Dodgers season? It's stupid, first of all, as the standings are talking about the "Los Angeles Dodgers", not the season. And what's the point?
Second, the templates are updated almost as soon as the game is concluded. Therefore, it doesn't make any sense to say "Updated as of May 4" for example. It doesn't add anything, as the templates for the standings are kept updated as much as possible. It only wastes space and doesn't add any information that is already assumed.
So, please don't revert this again, as I have given you a sufficient explanation for why I did what I did. Thank you. And I'm also sorry. From now on, whenever I revert something, I will try to give a reason in the edit summary (space pending) when I make the revert or the user's talk page before making the edit. Thanks for your cooperation. -- Ksy92003 23:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not confused any easier than anybody else, X96lee15. It might not be misleading for you (I can't imagine how) but it is rather misleading. When I first went to {{ 2007 AL West standings}}, I wanted to go to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim page. So I clicked on {{ Los Angeles Angels}}. And I saw that it took me to {{ 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season}}. That's not the page that I wanted to go to and that's not where it says it will take me. It says it will take me to {{ Los Angeles Angels}}, so that's what I want to go to, not {{ 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season}}. Take this for example:
AL West | W | L | Pct. | GB |
---|---|---|---|---|
2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season | 17 | 15 | .531 | -- |
2007 Seattle Mariners season | 14 | 13 | .519 | ½ |
2007 Oakland Athletics season | 15 | 15 | .500 | 1 |
2007 Texas Rangers season | 13 | 18 | .419 | 3½ |
Without the actual mentioning of the teams, this is what the template would look like. Granted, this isn't misleading at all because clicking on the link will take you to that page. But you wouldn't say "The 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season lead the division by ½ game", would you? The reason why Wikipedia implemented this feature is so you could link to an article without having to use that article's title word-for-word in the link itself by RE-WORDING it, not by making it entirely misleading. You might not think it is misleading or confusing, but when I first glanced at the template it was. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would have these problems. -- Ksy92003 04:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Sir,
With respect, I wish you to review your accusation that I have committed vandalism, and, once you confirm your error, please remove the warning from my talk page.
I am 68.218.223.16. My edit to Thomas McKean High School was itself specifically a revert of several consecutive acts of vandalism by 68.36.41.218.
I know you take vandalism seriously; I hope to discover that you are just as committed to accuracy. 68.218.223.16 20:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
You recently sent me a message about vandalizing the Ashley Massaro page (I am 206.253.155.139). I did nothing of the sort, if you look at the page prior to my changes I got rid of a guy saying things such as "She's hot," "Hey Nick Joe Michael says hi" and "Joe Michael is better than anyone she has met." I know I made three changes, however I didn't spot all the mistakes at once (they were spaced out throughout the page). I just want a further explanation to what I did wrong other than cleaning up filth on a page.
No problem, thank you for understanding.
Damn, your productive! You've got 300+ contributions in just 4\5 days! I've got 1300+, and it took me over one month to do it! Keep up the good work mate, your really helping this site! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 19:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
See my comment under your "Important note" comment on the uw-homophobia TFD. --TeckWiz is now R Parlate Contribs @ (Let's go Yankees!) 21:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you were helping me track 199.175.12.38 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). You may want to check out this edit, which is the only one that hasn't been reverted yet. It's essentially a basic blanking, but it looks like the material is controversial, and I'm not quite bold enough to revert. -- NORTH talk 22:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi The Evil Spartan
The category with CSD-I3 images in it at that point had around 400+ images to be deleted. I deleted them all, removing the red links and leaving a clickable, explaining message for every user. It took me 3 hours. Each day it takes between 2 and 4 hours. I have been doing this job for 10 weeks, every day, day in day out, getting nothing but complaints and nitpicking and death threats.
Your suggestion is very good, but it assumes I would have time to look into every single addition to see when the image was added and to hit revert. Leaving aside the fact that reversion is a very bad idea in this context (it will just be undone, the clickable message is very important in that respect), this would take the job from "boring but do-able" into "boring and impossible". Your tiny contribution of adding back the previous image would take seconds.
I'm sorry to heap this on you personally, but your message has been the final straw. This is one backlog I'll be fucked before I clear again. ⋐⋑ REDVEЯS 18:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Greetings The Evil Spartan. If you look on page 11 of the Eurobarometer 2005 pdf you will se the statistics for those who believe in god by country. Obviously one cannot be Christian if one doesn't believe in God. Giving fair dues to other religions I am basing the approimation on the Eurobarometer figures less about 5%
Europe is largely a secular country these days and the previous figures are really unrealistic, and indeed mostly unsourced. The general consensus on the talk page is that the euro figures are way innacurate.
Thanks for your message
Smeggypants
p.s I will edit the reference to include the page number of the pdf
Was the suspected sockpuppeteer reported to WP:SSP before? Find me the link and I will block him. Aquarius • talk 18:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Blocked. Aquarius • talk 18:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, A checkuser IP Check case you filled has been completed by a CheckUser, and archived. You can find the results for 7 days at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive. -- lucasbfr talk, checkuser clerk, 21:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC).
Please see my talk page for my answer Smeggypants 02:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Her page notes that she plays "operation." Is that some kind of gag? I'm not familiar enough with either the rules of Wikipeda nor the implications of playing "Operation." I thought I'd bring this to your attention.
Hi Evil Spartan. I understand your concern about the length of the block placed on this school ip, but I wasn't convinced that the ip is likely to reoffend in a hurry. I am inclined to see whether a block of a decent length will act as a deterrant before coming down with a harsher block and preventing not only further vandalism, but constructive editing from others at the school. If the vandalism starts again on Monday, then a longer block should be imposed, but apart from the trouble in the last few days, met with a much too short original block, it has been quite a while since the last persistent vandalism from this ip, and there is no reason to think the same people are involved, so their vandalism may not be as persistent as you fear. JPD ( talk) 16:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The Qiun Zhijun situation is at ArbCom, and you have been listed at a party. Please leave comments there. -- badlydrawnjeff talk 13:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. Cbrown1023 talk 14:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.
I think the article's in pretty good shape now, and it caused Dr. Hayward to reveal another of his sock-puppets :-). Care to withdraw your AfD nom? Groupthink 11:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Is your user name a play on characters in 300 or God of War? Just curious! -- 172.165.11.237 22:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello, on ANI you commented on how I should negotiate with the IP user I was having trouble with. After asking him to comment (yet again), he wrote a complaint about me, always referring to me in third person and talking about my apparent vandal tendencies (he has clearly not read WP:VANDALISM). This is similar to previous attempts to make contact with him. But I tried to tell him to reply to me on Talk:Malhotra. But instead he pasted a complaint about me, again referring to me in third person. Asking admins to take action against my vandalism. How can I, or should I even bother, to make sure this person discontinues their false editing. dishant 08:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
In this diff, you link to another user's comments, with a tone that implies you think they were wrong. I know that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. However, when the editing is hot, taking extra efforts to be civil are often good. Sarcasm is also often unhelpful. GRBerry 18:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, sounds reasonable. I've increased the block period by a month. Regards, Anas talk? 23:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the AfD withdrawal. As regards the changes he made, I personally thought he put a weaselly positive spin on things, much like the spin in the non-apology apologies he's offered regarding his thesis debacle. However, that's just my opinion, and not why I asked the page to be locked. I requested semi-protection because he has a long history of sock-puppetry (see User:Rafairminded). If he's going to make edits like that, I'd prefer that he do so openly. Groupthink 00:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your help here. I wasn't quite sure how to solve the problem.
NewYork1956 21:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering what template you use to make the blocked announcements in the brown square, like the one you used on User_talk:66.199.212.7. Thanks. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 17:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Oops..Sorry..actually this is the 6th time this has happened to me since I joined and its usually caused by two editors reverting the same page and the one with the faster internet connection gets it while the one with the slower connection (usually me) reverts the right one back to the vandals edit..Sorry..I'll take better attention next time .. -- Comet styles 19:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment at the ANI page regarding me and Bishonen. There were no diffs of any harassment prior to when Bishonen first mentioned "harassment." Maybe I did not react perfectly after Bishonen mentioned harassment and threatened me with a block. But there had been no harassment (at least not by me). Have you reached any conclusion about it? I'm not trying to stir up trouble here. I'm just having much difficulty understanding how this type of thing can happen. KC blasted me for --- essentially --- following her own advice, even though I pleaded with her to assume good faith. And then I got slapped with a harassment charge. Ferrylodge 02:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Evil Spartan, sorry for the delay responding to your post at ANI (job, sleep, you know). Anyway, I have responded here, and would appreciate your thoughts. Thx. Ferrylodge 15:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Spartan,
My revisions on the State College, Pennsylvania are true. it is a total nightmare living in state college, pa. What i have said is true about state college, pa. the public has to know. i have run into several problems living here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmase ( talk • contribs)
Fine then.
How do u create new articles on dis thing? -- Jmase
Please do not encourage people to misuse Wikipedia. Friday (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The Catholic Website is a violation of the guidelines for valid sources already on the page. Please do not escalate this by reporting me for reversion,. I shall simply do the same to you [ dont forget that YOU were the one who started the reversions ]. Which of course is counter productive. I have no problem with properly sourced figures, but Christian websites are not acceptable.
Please discuss this on the Christianity by country talk page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smeggypants ( talk • contribs)
The moves as proposed originally were supported by community consensus, with no dissenting opinion put forward. I suspect that the original reverting user did not understand the naming conventions and the MOS. Also, the reverted moves were accompanied by redirect sabotage, which makes them speedily reversible. 81.104.175.145 22:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? -- Barberio 16:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
You have just undone a lot work I have spent improving the Christianity by Country Page. This time you have no proper reason. I am reporting you to Wikipedia. It seems you are going over the line of good faith now. Please do NOT revert my work a 2nd time!!! Smeggypants 23:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I even took time out with curtesy to inform you of the improvements I had undertaken. Smeggypants 23:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Further just for reference, In your haste to undo all my work you also just undid the work of another user Yom who correctly updated the Ethiopia entry with a census, which I subsequently further improved by correcting the totals. You just trod all over Yom's work and mine. I have assumed good faith on yoru part for too long now. Smeggypants 23:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Next time, notify those people who have an interest in seeing the templates remain. - Jeske ( v^_^v) 02:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
His Evil Spartan, you told me to feel free to comment on you about images. The screenshots were from a movie I created and took production stills from. I also too the other photos so, I listed them as my own work because they are. I listed them as free images beause I'm okay if anyone wants to take them or keep them, etc. JoeyC5 23:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
As you may or may not be aware, the discussion you reverted is currently under discussion at WP:RFAR. ANI is not the place to discuss the merits or behaviour of administrators or editors in closing the Allison Stoke DRV. Please be aware of the 3 revert rule and don't reopen this discussion again. Thanks. Nick 14:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I am not a "jihadist" or a "terrorist sympathizer". I do not sympathize with anybody who kills innocent people. Just because I am in favor of the truth and reject misinformation (which in this case happen to be negative against an Iraqi insurgent group), does not mean I support them. Also blanking out whole sections of an article is considered vandalism and I have every right to restore valid deleted content. Thank you. - Lft6771 18:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
what? -- HanzoHattori 11:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Scuse me, but you're wrong. I started exactly from zero (null), used the 2006 Congress report, and then put it through the google search for more. You can see the history of gradually expanding. -- HanzoHattori 16:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC) Here, I started with this: [3] (Congress' stuff info + my infobox I did two days before -- do you mean the photo or what? I even changed the caption) -- HanzoHattori 16:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC) You can even see the original version of my infobox here: [4] (I even changed it a lot in the meantime - because I decided AQI should have their own article, so I used it in both) -- HanzoHattori 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
So, actually, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STOP SPEAKING IN SUCH A RIDDLES, please? -- HanzoHattori 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Btw, I think "TruthSeeker777" may be very related to "Lft6771": [6] (before this, there was a page on AQI alright - this one I built myself) I have no idea whatever happened to the original page. -- HanzoHattori 16:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you do speak in riddles and talk in caps (quote: STOP COPY AND PASTE MOVING [7]). How am I supposed to "STOP" doing I-don't-know-what-because-you-refuse-to-tell? Is "I don't COPY AND PASTE do now you can revert your revert" precise enough? -- HanzoHattori 17:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you were wrong, [8] [9] so now revert the revert so you will get suspended and not me this time :P The thing is, JTJ was not AQI. They changed a lot: new name(s), new flag, and most of all new alliegance (bin Laden). -- HanzoHattori 18:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
They're not the sports group, better compare Reichswehr and (after alliegance to Hitler) Wehrmacht (same people, yes). Anyway, I did two completely different articles (which you claimed were the same, somehow). So if you want the redirect, you do it after a vote, but now just revert the revert. -- HanzoHattori 18:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
The Russian secret police is the same organization, with the headquarters on Lubyanka, since it's founding as Cheka in 1917 (there was Okhrana before, but here there is no so direct connection). But they used many different names, so they have different articles (even the little stub of MGB - I don't think it's really more known than the AQI among the general public). Actually I don't think most people heard of anything more than KGB, or maybe current FSB. I can't use correct grammar because I don't speak correct English. That's why I tag my articles for copyedit. I try as much as I can anyway. Also, like how "no votes" when there's a vote? [10] Also still, returning to the discussion, why do you think there are previous= (Originated as) and next= (Became) lines in the Infobox War Faction? Do you really think sports groups have anything with armed groups? Another example: Ludowe Wojsko Polskie turning into Wojsko Polskie (again) after the fall of Communism - and so on, really.-- HanzoHattori 19:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
NOW, would you explain this [11]? As always, you didn't. Do you always have to be so mysterious in your "popups"? Actually, I think you do vandalise my work. (-17,458 without uttering one word, when everything was sourced and actually double-checked) Revert your revert, or this will mean a war - especially, since you said you want to provoke me just to report me then (well, I guess - even as I hate doing this, because I hate learning all this stupid beurocracy). You do not own Wikipedia TOO, and you commited a mistake, so now just repair your error instead of being disruptive. If you have problems about it, discuss this like we were doing, and start a vote if needed (and don't say there's no votes, because it's a lie). -- HanzoHattori 19:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, Evil Spartan, I'm Spartan-James. Peace. Spartan-James 17:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, The Evil Spartan, I saw your edit to Image:Ancient City Wall of Nanjing, World 1 Length.jpg. Just to let you know (if you are interested in doing some rote maintenance work), there are bunch of images which are definitely not screenshots that are in Category:Free screenshots (where I got this one from), and that category is populated with these non-screenshots quite often. I've been meaning to go through them all and nominate them for deletion and such, but any help would be appreciated. Cheers, Iamunknown 19:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I just e-mailed you a copy of the Research Video page at the final version before deletion. It's a really stupid rule not to undelete automatically for discussion, & I ask from time to time that it be changed. But it might help to simply ask at deletion review each time you think it really relevant. (if nobody beats me to it, I'll always email you a copy). (I'll also of course email if you ask at my talk page, but that doesnt get any public notice) DGG 22:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
So what do I do with the image ? I got it off his MySpace. He uses that picture to promote his stuff, and everyone else does. I don't understand what to do now :< —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuplad ( talk • contribs)
Just vandalised San Marino, I guess it's time for a permanent block. Therequiembellishere 23:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Sparty, I know you've got my back :) We must educate these people-- Ilya1166 04:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I guess you have placed a whole lot of pictures that i have uploaded onto the deletion list. First of all I am trying to get the permission of the site admin for the pics i have put up..till then i have removed them from the articles i have placed them in. Will they still be deleted within a few days?? the web admin is not responding to the mails i have sent and asking for permission requests(Not even not granting permission reply) Sadashiv n 09:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the notice. I tagged the picture for commons because I believe it has some use, to illustrate articles about barefoot. Also it is an open content photo. For these reasons I think moving it to Wikimedia Commons is appropriate. Of course, there are images on commons that are not used now, but have potential usage. Regards. Wooyi Talk to me? 21:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm always happy to expand on my reasoning/review my own actions. On that one I guess it depends if you consider it controversial or not, to me it looked like a fairly straight forward endorsement. As the nominator stated they were trying to add "new argument" i.e. rerun the TFD, which WP:DRV pretty explicitly is not, the endorse contributors covered this. The key objection raised and more or less on your point was that the Wikiproject and/or original creators weren't notified, as there is no requirement to do so, that again is not a process issue. i.e. Those wishing to overturn the deletion were not adding any new information to the debate, or addressing process issues with the debate, they were either disagreeing with the deletion or impose some process standard which doesn't exist. Those endorsing are supported by both the deletion and DRV processes. (Totally aside to this review if we decide that X has some interest and should be notified wouldn't we to be "fair" have to start identifying the other parties who may also have an interest, we don't do that we let people keep an eye on their own interests. If we want to change to making deletion nomination an arduous process of trying to identify and inform all those who maybe considered interested and subject to the post discussion argument of if someone should have been notified an whose input *may* have impacted the debate, I personally wouldn't be convinced that it's practical nor desirable, but whatever it's a general process/policy issue not something for DRV to dictate) -- pgk 18:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
That pretty much says it all! Flyguy649 talk contribs 21:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a member of the WikiProject Pittsburgh. In the past we have discussed a meetup idea - let's see if we can make it a reality during the summer. Please see this thread for more information.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not evading a block. It was reversed. Nonetheless, thank you for your input. I appreciate it. 24.160.241.190 00:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Teen_Spirit_2.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thnks for your notice. I took the photo myself. I will specify the source. As far as the licensing tag is concerned I used a CC tag by share alike. I hope it fits. Forli.tv 09:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
See reply on my talk page. And please do check the List of administrators. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I think HH may have left me with a lower opinion of him or her than they left you with.
But I don't think I qualify for certifying Wikipedia:Requests for comment/HanzoHattori, because while my dispute was very similar, I don't think it qualifies as the same dispute. The instructions state the certifiers have to have tried to resolve the same dispute.
I'll happily add my opinion in the space set outside for comments from outsiders.
Cheers! Geo Swan 21:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I got your message, I don't have a response. — Ocatecir T 17:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
just letting you know Soxrock reversed your edit of deleting Reggie Jackson's copyrighted photo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.234.99.1 ( talk • contribs)
Probably because the source is missing, just the old copy/paste footnote is there. Do you have the source? - Crockspot 18:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know that your comment on the 3RR noticeboard was deleted by ThePromenader: [12]. I've restored your comment. Hardouin 20:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Please explain to me your rationale in deleting Phroth's wikipedia page? You cited it as a "non-notable fraternity" and one of over 600 clubs at Penn State. I beg to differ, it is not a fraternity, but rather one of four notable media outlets at Penn State. Further, had you read the article, you would have learned that the magazine has existed for 99 years and has produced alumni who have gone on to win Academy Awards, Cannes Awards, Emmy Awards and work at some of the most notable publications of the 20th century. The article was based primarily on celebrating the history of that magazine, only providing a small part to its impact on the campus today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteaaaay ( talk • contribs)
Why did you revert it back to that version? The newb (don't say I am name calling because newb is just short for newbie) is in the wrong here and his version shouldn't be there. The issue is him claming it's OR to say who is on the poster even though the poster is right there in the article. TJ Spyke 20:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
This fight isnt about Lashley being on the poster bc he OBVIOUSLY is. This fight is because TJ thinks Monty Brown is on it but refuses to provide a source stating this. He just won listen. BlueShrek 20:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Im not fighting it im fighting for Brown. TJ kept putting it on there. HE has stopped for now but Im positivfe he'll start again soon. BlueShrek 20:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I'm the de facto caretaker of the Nittwits article you nominated for deletion. I haven't had the time recently to update it, but in the course of the last year there have been many television mentions and articles published that I could include in a re-write of the article which will further solidify the organizations's notability. Could you kindly remove the AfD until I have the chance to do so? Thanks. BroadSt Bully 07:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ugggh! What a horrorshow! I'll attack it if you and the anon IP are done. Flyguy649 talk contribs 17:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
TES, sorry about that the double-listing. I was working on orphaning {{ PUInonfree}} (as it is listed at TfD). Meant no harm by it. =) -- Iamunknown 04:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Where do you see the copyright violation in the present Economic Development and Cultural Change? all i see on the page is an infobox with a copy of the cover of the journal, and that illustration is accepted as fair use, just as an album cover is? (The paragraph in the original article wascertainly copyvio, but it has been removed. DGG ( talk) 17:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you delisted this article from Wikipedia:Copyright problems by the comment on the talk page. Please don't do this unless confirmation really has arrived per Wikipedia:OTRS. Just a statement on a talk is not enough. Garion96 (talk) 19:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I read WP:GHITS as you suggested. Yes, I found it interesting. I use the Ghit argument not for notability per se, but that, if you look hard enough, you can find something out there that something or someone must be notable. 345,000 Ghits are useless if they are all blogs, encyclopedia, and wikis; you must find clean Ghits: verifiable, unique, nontrivial sources. That's why I routinely add "-encyclopedia" or "-wiki" when I do clean Google searches. A rock band, for example, that generates 10,000 Ghits must have at the least a cult following. On the other hand, the lack of Ghits for someone who died in 1933 probably doesn't get many hits. In the end, the Ghit test is as useful as you make it. My own rule of thumb is that a living person, high school, or legal topic must generate 100 clean Ghits to be a stand-alone article. So yes, I'm still going to use the argument, but I'll be more judicious and careful in my logic. Bearian 15:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I have unblocked, per your request. LessHeard vanU 19:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Whats are you planning on doing with Transaction Processing over XML? Is it still at Afd or not? John Vandenberg 04:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC) Oops, that was a mistake. My bad. The Evil Spartan 17:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear Evil Spartan,
Can you please take a look at the "revised stub" that's proposed two sections before your comments on the Sahaj Marg talk page? Please edit away to create a neutral stub. We need neutral editors on this site.
Thanks, Renee -- Renee 19:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
If you don't want to help that's your choice, but was there really a need to disparage my concerns? Do you add condescending comments to all discussions, or just those related to Iranians? [13] -- Vitalmove 22:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I have restored Image:CallasVioletta1956.jpg. It is, however, an orphan, so you may want to fix that. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) ( random) 02:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The photo was taken by my friend, of Spigelman CJ and myself. I have cropped the image to show just His Honour.
It was taken with my camera, for my uses. Hence yes, I own the Copyright in the image.
Dear Evil Spartan,
Users Sethie and Reneeholle have filed an Rfc for user Shashwat pandey.
Because you have contributed to either the Sahaj Marg page, the Shri Ram Chandra Mission page, or both, we would appreciate it if you could provide your comments of this user at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Shashwat_pandey
Here are the guidelines for responding [14]:
Thank you for your time. It is greatly appreciated! 18:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reneeholle ( talk • contribs)
User mghabmw continues to repost the non-copyrighted image of Reggie Jackson on his wikipedia page. You had removed this image several weeks back as it is not public domain but he continues to repost it. Can you please advise on action? 192.234.99.1 18:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Some muppett placed this in WP:RM and went through unopposed even if completely wrong. It is no acronym. Staff would even get disciplined if they ever said British Midland! Please help to move it back where it belongs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.20.21 ( talk • contribs)
He keeps on using sockpuppets to change reggie jackson.
You just tagged three of my images ( Russell Allen, Michael Lepond, and Michael Pinnella) for lacking sources. Check out if I just fixed it. Just in case, the pictures were taken by me in a recent concert. Cheers and take care. Thief12 22:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
told you i'm not a sock. i'm just an a**hole. Mghabmw 17:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
There is no need to overturn the decision, as the decision was No consensus. That is the point of {{ relist}}, to continue discussion when no consensus is reached within a normal AfD period. I do not understand your reasoning. If it is based on a guideline could you please link to it? ~ JohnnyMrNinja { talk} 20:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
You've got mail. — Rlest 17:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Are you eyeing me and my every single edit and upload? What is your problem? Mghabmw 19:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a goddamned sock, read the conclusion of the sockpuppetry case you filed against me. I've never denied my socks and EXCUSE me for not making sure I was logged in every time I made an edit. It does log me out when I get out. Stop writing that I'm a sock. Mghabmw 20:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I just find it ridiculous that this has been going on for days and a not a single admin has shown up to respond to these block requests and take care of this once and for good...it just goes to show you how morons run this place and the most important people on the site, the ones who should be monitoring it, could care less... -- Palffy 23:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
As much as I agree with you, I've been told that null edits to avoid redirection are at very least in violation of the spirit of previous arbcom rulings. The Evil Spartan 00:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
I award you this barnstar for all of your anti-vandalism work. I have always seen you making edits and I think its amazing that you have compiled so many edits in such a short amount of time. I have only been here since June and this is the first time I have addressed your talk page but after seeing all the work you have done I feel I have an obligation to give you this barnstar. Southern Texas 00:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC) |
I uploaded a new Image:Whiteyford.png with copyright notices from the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Since Wikipedia is both informational and noncommercial and the image has not been modified, I believe it falls under the guidelines of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Mghabmw 21:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Whoever put "1882" in there was right. They began in the A.A. in 1882 and moved to the N.L. in 1887. However, that's one of only many issues with the article. The writer spent a paragraph or two speculating on why the team was supposedly called the "Alleghenies". They were "Allegheny", or "the Alleghenys" (not -ies) because they played in Allegheny. I'll work on this when I have some time. Or maybe right now. :) Baseball Bugs 23:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
Your efforts are very much appreciated. MONGO 00:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC) |
Hi, I was bold and took the action of copying the content of this page to the creator's user page at User:Donal Lang. Bearian 19:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Have there been any incidents since the Xterra/recall thing? If not, what prompted the RFC? Andre ( talk) 20:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[15] The comment you made was completely unfounded and unnecessary. I ask you nicely to promptly withdraw it with an apology to Hesperian. — Moondyne 02:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, The Evil Spartan, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy U C P 04:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Greece's %4.6 in Asia and the islands aren't their depencies, local people are Greek for centuries. See the image Image:AegeanIslands.PNG Islans in Asia shown with "yellow" User talk:Zaparojdik 19:57 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The Aegean islands belonging to Greece and on Asia's continental shelf are not territories, but as culturally Greek as the other Greek islands and mainland and fully integrated into Greece. However, this does not change the fact that Wikipedia's definitons allow these islands to be regarded as associated with Asia and justify the inclusion of Greece as a transcontinental state. The article text allows such islands on the continental shelf of a continent other than where the nation is based to count toward the nation being transcontinental. Heff01 19:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested your input would be helpful at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States Secretary of Energy, Thank you.-- Southern Texas 22:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Can you certify an RfC for a dispute in which you weren't involved? I thought it had to be someone involved (which is why I'm anxiously waiting around for Murderbike to get online) -- but it would certainly make sense for you to endorse it or maybe better to make a summary for the "outside view" based on your own prior experience with HH. I remember your prior RfC -- that was just as I was first getting involved in the Battle of Washita River article, & first getting to know HH; I mentioned your RfC in the ANI report I made about HH and Custerwest that same day. HH could be a pretty good editor if he'd just please give up his so-very-witty incivility. -- Yksin 18:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. Thanks. -- Yksin 02:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
If you would be so kind as to provide a link to the earlier RfC on HanzoHattori you mentioned in the current RfC, I would like to check it out..! I scanned your talk page, but didn't see it..prolly missed it..;) Thanks! – Dreadstar † 23:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello. On the admin noticeboard, you appeared to assert that I was guilty of Misaccusing someone of a personal attack. Surely a false accusation of "POV pushing" counts as a personal attack, and removing it from the talk page where it was posted is the appropriate action, or have I misinterpreted the guidelines? (Apologies if that is not what your statement meant) Lurker ( said · done) 13:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the COI tag which you've placed on the article. It was created by an editor whose user name suggests a commercial interest. However, it has been significantly rewritten by several independent editors since then. Although COI may become an issue again in the future, I don't think it is one now. If you still feel COI is an isse, put the tag back and explain on the talk page. Thanks,-- Ethicoaestheticist 16:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
That article is full of WP:PEACOCK issues, so much so that I wouldn't even know where to begin. : ) -- cholmes75 ( chit chat) 17:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, yes— User:Ieraj007. DrKiernan 15:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
We don't understand exactly what you do want. We have rephrased many parts already of the article. Furthermore, there are many pages (not just two) in the category Lamas which are using titles (Lama, but also Kyabje for example): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_Nydahl, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namgyal_Rinpoche, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lama_Kunga_Rinpoche, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyabje_Gehlek_Rinpoche, etc etc. So, where is the fairness? And what is the point in removing the fact that RInpoche has been trained in a Tradition but teach a more westernize Buddhism? You keep removing that part... Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmaling ( talk • contribs)
"as it does with the subject of his study" Do you know Buddhist studies well enought to judge that? Don't you think that in 23 years of being a monk, Shenphen Rinpoche didn't received numerous transmissions and has been trained correctly into his primary Tradition, so to be consequently able to adapt it so to be better understood in the West? Anyhow, we rephrase these parts, and hope this will be ok to your appreciation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmaling ( talk • contribs)
Actually, I am an American citizen, but I have living in Quebec six days a week for almost four years. But aside from "Je ne parle pas Francais", I still can't speak a damn word of French. :) - Crockspot 17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
You flagged my page as an autobiography. It is true that I posted the initial content, but I have now invited many of my colleagues to edit the page and encouraged them to also post academic stubs. My intention is not at all to violate npov policy, but to help build a community of prominent social scientists who will be committed to enhancing content of organizational and sociological theories in our scholarly world. To this end, it is important to include academic stubs of prominent scholars in this world, one of which is me. I could have easily had one of my colleagues post my stub, so this is an oversight on my part given my relative inexperience in wiki. However, I think this is a fabulous forum for our scholars to develop content for ourselves and future scholars in our area. Thus, I have invited colleagues to edit my page to assauge your concern of "autobiography". I believe a couple of folks have already edited the page, but more will join. Ultimately, I would not expect it to change dramatically though. Had I just had a colleague post the same material, my guess is that we would not be having this conversation. Again, my intentions are noble and I seek to get a number of similar academics involved that will only help build and contribute to the wiki community. I would appreciate it if you would consider taking off the autobiography flag on my stub and appreciate the broader aims of what I am trying to do. --Lounsbury —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msacks11 ( talk • contribs)
No, I don't see what you mean. I carried out a split, which to my knowledge cannot be performed by a move. THe article covered both the river and the city, and so I split the river off to its own page, as described on the original page's talk page. I promise you I haven't done cut-and-paste moves since last year! - BillCJ 01:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
See this 81.77.251.19 has popped up on Template:AONBs in Northern Ireland now reverting my edits.-- padraig 23:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know: it's possible to move a page over a redirect as long as it only has one edit on it. You probably could have moved the page yourself. The Evil Spartan 23:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
If I make an argument that others seem incapable of refuting but they inhibit things by playing their numbers against me and using the 3RR technicality?-- 24.203.217.224 00:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
You can delete the kumioko\TOC page that you marked for speedy deltion. I created it on accident.-- Kumioko 00:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Understood, I'm new to this, but thanks for the advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FruitMonkey ( talk • contribs) 12:31, August 13, 2007
Update to Unicorn Museum article deletion issue and WP:WEB
We just got a mention in Dagbladet this morning (one of Norway's largest newspapers) and have been covered by Pharyngula (listed by the science journal Nature as the top-ranked blog written by a scientist [1]) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TWIS ( talk • contribs) 19:18, August 14, 2007
Why on earth did you put this article up for deletion? I don't see a rationale for such an action. — BQZip01 — talk 21:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I use the preview button, I just sometimes change my mind or feel the need to add/change/remove things later.-- Ilya1166 05:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a thought, wouldn't it be possible to contact the person who wrote the summary (from the forum thread you linked) to get their permission for the material? After all, it's even possible they put it on Wikipedia in the first place. laddiebuck 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Jauerback 18:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
TV.com was used as a reference for text but not pictures. Neither did I copy text from the pages. I may of done this when I first started Wikipedia but that's aichent history now. I feel personaly offended by your suggestion on my talk page. Pafcool2 18:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Can you please tell me which pages you're talking about, because I have not copied any writing. Some pages such as Daytime Emmys, Part 1, I just formalised (etc. Television template), and the writing was already there. This goes for most of them. I'll investigate myself into the articles and will promise to re-do them, if I find I'm mistaken but otherwise you're wrong. Fact. Pafcool2 17:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I recently listed this image as a copyright violation, but you changed this to Possibly Unfree Image and put "no copyvio evident". I know it is a copyright violation because it comes from the website militarymorons.com and was used without permission of the site's owner, who I contacted via e-mail to confirm the violation. I have reverted the image's state to copyright violation. - CumbiaDude 20:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
As a checkuser requestor on this, I'm letting you know that I've put a request for arbitration on the sockpuppet accusations here Theresa Knott | The otter sank Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for endorsing my RFC [16]. Blackbeard2k7 22:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
You tried to get me banned because of my "politically incorrect" edits, but you failed. As I explain on the 3RR page, it was wrong to narrowly interpret my edits as a "revert war". But, I guess that the Neo-Cons see everything as a war. And that's why they get beaten, like in Iraq. Note that in Iraq things are going better in Al Anbar only because the US reversed their policy of regarding the insurgents as terrorists. They are now cooporating with them.
Similarly, you could have discussed the edits on the talk page of Hezbollah or edit the page yourself. Instead you found it necessary to fire a tactical 3RR missile at me. Why not just consider the fact that editing the Hezbollah page is not part of the war on terror? Count Iblis 00:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Dear ES,
This individual who is accusing us of putting wrong content on the FC page has been a perpetual trouble-maker on the Field Commander forum and has been banned repeatedly there.
We who run the League of Field Commander are from every continent.
(1) The argument of not having the Field Commander League on the Field Commander page will also hold good for not having the list of World Champions on the Marathon page, Champions names on the Tennis page or any other game or sport page. This is one individual who is harnessing us repeatedly since the past 3 months. He has now found the Wiki site to vandalize.
(2) The League is an Open Championship and any Field Commander player is welcome to join.
(3) It is the only Tournament held for Field Commander players and there is no other such tournament anywhere in the world.
(4) This individual here BlackBeard2k7 is only here to vandalise this page. If you check his history on Wikipedia, he has just done that and nothing else.
(5) He has made personal attacks and libeous statements against me on the FC discussion page.
The owner of the site has been known in the past for making hacking attempts on computers of users he does not like by using the IP address they used to register on his forums with. In addition, he has publicly harrassed other users on the official Sony forum for Field Commander, frequently accusing other players of cheating, threatening their family, using extreme vulgarity toward them and posting personal information about them in public.
(6) You can yourself check the Field Commander Championship site and see for yourself : Field Commander Site —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hungrywolf ( talk • contribs) 04:22, August 21, 2007 (UTC).
His first argument of removing the League from the Wiki site was that users would get hacked. (Check the history of his edits). When that didn't work with the editors then he has come up with some new warped explaination.
If you have objections after this please be free to ask me on my Talk page before deleting the entries.
Thank you.
Hungrywolf 04:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello again Evil Spartan, and thanks for updating the Gorsleben image and getting it on to Commons.
I also notice that you've tagged Image:WernervonBülowsWorldRuneClock.JPG for deletion. I'm pretty certain I know Robert Prenic's source for this one. The identical image of Bülow's 'world-rune-clock' is reproduced in the same book by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (again: The Occult Roots of Nazism, 1985, ISBN 0-85030-402-4), and the single reference to it in the text is sourced to Gorsleben's book Hoch-Zeit der Menschheit (Leipzig, 1930), p.328f., which therefore seems to be where the clock design was published.
Bülow died in 1947 so if copyright applies, it should expire in 2017, but it isn't clear from the text whether he published the clock earlier some place else, in which case it might qualify as public domain on other grounds. Or fair use perhaps? Bülow designed the 'clock' (actually, a diagram of correspondences) to be used, which means widely distributed, among Germanic mystics so there's a doubt in my mind whether copyright status would be appropriate.
I'm not sure if any of that helps, but I'd hate to lose the image, as I would have liked to use it to illustrate Germanic mysticism and I think there may be genuine grounds for a benefit-of-the-doubt reprieve until somebody more expert than myself has checked into its earliest publication date and copyright status more thoroughly.
I do wish that Robert Prenic would defend his images, but then, I'm not very sure myself about how to enter the source information on to the image's page or whether I'm entitled to do so on somebody else's behalf.
I'm going to post this on both your own talk page and the image talk page, so feel free to reply in whichever place you think best. Gnostrat 21:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Indeed I did. :) Singu larity 00:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It's not a recreation. Neil ム 08:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Of course, but the information I got for the bio was qualifications. I changed the wording a bit but I cannot change her qualifications (which are needed for a biography) so how is that copy violoation? Robert C Prenic 07:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I didn't understand what you meant, can you explain what was wrong with the article and how I can improve it please? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Faction120 ( talk • contribs) 18:39, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
can you show where White Cat was told not to move said pages? Respond on ANI pls. Rlevse 13:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Remember when you said Ramdrake may be a puppet of Muntuwandi? [17]. I agree with you. However I dont know where to start for evidence. Ramdrake already has a suspected sockpuppet case. See: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ramdrake. Your help would be great if your interested and have time... KarenAER 23:00, 26 August 2007 (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. |
Re Bob Dylan -- another admin has blocked the IP for a WP:3RR violation.
Re Menstruation slang -- I think there's enough there to avoid a speedy delete. Post it for deletion at WP:AFD if you like. Thanks, NawlinWiki 16:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, The Evil Spartan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}}
after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
Friday
(talk) 16:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Alright. First, why would you link Los Angeles Dodgers to 2007 Los Angeles Dodgers season? It's stupid, first of all, as the standings are talking about the "Los Angeles Dodgers", not the season. And what's the point?
Second, the templates are updated almost as soon as the game is concluded. Therefore, it doesn't make any sense to say "Updated as of May 4" for example. It doesn't add anything, as the templates for the standings are kept updated as much as possible. It only wastes space and doesn't add any information that is already assumed.
So, please don't revert this again, as I have given you a sufficient explanation for why I did what I did. Thank you. And I'm also sorry. From now on, whenever I revert something, I will try to give a reason in the edit summary (space pending) when I make the revert or the user's talk page before making the edit. Thanks for your cooperation. -- Ksy92003 23:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not confused any easier than anybody else, X96lee15. It might not be misleading for you (I can't imagine how) but it is rather misleading. When I first went to {{ 2007 AL West standings}}, I wanted to go to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim page. So I clicked on {{ Los Angeles Angels}}. And I saw that it took me to {{ 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season}}. That's not the page that I wanted to go to and that's not where it says it will take me. It says it will take me to {{ Los Angeles Angels}}, so that's what I want to go to, not {{ 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season}}. Take this for example:
AL West | W | L | Pct. | GB |
---|---|---|---|---|
2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season | 17 | 15 | .531 | -- |
2007 Seattle Mariners season | 14 | 13 | .519 | ½ |
2007 Oakland Athletics season | 15 | 15 | .500 | 1 |
2007 Texas Rangers season | 13 | 18 | .419 | 3½ |
Without the actual mentioning of the teams, this is what the template would look like. Granted, this isn't misleading at all because clicking on the link will take you to that page. But you wouldn't say "The 2007 Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim season lead the division by ½ game", would you? The reason why Wikipedia implemented this feature is so you could link to an article without having to use that article's title word-for-word in the link itself by RE-WORDING it, not by making it entirely misleading. You might not think it is misleading or confusing, but when I first glanced at the template it was. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would have these problems. -- Ksy92003 04:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Sir,
With respect, I wish you to review your accusation that I have committed vandalism, and, once you confirm your error, please remove the warning from my talk page.
I am 68.218.223.16. My edit to Thomas McKean High School was itself specifically a revert of several consecutive acts of vandalism by 68.36.41.218.
I know you take vandalism seriously; I hope to discover that you are just as committed to accuracy. 68.218.223.16 20:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
You recently sent me a message about vandalizing the Ashley Massaro page (I am 206.253.155.139). I did nothing of the sort, if you look at the page prior to my changes I got rid of a guy saying things such as "She's hot," "Hey Nick Joe Michael says hi" and "Joe Michael is better than anyone she has met." I know I made three changes, however I didn't spot all the mistakes at once (they were spaced out throughout the page). I just want a further explanation to what I did wrong other than cleaning up filth on a page.
No problem, thank you for understanding.
Damn, your productive! You've got 300+ contributions in just 4\5 days! I've got 1300+, and it took me over one month to do it! Keep up the good work mate, your really helping this site! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 19:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
See my comment under your "Important note" comment on the uw-homophobia TFD. --TeckWiz is now R Parlate Contribs @ (Let's go Yankees!) 21:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you were helping me track 199.175.12.38 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). You may want to check out this edit, which is the only one that hasn't been reverted yet. It's essentially a basic blanking, but it looks like the material is controversial, and I'm not quite bold enough to revert. -- NORTH talk 22:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi The Evil Spartan
The category with CSD-I3 images in it at that point had around 400+ images to be deleted. I deleted them all, removing the red links and leaving a clickable, explaining message for every user. It took me 3 hours. Each day it takes between 2 and 4 hours. I have been doing this job for 10 weeks, every day, day in day out, getting nothing but complaints and nitpicking and death threats.
Your suggestion is very good, but it assumes I would have time to look into every single addition to see when the image was added and to hit revert. Leaving aside the fact that reversion is a very bad idea in this context (it will just be undone, the clickable message is very important in that respect), this would take the job from "boring but do-able" into "boring and impossible". Your tiny contribution of adding back the previous image would take seconds.
I'm sorry to heap this on you personally, but your message has been the final straw. This is one backlog I'll be fucked before I clear again. ⋐⋑ REDVEЯS 18:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Greetings The Evil Spartan. If you look on page 11 of the Eurobarometer 2005 pdf you will se the statistics for those who believe in god by country. Obviously one cannot be Christian if one doesn't believe in God. Giving fair dues to other religions I am basing the approimation on the Eurobarometer figures less about 5%
Europe is largely a secular country these days and the previous figures are really unrealistic, and indeed mostly unsourced. The general consensus on the talk page is that the euro figures are way innacurate.
Thanks for your message
Smeggypants
p.s I will edit the reference to include the page number of the pdf
Was the suspected sockpuppeteer reported to WP:SSP before? Find me the link and I will block him. Aquarius • talk 18:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Blocked. Aquarius • talk 18:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, A checkuser IP Check case you filled has been completed by a CheckUser, and archived. You can find the results for 7 days at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive. -- lucasbfr talk, checkuser clerk, 21:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC).
Please see my talk page for my answer Smeggypants 02:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Her page notes that she plays "operation." Is that some kind of gag? I'm not familiar enough with either the rules of Wikipeda nor the implications of playing "Operation." I thought I'd bring this to your attention.
Hi Evil Spartan. I understand your concern about the length of the block placed on this school ip, but I wasn't convinced that the ip is likely to reoffend in a hurry. I am inclined to see whether a block of a decent length will act as a deterrant before coming down with a harsher block and preventing not only further vandalism, but constructive editing from others at the school. If the vandalism starts again on Monday, then a longer block should be imposed, but apart from the trouble in the last few days, met with a much too short original block, it has been quite a while since the last persistent vandalism from this ip, and there is no reason to think the same people are involved, so their vandalism may not be as persistent as you fear. JPD ( talk) 16:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The Qiun Zhijun situation is at ArbCom, and you have been listed at a party. Please leave comments there. -- badlydrawnjeff talk 13:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. Cbrown1023 talk 14:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.
I think the article's in pretty good shape now, and it caused Dr. Hayward to reveal another of his sock-puppets :-). Care to withdraw your AfD nom? Groupthink 11:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Is your user name a play on characters in 300 or God of War? Just curious! -- 172.165.11.237 22:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello, on ANI you commented on how I should negotiate with the IP user I was having trouble with. After asking him to comment (yet again), he wrote a complaint about me, always referring to me in third person and talking about my apparent vandal tendencies (he has clearly not read WP:VANDALISM). This is similar to previous attempts to make contact with him. But I tried to tell him to reply to me on Talk:Malhotra. But instead he pasted a complaint about me, again referring to me in third person. Asking admins to take action against my vandalism. How can I, or should I even bother, to make sure this person discontinues their false editing. dishant 08:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
In this diff, you link to another user's comments, with a tone that implies you think they were wrong. I know that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. However, when the editing is hot, taking extra efforts to be civil are often good. Sarcasm is also often unhelpful. GRBerry 18:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, sounds reasonable. I've increased the block period by a month. Regards, Anas talk? 23:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the AfD withdrawal. As regards the changes he made, I personally thought he put a weaselly positive spin on things, much like the spin in the non-apology apologies he's offered regarding his thesis debacle. However, that's just my opinion, and not why I asked the page to be locked. I requested semi-protection because he has a long history of sock-puppetry (see User:Rafairminded). If he's going to make edits like that, I'd prefer that he do so openly. Groupthink 00:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your help here. I wasn't quite sure how to solve the problem.
NewYork1956 21:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering what template you use to make the blocked announcements in the brown square, like the one you used on User_talk:66.199.212.7. Thanks. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 17:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Oops..Sorry..actually this is the 6th time this has happened to me since I joined and its usually caused by two editors reverting the same page and the one with the faster internet connection gets it while the one with the slower connection (usually me) reverts the right one back to the vandals edit..Sorry..I'll take better attention next time .. -- Comet styles 19:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment at the ANI page regarding me and Bishonen. There were no diffs of any harassment prior to when Bishonen first mentioned "harassment." Maybe I did not react perfectly after Bishonen mentioned harassment and threatened me with a block. But there had been no harassment (at least not by me). Have you reached any conclusion about it? I'm not trying to stir up trouble here. I'm just having much difficulty understanding how this type of thing can happen. KC blasted me for --- essentially --- following her own advice, even though I pleaded with her to assume good faith. And then I got slapped with a harassment charge. Ferrylodge 02:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Evil Spartan, sorry for the delay responding to your post at ANI (job, sleep, you know). Anyway, I have responded here, and would appreciate your thoughts. Thx. Ferrylodge 15:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Spartan,
My revisions on the State College, Pennsylvania are true. it is a total nightmare living in state college, pa. What i have said is true about state college, pa. the public has to know. i have run into several problems living here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmase ( talk • contribs)
Fine then.
How do u create new articles on dis thing? -- Jmase
Please do not encourage people to misuse Wikipedia. Friday (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The Catholic Website is a violation of the guidelines for valid sources already on the page. Please do not escalate this by reporting me for reversion,. I shall simply do the same to you [ dont forget that YOU were the one who started the reversions ]. Which of course is counter productive. I have no problem with properly sourced figures, but Christian websites are not acceptable.
Please discuss this on the Christianity by country talk page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smeggypants ( talk • contribs)
The moves as proposed originally were supported by community consensus, with no dissenting opinion put forward. I suspect that the original reverting user did not understand the naming conventions and the MOS. Also, the reverted moves were accompanied by redirect sabotage, which makes them speedily reversible. 81.104.175.145 22:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? -- Barberio 16:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
You have just undone a lot work I have spent improving the Christianity by Country Page. This time you have no proper reason. I am reporting you to Wikipedia. It seems you are going over the line of good faith now. Please do NOT revert my work a 2nd time!!! Smeggypants 23:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I even took time out with curtesy to inform you of the improvements I had undertaken. Smeggypants 23:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Further just for reference, In your haste to undo all my work you also just undid the work of another user Yom who correctly updated the Ethiopia entry with a census, which I subsequently further improved by correcting the totals. You just trod all over Yom's work and mine. I have assumed good faith on yoru part for too long now. Smeggypants 23:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Next time, notify those people who have an interest in seeing the templates remain. - Jeske ( v^_^v) 02:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
His Evil Spartan, you told me to feel free to comment on you about images. The screenshots were from a movie I created and took production stills from. I also too the other photos so, I listed them as my own work because they are. I listed them as free images beause I'm okay if anyone wants to take them or keep them, etc. JoeyC5 23:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
As you may or may not be aware, the discussion you reverted is currently under discussion at WP:RFAR. ANI is not the place to discuss the merits or behaviour of administrators or editors in closing the Allison Stoke DRV. Please be aware of the 3 revert rule and don't reopen this discussion again. Thanks. Nick 14:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I am not a "jihadist" or a "terrorist sympathizer". I do not sympathize with anybody who kills innocent people. Just because I am in favor of the truth and reject misinformation (which in this case happen to be negative against an Iraqi insurgent group), does not mean I support them. Also blanking out whole sections of an article is considered vandalism and I have every right to restore valid deleted content. Thank you. - Lft6771 18:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
what? -- HanzoHattori 11:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Scuse me, but you're wrong. I started exactly from zero (null), used the 2006 Congress report, and then put it through the google search for more. You can see the history of gradually expanding. -- HanzoHattori 16:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC) Here, I started with this: [3] (Congress' stuff info + my infobox I did two days before -- do you mean the photo or what? I even changed the caption) -- HanzoHattori 16:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC) You can even see the original version of my infobox here: [4] (I even changed it a lot in the meantime - because I decided AQI should have their own article, so I used it in both) -- HanzoHattori 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
So, actually, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STOP SPEAKING IN SUCH A RIDDLES, please? -- HanzoHattori 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Btw, I think "TruthSeeker777" may be very related to "Lft6771": [6] (before this, there was a page on AQI alright - this one I built myself) I have no idea whatever happened to the original page. -- HanzoHattori 16:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you do speak in riddles and talk in caps (quote: STOP COPY AND PASTE MOVING [7]). How am I supposed to "STOP" doing I-don't-know-what-because-you-refuse-to-tell? Is "I don't COPY AND PASTE do now you can revert your revert" precise enough? -- HanzoHattori 17:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you were wrong, [8] [9] so now revert the revert so you will get suspended and not me this time :P The thing is, JTJ was not AQI. They changed a lot: new name(s), new flag, and most of all new alliegance (bin Laden). -- HanzoHattori 18:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
They're not the sports group, better compare Reichswehr and (after alliegance to Hitler) Wehrmacht (same people, yes). Anyway, I did two completely different articles (which you claimed were the same, somehow). So if you want the redirect, you do it after a vote, but now just revert the revert. -- HanzoHattori 18:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
The Russian secret police is the same organization, with the headquarters on Lubyanka, since it's founding as Cheka in 1917 (there was Okhrana before, but here there is no so direct connection). But they used many different names, so they have different articles (even the little stub of MGB - I don't think it's really more known than the AQI among the general public). Actually I don't think most people heard of anything more than KGB, or maybe current FSB. I can't use correct grammar because I don't speak correct English. That's why I tag my articles for copyedit. I try as much as I can anyway. Also, like how "no votes" when there's a vote? [10] Also still, returning to the discussion, why do you think there are previous= (Originated as) and next= (Became) lines in the Infobox War Faction? Do you really think sports groups have anything with armed groups? Another example: Ludowe Wojsko Polskie turning into Wojsko Polskie (again) after the fall of Communism - and so on, really.-- HanzoHattori 19:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
NOW, would you explain this [11]? As always, you didn't. Do you always have to be so mysterious in your "popups"? Actually, I think you do vandalise my work. (-17,458 without uttering one word, when everything was sourced and actually double-checked) Revert your revert, or this will mean a war - especially, since you said you want to provoke me just to report me then (well, I guess - even as I hate doing this, because I hate learning all this stupid beurocracy). You do not own Wikipedia TOO, and you commited a mistake, so now just repair your error instead of being disruptive. If you have problems about it, discuss this like we were doing, and start a vote if needed (and don't say there's no votes, because it's a lie). -- HanzoHattori 19:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, Evil Spartan, I'm Spartan-James. Peace. Spartan-James 17:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, The Evil Spartan, I saw your edit to Image:Ancient City Wall of Nanjing, World 1 Length.jpg. Just to let you know (if you are interested in doing some rote maintenance work), there are bunch of images which are definitely not screenshots that are in Category:Free screenshots (where I got this one from), and that category is populated with these non-screenshots quite often. I've been meaning to go through them all and nominate them for deletion and such, but any help would be appreciated. Cheers, Iamunknown 19:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I just e-mailed you a copy of the Research Video page at the final version before deletion. It's a really stupid rule not to undelete automatically for discussion, & I ask from time to time that it be changed. But it might help to simply ask at deletion review each time you think it really relevant. (if nobody beats me to it, I'll always email you a copy). (I'll also of course email if you ask at my talk page, but that doesnt get any public notice) DGG 22:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
So what do I do with the image ? I got it off his MySpace. He uses that picture to promote his stuff, and everyone else does. I don't understand what to do now :< —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuplad ( talk • contribs)
Just vandalised San Marino, I guess it's time for a permanent block. Therequiembellishere 23:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Sparty, I know you've got my back :) We must educate these people-- Ilya1166 04:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I guess you have placed a whole lot of pictures that i have uploaded onto the deletion list. First of all I am trying to get the permission of the site admin for the pics i have put up..till then i have removed them from the articles i have placed them in. Will they still be deleted within a few days?? the web admin is not responding to the mails i have sent and asking for permission requests(Not even not granting permission reply) Sadashiv n 09:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the notice. I tagged the picture for commons because I believe it has some use, to illustrate articles about barefoot. Also it is an open content photo. For these reasons I think moving it to Wikimedia Commons is appropriate. Of course, there are images on commons that are not used now, but have potential usage. Regards. Wooyi Talk to me? 21:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm always happy to expand on my reasoning/review my own actions. On that one I guess it depends if you consider it controversial or not, to me it looked like a fairly straight forward endorsement. As the nominator stated they were trying to add "new argument" i.e. rerun the TFD, which WP:DRV pretty explicitly is not, the endorse contributors covered this. The key objection raised and more or less on your point was that the Wikiproject and/or original creators weren't notified, as there is no requirement to do so, that again is not a process issue. i.e. Those wishing to overturn the deletion were not adding any new information to the debate, or addressing process issues with the debate, they were either disagreeing with the deletion or impose some process standard which doesn't exist. Those endorsing are supported by both the deletion and DRV processes. (Totally aside to this review if we decide that X has some interest and should be notified wouldn't we to be "fair" have to start identifying the other parties who may also have an interest, we don't do that we let people keep an eye on their own interests. If we want to change to making deletion nomination an arduous process of trying to identify and inform all those who maybe considered interested and subject to the post discussion argument of if someone should have been notified an whose input *may* have impacted the debate, I personally wouldn't be convinced that it's practical nor desirable, but whatever it's a general process/policy issue not something for DRV to dictate) -- pgk 18:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
That pretty much says it all! Flyguy649 talk contribs 21:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a member of the WikiProject Pittsburgh. In the past we have discussed a meetup idea - let's see if we can make it a reality during the summer. Please see this thread for more information.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not evading a block. It was reversed. Nonetheless, thank you for your input. I appreciate it. 24.160.241.190 00:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Teen_Spirit_2.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thnks for your notice. I took the photo myself. I will specify the source. As far as the licensing tag is concerned I used a CC tag by share alike. I hope it fits. Forli.tv 09:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
See reply on my talk page. And please do check the List of administrators. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 19:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I think HH may have left me with a lower opinion of him or her than they left you with.
But I don't think I qualify for certifying Wikipedia:Requests for comment/HanzoHattori, because while my dispute was very similar, I don't think it qualifies as the same dispute. The instructions state the certifiers have to have tried to resolve the same dispute.
I'll happily add my opinion in the space set outside for comments from outsiders.
Cheers! Geo Swan 21:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I got your message, I don't have a response. — Ocatecir T 17:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
just letting you know Soxrock reversed your edit of deleting Reggie Jackson's copyrighted photo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.234.99.1 ( talk • contribs)
Probably because the source is missing, just the old copy/paste footnote is there. Do you have the source? - Crockspot 18:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know that your comment on the 3RR noticeboard was deleted by ThePromenader: [12]. I've restored your comment. Hardouin 20:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Please explain to me your rationale in deleting Phroth's wikipedia page? You cited it as a "non-notable fraternity" and one of over 600 clubs at Penn State. I beg to differ, it is not a fraternity, but rather one of four notable media outlets at Penn State. Further, had you read the article, you would have learned that the magazine has existed for 99 years and has produced alumni who have gone on to win Academy Awards, Cannes Awards, Emmy Awards and work at some of the most notable publications of the 20th century. The article was based primarily on celebrating the history of that magazine, only providing a small part to its impact on the campus today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteaaaay ( talk • contribs)
Why did you revert it back to that version? The newb (don't say I am name calling because newb is just short for newbie) is in the wrong here and his version shouldn't be there. The issue is him claming it's OR to say who is on the poster even though the poster is right there in the article. TJ Spyke 20:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
This fight isnt about Lashley being on the poster bc he OBVIOUSLY is. This fight is because TJ thinks Monty Brown is on it but refuses to provide a source stating this. He just won listen. BlueShrek 20:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Im not fighting it im fighting for Brown. TJ kept putting it on there. HE has stopped for now but Im positivfe he'll start again soon. BlueShrek 20:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I'm the de facto caretaker of the Nittwits article you nominated for deletion. I haven't had the time recently to update it, but in the course of the last year there have been many television mentions and articles published that I could include in a re-write of the article which will further solidify the organizations's notability. Could you kindly remove the AfD until I have the chance to do so? Thanks. BroadSt Bully 07:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ugggh! What a horrorshow! I'll attack it if you and the anon IP are done. Flyguy649 talk contribs 17:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
TES, sorry about that the double-listing. I was working on orphaning {{ PUInonfree}} (as it is listed at TfD). Meant no harm by it. =) -- Iamunknown 04:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Where do you see the copyright violation in the present Economic Development and Cultural Change? all i see on the page is an infobox with a copy of the cover of the journal, and that illustration is accepted as fair use, just as an album cover is? (The paragraph in the original article wascertainly copyvio, but it has been removed. DGG ( talk) 17:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you delisted this article from Wikipedia:Copyright problems by the comment on the talk page. Please don't do this unless confirmation really has arrived per Wikipedia:OTRS. Just a statement on a talk is not enough. Garion96 (talk) 19:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I read WP:GHITS as you suggested. Yes, I found it interesting. I use the Ghit argument not for notability per se, but that, if you look hard enough, you can find something out there that something or someone must be notable. 345,000 Ghits are useless if they are all blogs, encyclopedia, and wikis; you must find clean Ghits: verifiable, unique, nontrivial sources. That's why I routinely add "-encyclopedia" or "-wiki" when I do clean Google searches. A rock band, for example, that generates 10,000 Ghits must have at the least a cult following. On the other hand, the lack of Ghits for someone who died in 1933 probably doesn't get many hits. In the end, the Ghit test is as useful as you make it. My own rule of thumb is that a living person, high school, or legal topic must generate 100 clean Ghits to be a stand-alone article. So yes, I'm still going to use the argument, but I'll be more judicious and careful in my logic. Bearian 15:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I have unblocked, per your request. LessHeard vanU 19:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Whats are you planning on doing with Transaction Processing over XML? Is it still at Afd or not? John Vandenberg 04:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC) Oops, that was a mistake. My bad. The Evil Spartan 17:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear Evil Spartan,
Can you please take a look at the "revised stub" that's proposed two sections before your comments on the Sahaj Marg talk page? Please edit away to create a neutral stub. We need neutral editors on this site.
Thanks, Renee -- Renee 19:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
If you don't want to help that's your choice, but was there really a need to disparage my concerns? Do you add condescending comments to all discussions, or just those related to Iranians? [13] -- Vitalmove 22:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I have restored Image:CallasVioletta1956.jpg. It is, however, an orphan, so you may want to fix that. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) ( random) 02:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The photo was taken by my friend, of Spigelman CJ and myself. I have cropped the image to show just His Honour.
It was taken with my camera, for my uses. Hence yes, I own the Copyright in the image.
Dear Evil Spartan,
Users Sethie and Reneeholle have filed an Rfc for user Shashwat pandey.
Because you have contributed to either the Sahaj Marg page, the Shri Ram Chandra Mission page, or both, we would appreciate it if you could provide your comments of this user at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Shashwat_pandey
Here are the guidelines for responding [14]:
Thank you for your time. It is greatly appreciated! 18:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reneeholle ( talk • contribs)
User mghabmw continues to repost the non-copyrighted image of Reggie Jackson on his wikipedia page. You had removed this image several weeks back as it is not public domain but he continues to repost it. Can you please advise on action? 192.234.99.1 18:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Some muppett placed this in WP:RM and went through unopposed even if completely wrong. It is no acronym. Staff would even get disciplined if they ever said British Midland! Please help to move it back where it belongs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.20.21 ( talk • contribs)
He keeps on using sockpuppets to change reggie jackson.
You just tagged three of my images ( Russell Allen, Michael Lepond, and Michael Pinnella) for lacking sources. Check out if I just fixed it. Just in case, the pictures were taken by me in a recent concert. Cheers and take care. Thief12 22:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
told you i'm not a sock. i'm just an a**hole. Mghabmw 17:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
There is no need to overturn the decision, as the decision was No consensus. That is the point of {{ relist}}, to continue discussion when no consensus is reached within a normal AfD period. I do not understand your reasoning. If it is based on a guideline could you please link to it? ~ JohnnyMrNinja { talk} 20:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
You've got mail. — Rlest 17:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Are you eyeing me and my every single edit and upload? What is your problem? Mghabmw 19:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a goddamned sock, read the conclusion of the sockpuppetry case you filed against me. I've never denied my socks and EXCUSE me for not making sure I was logged in every time I made an edit. It does log me out when I get out. Stop writing that I'm a sock. Mghabmw 20:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I just find it ridiculous that this has been going on for days and a not a single admin has shown up to respond to these block requests and take care of this once and for good...it just goes to show you how morons run this place and the most important people on the site, the ones who should be monitoring it, could care less... -- Palffy 23:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
As much as I agree with you, I've been told that null edits to avoid redirection are at very least in violation of the spirit of previous arbcom rulings. The Evil Spartan 00:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
I award you this barnstar for all of your anti-vandalism work. I have always seen you making edits and I think its amazing that you have compiled so many edits in such a short amount of time. I have only been here since June and this is the first time I have addressed your talk page but after seeing all the work you have done I feel I have an obligation to give you this barnstar. Southern Texas 00:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC) |
I uploaded a new Image:Whiteyford.png with copyright notices from the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Since Wikipedia is both informational and noncommercial and the image has not been modified, I believe it falls under the guidelines of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Mghabmw 21:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Whoever put "1882" in there was right. They began in the A.A. in 1882 and moved to the N.L. in 1887. However, that's one of only many issues with the article. The writer spent a paragraph or two speculating on why the team was supposedly called the "Alleghenies". They were "Allegheny", or "the Alleghenys" (not -ies) because they played in Allegheny. I'll work on this when I have some time. Or maybe right now. :) Baseball Bugs 23:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
Your efforts are very much appreciated. MONGO 00:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC) |
Hi, I was bold and took the action of copying the content of this page to the creator's user page at User:Donal Lang. Bearian 19:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Have there been any incidents since the Xterra/recall thing? If not, what prompted the RFC? Andre ( talk) 20:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[15] The comment you made was completely unfounded and unnecessary. I ask you nicely to promptly withdraw it with an apology to Hesperian. — Moondyne 02:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, The Evil Spartan, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy U C P 04:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Greece's %4.6 in Asia and the islands aren't their depencies, local people are Greek for centuries. See the image Image:AegeanIslands.PNG Islans in Asia shown with "yellow" User talk:Zaparojdik 19:57 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The Aegean islands belonging to Greece and on Asia's continental shelf are not territories, but as culturally Greek as the other Greek islands and mainland and fully integrated into Greece. However, this does not change the fact that Wikipedia's definitons allow these islands to be regarded as associated with Asia and justify the inclusion of Greece as a transcontinental state. The article text allows such islands on the continental shelf of a continent other than where the nation is based to count toward the nation being transcontinental. Heff01 19:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested your input would be helpful at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States Secretary of Energy, Thank you.-- Southern Texas 22:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Can you certify an RfC for a dispute in which you weren't involved? I thought it had to be someone involved (which is why I'm anxiously waiting around for Murderbike to get online) -- but it would certainly make sense for you to endorse it or maybe better to make a summary for the "outside view" based on your own prior experience with HH. I remember your prior RfC -- that was just as I was first getting involved in the Battle of Washita River article, & first getting to know HH; I mentioned your RfC in the ANI report I made about HH and Custerwest that same day. HH could be a pretty good editor if he'd just please give up his so-very-witty incivility. -- Yksin 18:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. Thanks. -- Yksin 02:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
If you would be so kind as to provide a link to the earlier RfC on HanzoHattori you mentioned in the current RfC, I would like to check it out..! I scanned your talk page, but didn't see it..prolly missed it..;) Thanks! – Dreadstar † 23:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello. On the admin noticeboard, you appeared to assert that I was guilty of Misaccusing someone of a personal attack. Surely a false accusation of "POV pushing" counts as a personal attack, and removing it from the talk page where it was posted is the appropriate action, or have I misinterpreted the guidelines? (Apologies if that is not what your statement meant) Lurker ( said · done) 13:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the COI tag which you've placed on the article. It was created by an editor whose user name suggests a commercial interest. However, it has been significantly rewritten by several independent editors since then. Although COI may become an issue again in the future, I don't think it is one now. If you still feel COI is an isse, put the tag back and explain on the talk page. Thanks,-- Ethicoaestheticist 16:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
That article is full of WP:PEACOCK issues, so much so that I wouldn't even know where to begin. : ) -- cholmes75 ( chit chat) 17:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, yes— User:Ieraj007. DrKiernan 15:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
We don't understand exactly what you do want. We have rephrased many parts already of the article. Furthermore, there are many pages (not just two) in the category Lamas which are using titles (Lama, but also Kyabje for example): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_Nydahl, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namgyal_Rinpoche, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lama_Kunga_Rinpoche, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyabje_Gehlek_Rinpoche, etc etc. So, where is the fairness? And what is the point in removing the fact that RInpoche has been trained in a Tradition but teach a more westernize Buddhism? You keep removing that part... Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmaling ( talk • contribs)
"as it does with the subject of his study" Do you know Buddhist studies well enought to judge that? Don't you think that in 23 years of being a monk, Shenphen Rinpoche didn't received numerous transmissions and has been trained correctly into his primary Tradition, so to be consequently able to adapt it so to be better understood in the West? Anyhow, we rephrase these parts, and hope this will be ok to your appreciation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmaling ( talk • contribs)
Actually, I am an American citizen, but I have living in Quebec six days a week for almost four years. But aside from "Je ne parle pas Francais", I still can't speak a damn word of French. :) - Crockspot 17:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
You flagged my page as an autobiography. It is true that I posted the initial content, but I have now invited many of my colleagues to edit the page and encouraged them to also post academic stubs. My intention is not at all to violate npov policy, but to help build a community of prominent social scientists who will be committed to enhancing content of organizational and sociological theories in our scholarly world. To this end, it is important to include academic stubs of prominent scholars in this world, one of which is me. I could have easily had one of my colleagues post my stub, so this is an oversight on my part given my relative inexperience in wiki. However, I think this is a fabulous forum for our scholars to develop content for ourselves and future scholars in our area. Thus, I have invited colleagues to edit my page to assauge your concern of "autobiography". I believe a couple of folks have already edited the page, but more will join. Ultimately, I would not expect it to change dramatically though. Had I just had a colleague post the same material, my guess is that we would not be having this conversation. Again, my intentions are noble and I seek to get a number of similar academics involved that will only help build and contribute to the wiki community. I would appreciate it if you would consider taking off the autobiography flag on my stub and appreciate the broader aims of what I am trying to do. --Lounsbury —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msacks11 ( talk • contribs)
No, I don't see what you mean. I carried out a split, which to my knowledge cannot be performed by a move. THe article covered both the river and the city, and so I split the river off to its own page, as described on the original page's talk page. I promise you I haven't done cut-and-paste moves since last year! - BillCJ 01:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
See this 81.77.251.19 has popped up on Template:AONBs in Northern Ireland now reverting my edits.-- padraig 23:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know: it's possible to move a page over a redirect as long as it only has one edit on it. You probably could have moved the page yourself. The Evil Spartan 23:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
If I make an argument that others seem incapable of refuting but they inhibit things by playing their numbers against me and using the 3RR technicality?-- 24.203.217.224 00:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
You can delete the kumioko\TOC page that you marked for speedy deltion. I created it on accident.-- Kumioko 00:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Understood, I'm new to this, but thanks for the advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FruitMonkey ( talk • contribs) 12:31, August 13, 2007
Update to Unicorn Museum article deletion issue and WP:WEB
We just got a mention in Dagbladet this morning (one of Norway's largest newspapers) and have been covered by Pharyngula (listed by the science journal Nature as the top-ranked blog written by a scientist [1]) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TWIS ( talk • contribs) 19:18, August 14, 2007
Why on earth did you put this article up for deletion? I don't see a rationale for such an action. — BQZip01 — talk 21:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I use the preview button, I just sometimes change my mind or feel the need to add/change/remove things later.-- Ilya1166 05:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a thought, wouldn't it be possible to contact the person who wrote the summary (from the forum thread you linked) to get their permission for the material? After all, it's even possible they put it on Wikipedia in the first place. laddiebuck 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Jauerback 18:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
TV.com was used as a reference for text but not pictures. Neither did I copy text from the pages. I may of done this when I first started Wikipedia but that's aichent history now. I feel personaly offended by your suggestion on my talk page. Pafcool2 18:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Can you please tell me which pages you're talking about, because I have not copied any writing. Some pages such as Daytime Emmys, Part 1, I just formalised (etc. Television template), and the writing was already there. This goes for most of them. I'll investigate myself into the articles and will promise to re-do them, if I find I'm mistaken but otherwise you're wrong. Fact. Pafcool2 17:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I recently listed this image as a copyright violation, but you changed this to Possibly Unfree Image and put "no copyvio evident". I know it is a copyright violation because it comes from the website militarymorons.com and was used without permission of the site's owner, who I contacted via e-mail to confirm the violation. I have reverted the image's state to copyright violation. - CumbiaDude 20:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
As a checkuser requestor on this, I'm letting you know that I've put a request for arbitration on the sockpuppet accusations here Theresa Knott | The otter sank Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for endorsing my RFC [16]. Blackbeard2k7 22:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
You tried to get me banned because of my "politically incorrect" edits, but you failed. As I explain on the 3RR page, it was wrong to narrowly interpret my edits as a "revert war". But, I guess that the Neo-Cons see everything as a war. And that's why they get beaten, like in Iraq. Note that in Iraq things are going better in Al Anbar only because the US reversed their policy of regarding the insurgents as terrorists. They are now cooporating with them.
Similarly, you could have discussed the edits on the talk page of Hezbollah or edit the page yourself. Instead you found it necessary to fire a tactical 3RR missile at me. Why not just consider the fact that editing the Hezbollah page is not part of the war on terror? Count Iblis 00:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Dear ES,
This individual who is accusing us of putting wrong content on the FC page has been a perpetual trouble-maker on the Field Commander forum and has been banned repeatedly there.
We who run the League of Field Commander are from every continent.
(1) The argument of not having the Field Commander League on the Field Commander page will also hold good for not having the list of World Champions on the Marathon page, Champions names on the Tennis page or any other game or sport page. This is one individual who is harnessing us repeatedly since the past 3 months. He has now found the Wiki site to vandalize.
(2) The League is an Open Championship and any Field Commander player is welcome to join.
(3) It is the only Tournament held for Field Commander players and there is no other such tournament anywhere in the world.
(4) This individual here BlackBeard2k7 is only here to vandalise this page. If you check his history on Wikipedia, he has just done that and nothing else.
(5) He has made personal attacks and libeous statements against me on the FC discussion page.
The owner of the site has been known in the past for making hacking attempts on computers of users he does not like by using the IP address they used to register on his forums with. In addition, he has publicly harrassed other users on the official Sony forum for Field Commander, frequently accusing other players of cheating, threatening their family, using extreme vulgarity toward them and posting personal information about them in public.
(6) You can yourself check the Field Commander Championship site and see for yourself : Field Commander Site —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hungrywolf ( talk • contribs) 04:22, August 21, 2007 (UTC).
His first argument of removing the League from the Wiki site was that users would get hacked. (Check the history of his edits). When that didn't work with the editors then he has come up with some new warped explaination.
If you have objections after this please be free to ask me on my Talk page before deleting the entries.
Thank you.
Hungrywolf 04:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello again Evil Spartan, and thanks for updating the Gorsleben image and getting it on to Commons.
I also notice that you've tagged Image:WernervonBülowsWorldRuneClock.JPG for deletion. I'm pretty certain I know Robert Prenic's source for this one. The identical image of Bülow's 'world-rune-clock' is reproduced in the same book by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (again: The Occult Roots of Nazism, 1985, ISBN 0-85030-402-4), and the single reference to it in the text is sourced to Gorsleben's book Hoch-Zeit der Menschheit (Leipzig, 1930), p.328f., which therefore seems to be where the clock design was published.
Bülow died in 1947 so if copyright applies, it should expire in 2017, but it isn't clear from the text whether he published the clock earlier some place else, in which case it might qualify as public domain on other grounds. Or fair use perhaps? Bülow designed the 'clock' (actually, a diagram of correspondences) to be used, which means widely distributed, among Germanic mystics so there's a doubt in my mind whether copyright status would be appropriate.
I'm not sure if any of that helps, but I'd hate to lose the image, as I would have liked to use it to illustrate Germanic mysticism and I think there may be genuine grounds for a benefit-of-the-doubt reprieve until somebody more expert than myself has checked into its earliest publication date and copyright status more thoroughly.
I do wish that Robert Prenic would defend his images, but then, I'm not very sure myself about how to enter the source information on to the image's page or whether I'm entitled to do so on somebody else's behalf.
I'm going to post this on both your own talk page and the image talk page, so feel free to reply in whichever place you think best. Gnostrat 21:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Indeed I did. :) Singu larity 00:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It's not a recreation. Neil ム 08:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Of course, but the information I got for the bio was qualifications. I changed the wording a bit but I cannot change her qualifications (which are needed for a biography) so how is that copy violoation? Robert C Prenic 07:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I didn't understand what you meant, can you explain what was wrong with the article and how I can improve it please? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Faction120 ( talk • contribs) 18:39, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
can you show where White Cat was told not to move said pages? Respond on ANI pls. Rlevse 13:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Remember when you said Ramdrake may be a puppet of Muntuwandi? [17]. I agree with you. However I dont know where to start for evidence. Ramdrake already has a suspected sockpuppet case. See: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ramdrake. Your help would be great if your interested and have time... KarenAER 23:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)