This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Welcome back! ;)-- U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 22:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
As I stated during on the talk page of the WyomingHS.jpg image, the image was taken by me. The fact that it appears on the school web site does not eliminate the fact that it is my intellectual property, and, as such, I have the right to release it for use on Wikipedia. Read before you delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JagSeal ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Congrats on your team winning today! Bowl or no bowl? Miranda 22:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Can you tell me when this became consensus. It seem odd to me that former professional football players are not notable, but former pro baseball and basketball players are.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:LOTD) 16:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I have mentioned your username in evidence presented at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. Your administrative action was mentioned as one superior (IMO) to that taken by one of the parties in the case. GRBerry 01:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Good to see you back. Definitely missed your insights and your work. I'd really appreciate it if you could take a look at the FAC for 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl and leave a few comments. Since it's a Virginia Tech bowl game, I think it's right up your alley. Thanks, and good to have you back! JKBrooks85 17:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
When you've got the time, could you swing by 2007 ACC Championship Game and see if there's any glaring errors or anything you think needs to be changed in it? I tried to model the article after the Chick-fil-A Bowl article I shepherded to Featured status, but there are still some things I'm overlooking, I'm sure. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Your last edit to {{ cbb link}} broke the template. Is there a way we can compromise to still make it work while limiting the #ifedit traffic? This is the first I've heard about problems with that function, would you mind filling me in (and please dumb it down as much as possible, I'm no computer whiz) Hoof Hearted 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up about #ifexist. I was not aware of that limitation. I'm also active in the US highways projects, where {{ jct}} is used a lot. I just checked, and it does not call #ifexist, so it should be fine. (Articles with long exit lists may call the template over 100 times; because of calls to images, it really makes articles a lot more readible to use that template and not subst it.) You're right, though: cfb link should be subst'ed or otherwise avoided, except where there's potential for a future article. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you are about! Sorry - I thought that you weren't, so brought up Profg's return to try and find an alternate mentor thingie. Sorry!
Adam Cuerden
talk 04:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Never mind. talk to you when not sleep-deprived and can speak coherently. Adam Cuerden talk 04:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Yup. nobody can resist the gravitational pull Wikipedia appears to have on people. :) Maser ( Talk!) 04:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I was going to upload that image (amongst others) and put it on my user page, but couldn't find a proper citation for it. When I went back and looked at my user page, I didn't have it on there and I thought I just decided not to upload it. Like I said, I was doing a bunch of them at once and I guess I put that caption in there with the others. This is certainly a BIG mistake on my part. Do you know the process for getting a photo deleted (and this one certainly should)? — BQZip01 — talk 00:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar | ||
For your hard work in the thankless task of image cleanup, I award you this shiny new barnstar made from 100% recycled photons! – Quadell ( talk) ( random) 13:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Thats fine, I viewed the source and it did not provide an author, so I think chances of that image returning to Wiki is slight. -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 01:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes I still have OTRS access. I looked this up (Ticket 2007121410018321) and the agent handling it decided (for which I agree) that getting a free license out of the owner isn't possible. They want attribution on the article, which we don't do. They also don't seem to really understand the free license part, putting restrictions such as "not uploading to Commons" which would be perfectly acceptable under a free license. My thought (with the agent that handled it) is that we have no hope of a free license and should delete the image(s). It was worth a shot, but doesn't seem possible now. MECU≈ talk 03:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It got muddled in a collection of photographs I have on the subject. I may have taken the photograph, I don't know, I have been in contact with the guy on the blog in the past, and it may well be my image. Though I cant be sure. Iwas at that parade, and recall taking pics. So feel free to delete that image while I clarify. Sorry for the trouble. My bad. Lobojo ( talk) 03:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
It is in the second-to-last paragraph under Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#Instructions...
“ | Note: Images can be unlisted immediately if they are indisputably in the public domain or licensed under an indisputably free license (GFDL, CC-BY-SA, etc.—see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for more on these). Images which claim fair use must have two people agree to this. | ” |
If I misunderstood this, please correct me. It strikes me that this rule was probably intended for those editors who shoot off an invalid fair-use claim in response to a claimed-as-free image being challenged. WP:IFD would have been a more appropriate venue for the ip editor to nominate the image in question. WP:PUI largely deals with possibly unfree images that are being claimed as free. That being said, both venues generate very little traffic, and two (now three) editors in agreement seem to indicate that I made the right choice. Best, IronGargoyle ( talk) 00:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I replied to your post on the sophia image deletion discussion [1]. jbolden1517 Talk 13:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
So sorry, didn't realize that person was still alive. sorry. KitHutch on the other hand should have tagged the info, instead of unilateral deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerome709 ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. This is a bit of a curiosity - someone else took the image from my upload to 'Find-a-Grave' (c. 2002) and claimed it on WP as their own. I couldn't really be bothered to argue - but have now tagged it as a GFDL under my own name. Best regards, Smerus ( talk) 10:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I've got a few free tickets to the 2008 Orange Bowl... want one? JKBrooks85 ( talk) 01:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
B, the permissions were forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the images are now uploaded at commons (see the links at the discussion page for those images) and can be used directly from commons now. All permissions appear at the commons address provided. Once again, thank you for your help and all the best in this season. Jenny Len☤ 09:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I am requesting your periodic monitoring of this page as HappyTalk22 has proven to be dominant in his editing and reverting this article without any "three-revert-edit" imposition placed on his account.
Thank you very much. 74.73.106.239 ( talk) 18:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been working on the 2005 ACC Championship Game article, and was wondering if you happened to have any photos of that game. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I created a selected article, since I couldn't see that one had been, and also couldn't see that any discussion was being held to decide which. I went with the "safe" decision of Paul the Apostle, since I figure he's more than a little bit influential, important, featurable (I know that's not a real word) and the article's a good one. I've basically copied the lead directly across, with a few crops and removed all of the references. Is this how you'd want it? If you had anything else in mind to do with this, feel free to change it, but I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring. -- linca linca 14:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I think I screwed up the deletion/redirect for this article when I was trying to make the article name consistent with what seems to be our style. I'd appreciate any help you could give. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 16:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I see you have added an entry to the blacklist. However can I ask you to please log any entries that you make with a permanent link to the request came in some form. This may seem a little irritating but in 6 or 12 months time the rationale may be impossible to find and the listing will then be removed by someone. I recently had to do exactly that on a Meta listing than no one logged! Let me know if I can help - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 09:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I would like to request for FULL protection for the Christmas article. There is an edit war that I would like to see resolved. RC-0722 ( talk) 01:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
A comment of yours regarding the fact that you were "denied access to the admin channel" has been brought up in an arbitration case, at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Workshop#Some admins are denied access to the admins channel. Do you mean explicitly turned down, or just ignored? Thanks, Picaroon (t) 02:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
B...if you want I can email you notes I made on the process as it is confusing and not that well documented. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I've read your comment here and I am flabbergasted. You've got a lot of nerve creating that stink where you accused me and others of being sockpuppets considering you've contributed under another username which you're trying to keep quiet. You're an admin, in a position of trust, fer chrissakes. Full disclosure is called for here and on your userpage unless you have a very compelling reason why the community should not know your other username. I'm still stunned. Odd nature ( talk) 21:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping clean up that guy's vandal welcomes. =) -- slakr\ talk / 04:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Copy and paste errors. I love 'em FlowerpotmaN·( t) 04:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. You reverted my edit of Template:UK geo article. I must confess that I didn't understand the meaning of "COTM".
So this template is used in one place Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/cotm to change one article title, and the page in question is in it self transcluded like a template. So the template still seems meaningless to me, but I agree that it is not a candidate for speedy deletion.
Then Category:Geography and place-related templates. What is the problem here? — Leo Laursen ( T | C ) 11:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Message redacted Magnonimous ( talk) 12:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I happened to lift the autoblock at the same time that you declined to do this. Feel free to re-block the user if you think he is abusing sockpuppet accounts. Sandstein ( talk) 20:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
In case it's helpful, MLGSP says he's MoonLightGlory [3] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
When I reviewed the block, I wasn't sure that the material that Kjoonlee was reverting definitely fell under the spam exception to 3RR. I've seen a lot of mods that are really strange, but nonetheless real. Reading it again, though, I can see how it could simply be a prank or attack on someone named Daniels. I'm sorry, I will try to be more diligent in the future in reading repeatedly inserted content like this to determine its validity. I believe that Kjoonlee's 8 hour block has already ended, so I can't really unblock him. However, I will leave a note on his talk page to the effect that I have reconsidered his block in light of your reasoning.-- Danaman5 ( talk) 18:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
We'll be in the Signpost on Wednesday, 2 Jan about 17:00 UTC, someone noticed us, be sure to read it, many of us get it, read it on my talk page if you like. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I do have the releases and will forward them within the next couple of days. I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure it's only the three images you mentioned plus two others. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 04:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 17:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks B. I'll see what his response is, but if you see anything positive before I do I'm more than happy for you to unblock. -- Step hen 00:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Relax and good luck with the game tonight. miranda 01:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, ****. At least the tickets were cheap, and I did take a couple hundred photos (literally), some of which might actually be usable. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm getting really close to wrapping up the writing on the 2008 Orange Bowl article. Just need a few more paragraphs for the Kansas Statistical Summary section, and it should be good to go, except for as-needed updates in the post-game effects section. Could you swing through the article when you get a chance and let me know if anything catches your eye? I know that it needs a pass for style — en-dashes and non-breaking spaces — but if there's anything else, could you let me know? Thanks. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Good call on deleting that idiocy from the Frank Beamer page! After watching tonight's game, I went check his bio and couldn't believe that an entire section was devoted to the subject. Also, it appears that that bunk was hanging on the page for a while. Regards, AlphaEta 06:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
As I was verbally (textually?) sparring with Betacommand on the talk page it occurred to me that the article was not always named "List of Metalocalypse characters", and was in fact named "Characters in Metalocalypse" (per my suggestion, actually) specifically to avoid the kind of crap that's happened here. Looking back it appears that User:Fullmetal2887 moved the article to it's current name in November with no discussion, fanfare, or (I would presume) consensus to do so. I'll admit there was sort of a silent approval thereof, but I think this latest edit war has highlighted exactly why it would be better off under the former name.
Thus, to make a short request long, (:P) could I persuade you to rename the article "Characters in Metalocalypse", given that you've protected it? -- Y|yukichigai ( ramble argue check) —Preceding comment was added at 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you take a look and offer your opinion again? A lot or tangents over there, and nobody seems to be focusing on the point. See Talk:D._James_Kennedy#A_vital_component:_good_research. Ra2007 ( talk) 19:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I didn't mean to edit your section. I didn't know it was against the rules.
This is my first arbitration case!
It would be difficult for me to move my comments and they might look out-of-place. I thought I saw people at the bottom responding in the way that I did.
If it's a big issue, I have no problem with a clerk moving my comments. Zenwhat ( talk) 23:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Should we simply assume UnclePaco is telling the truth about that anonymous IP, given his pattern of trolling? I'm not fishing here, but I simply want this suspicious diff [4] to be investigated, since Paco was blocked. Zenwhat ( talk) 03:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean? Zenwhat ( talk) 03:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Ah, yes. You're right. Also, I just saw this diff. [5] Sorry to be a bother! Zenwhat ( talk) 03:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know the vandalism went back that far, thanks for fixing that. Sincerely, Sir Intellegence - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 06:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel like idiot.Sincerely, Sir Intellegence - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 06:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I was looking around for a shared account template and couldn't really find one, so I just went with the generic one. Unfortunately there's not a block reason field for that template, but I did provide the reason in the block log. As far as the unblock goes, I tried e-mailing a bureaucrat about it, asking whether or not shared accounts can be unblocked, as it can never really be known if the account is thereafter secure, but I didn't get a response. Pats1 T/ C 14:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and commenting on our stupidity. I don't know why I let the silly remark bother me so much, I guess I felt that it had impugned the good discussion. Either way, I'm going to take a break for a day, if he insists on putting that remark back, I'm just going to leave it alone. Your remarks were quite fair and accurate. Alan.ca ( talk) 18:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
He indicated his brother got his own account and he had changed the password to that account, so I unblocked. Daniel Case ( talk) 21:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I notice you "finished" the unblocking of Dominik92 last night. It seems as though whenever I unblock an editor (which frankly isn't all that often), we then have to do some extra work to also unblock their IP. Is there a way to unblock it all at once? I tried looking around for some instructions on this, but couldn't find any. Thanks -- Kubigula ( talk) 23:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:BIO has a section on athletes, stating: Competitors and coaches who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis. (are notable, that is). jj137 ♠ 02:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, you got me. What is a "DI football or basketball player"? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I would love to request your assistance again with the article on the Dominican Day Parade. A user by the name of "UnclePaco" and I are arguing about the inclusion of information that I classified as lacking significance to the article. He has made snide remarks that can be labeled as an attack. You were very helpful with the opinion you provided on the article in the past and I thought I would request your help again. Please see the articles TALK page for more information. Many thanks!-- XLR8TION ( talk) 03:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, User B. Well i see we are at it again. He was let off of block and starts an edit war. Please go to the talk page and give an opinion. thanks. UnclePaco ( talk) 03:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Guys, I don't know what to do with this one. For one thing, please see
WP:COATRACK and
WP:NPOV#Undue weight. This is a parade that has been going on for 15 years. It's a really bad idea for half of the article to be about violence at the parade one year. Take a look at
Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. There is a small section at the bottom called
Incidents_and_injuries. That's the appropriate proportion. Heck, one of the articles being used to source the violence
[6] has about 20 sentences in the article and 3 are on violence.
[7] has 2 sentences on violence, "Police said one person was hit in the head with a bottle at the parade. Records of arrests were not available by press time." You can't take these articles that just mention in passing that there was violence and turn it into a Wikipedia article where the bulk of it is about violence. So the best solution is to expand the article and make it a quality article, like
Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, then a small section on violence would be appropriate. That's my suggestion. My other suggestion is to quit reverting each other because that's just going to result in both of you being blocked and the article being protected on
the wrong version. --
B (
talk) 04:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I can agree with you here, and even tried to expand on the article. User:Xlr8tion deleted any type of expansions I placed in.
UnclePaco (
talk) 05:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I agreed to unblock XLR8TION provided that he wouldn't violate 3RR, be uncivil or make attacks. He violated 3RR just now. I told him that he would face longer blocks if he violated the terms of our agreement. Nishkid64 ( talk) 06:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't have any, myself... you could get a fair use one from Hokiesports.com, but that wouldn't be free-use, and it'd have to be replaced eventually. You could always try making a post on TSL asking for help... it worked for the 2007 ACC Championship Game. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 16:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I added the information about the blog war between Markos and Brad because Rhobite kept removing all references to Bradblog and adding a quote from Markos. I could not cite the blog posts because Wikipedia bans blogs as sources. Personally, I think that both sources should be left out since neither is neutral. 76.31.249.88 ( talk) 18:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick heads up on him:
ID the future report on one of his campaigns
Bill Greene is, of course, Profg. Indeed, if you look at the link for the podcast discussed there, it's
Adam Cuerden talk 08:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Just had to say it.
I LOLed! futurebird ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
B,
The positioning obviously is dependent on the browser used. I use IE and it looks fine. Not so good without it. Rather than just delete the formatting, will you please try to adjust it so the top line of wikinews is the same height as the top line of Wikipedia new for your browser? Thanks, RichardF ( talk) 04:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Completely understand. I would have done the same thing if I did not go to Tech, but alas, I am bias :). I will fix it later so that it is not a copyright infringement and will make you proud. Jwalte04 ( talk) 05:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then please place {{ hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.
Yes, I can see why you did it, but you should still not remove the tag yourself. I was just about to do it for you. Ros0709 ( talk) 19:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I've unblocked him. However, his lack of civility is a concern. Thanks for the advice. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 14:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Help Please What do I have to do to get intervention from someone on my behalf? I'm being harassed and libelous claims are being made against me accusing me of being a sock puppet and a case has been opened. I left a message with arbitration but what else must I do to defend myself. I'm a known person and not some anonymous user.--
Kingofmann (
talk) 16:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I gave a short description on the talk page [8] of why the map Ceha has provided is the correct one, following the recent municipal changes. Cheers JdeJ ( talk) 20:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Matthew_Hoffman/Evidence#Comments_on_Mateohoffman. Carcharoth ( talk) 02:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
It certainly wouldn't surprise me, but Arbcom are not releasing any of the information Matthew Hoffman provided on himself. Adam Cuerden talk 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 16:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you look at Image:George Washington Honor Medal.jpg and tell me what you think of the licensing? I want to tag it {{ movetocommons}}, but want to make sure it's okay first. -- evrik ( talk) 17:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I took those pictures. I chose the option for "self-made" and assumed that was enough. Apparently I still have to say "PD-self". One of these days, maybe the folks who keep tinkering with the image uploading process will get it right. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
This appears to be a much bigger problem. east.718 at 06:19, January 19, 2008
I've responded to your comment regarding Scientific Apologist where you posted it. - Revolving Bugbear 18:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you move the page so that the R in running isn't capitalized? I don't believe it should be, as it's not the first word in the article and it's not a proper noun.► Chris Nelson Holla! 05:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve.
PS:On those Free Republic blocks you did, I notated it on the logs part of the case page. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Jeez, your talk page is huge. Really slows down my browser. Anyway, please have a look at John Hick to see if the changes I have made are in accordance to your interpretation of BLP. Thanks!-- Hazillow ( talk) 00:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
This appears to be a much bigger problem. east.718 at 06:19, January 19, 2008
I've responded to your comment regarding Scientific Apologist where you posted it. - Revolving Bugbear 18:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you move the page so that the R in running isn't capitalized? I don't believe it should be, as it's not the first word in the article and it's not a proper noun.► Chris Nelson Holla! 05:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve.
PS:On those Free Republic blocks you did, I notated it on the logs part of the case page. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah everyone has their views. As an admin who regularly makes blocks, I suppose you're eventually going to come across someone who disputes your block. Anyway, I'll be watching that user. Hopefully the nonsense edits will stop. Spellcast ( talk) 04:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi B - I believe 207.237.228.83 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has taken over where 74.73.106.239 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) left off - they appear to be the same person, making the same accusation against Happyme22 about Nancy Reagan, in the same manner - almost exactly. The IP has been warned about personal attacks, but more may be needed, and I think an admin should keep an eye on it too. thanks Tvoz | talk 09:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
B, I was looking through FA articles, and saw that Virginia Tech massacre is a featured article! Congrats! When will it be featured on the main page? miranda 15:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I never thought a Wikipedia page would make me cry. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
My point was that opposing free culture because it allows people to promote thing you disagree with is promoting a lack of freedom. Think of the children! Should they all be raised in a world where information is proprietary and controlled or raised in a world where they and others are all free to express themselves? Freedom of speech is about the freedom to communicate and promote what we don't wish communicated and promoted or it is nothing - there is no need to protect speech everyone supports. Freedom is the right for people to be free to act the way they want to act. The free culture movement is about enabling people to create, modify, and distribute information as text, sounds, images, or video by providing copyleft software tools and content for modification and redistribution. It is not free if the uses are legally restricted to the original content creator's desired purposes. For that, you need to use a non-free copyright license. Wikipedia and WikiMedia have a mission of maximum worldwide free distribution of freely re-editable educational content. If one does not want content that they create to be legally free to be modified and redistributed for causes one does not personally endorse, then they should not contribute them to a free culture site such as wikipedia. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 15:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I have no objection to you or anyone else trying to get Wikia to only promote good things. What I object to is attacks on the legal tool of copyleft copyrights which is needed in the fight for freedom. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 15:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
The right to freedom is not absolute, check any of several supreme court rulings. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any other way to protect images of youth other than the personality rights tag on commons? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 15:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That user page you just deleted. User:MittRomney-something-or-other...'s page. Why? (I'm not stalking your contributions or anything; User:Bongwarrior's talkpage is on my watchlist and they contributed to it, so I noticed the link was blue but went red. That's not really fair, actually; it's their userpage, and a userpage is only the property of the user with that name, unless they say otherwise on it. Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello B:
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I went back to the arbcom discussion page to see what I said.
I should have made myself clear that my "take some time off" note was general, to all the editors in that discussion. I didn't do that and I apologize for the misunderstanding. It was not specific to you, but I can see why you might take it that way.
Very sorry, Wanderer57 ( talk) 02:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
i never meant to vandalize anything, and i didn't understand how to operate the warnings. but i don't think the pages i were trying to make are for promotion, it was simply adding to another page. a lot of people have told me they were interested in seeing the pages i made to be brought up. but how is the best way for me to go about doing that? the pages are already made, what should i change about them? i made it the best way i could just to be informative for wikipedians and viewers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SLICKFINGERS ( talk • contribs) 00:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
On the talk page, I supported this image's removal, though I contend it simply was mislabeled under fair use vs WP:NOR, so I am not quite sure what you are talking about. What can I do to convince you otherwise? — BQZip01 — talk 04:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!-- MONGO 06:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, B. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:Non-free promotional. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. — Bkell ( talk) 17:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. The reason I left the vandalism template was because the article had been vandalized several times within the past few minutes by different people and I thought he/she was vandalizing as well. I'll try to find a message template showing the actual edit, etc. the next time I leave a message for someone in regards to possible vandalism or bad editing. About reverting the comment on my userpage...I did that because I don't want arguments to start on my userpage.-- AgnosticPreachersKid ( talk) 01:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I am looking for help on an article that I have adopted called Single-wing formation. I have expanded the article; however, now I would like to upgrade it to improve its quality. Thanks, Bill Spencer ( talk) 14:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
You were the main proponent of an unblock for User:Profg. You should be aware that he has been running a sock puppet, User:Goo2you since 12 October 2007, which is the very day that your editing restriction on him took effect. PouponOnToast ( talk) 14:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Mike Hart (American football) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Why did you change my Mike Hart? I put my sources in there. They are the one from the Detroit Free Press and the Michigan Daily newspapers. What do I need to do to get it fixed and keep it on there? The sources are listed at the very bottom they just need to be added in with number, right? Its a pretty big news subject. Just go ahead an search google "Mike Hart" "Little Brother" and it has close to 8,000 hits. This isn't a rant about some rival school, its an actual noteworthy fact about Mike Hart.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs)
The viewpoint was very neutral. I explained how the comments were said which angered head coach Mark Dantonio. Mark Dantonio responded by taking a shot at Mike Hart about his size, all of which can easily be referenced. The fallout from the comments are now the little brother and little sister comments between the two colleges, which can also be easily referenced. If the problem is referencing, that can be fixed. How can the "neutral view point" be fixed? All I am doing is reporting history, which I don't understand how you can claim it isn't a neutral viewpoint.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs)
I see that the above statement may be considered a bit biased, but I think its doing a disservice to the wikipedia community to not to talk about it. If this doesn't count as noteworthy, then you need to evaluate every page such as Mike Gundy and take off the portion about his rant. This obviously is a big enough news story to be mentioned in the Mike Hart wikipedia article. LIke I said, if you google "mike hart" "little brother" you get 8,000 results. His comment has sparked a huge uproar between the two colleges and all of it can be referenced. ESPN talked about it. It doesn't matter if that portion is larger than what he did in college, this is actual news event. I think that taking that off would be a shame. This isn't about covering up his college and high school achievements its about reporting news and spreading knowledge. So what is so wrong with what I added? Let's clean it up, reference it, and let the world see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs) 19:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Those comments about Gagne were for humor. Thanks for voting! HPJoker Leave me a message 18:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know you were rooting for the Giants. Burner0718 (Jibba Jabba!) 23:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
You recently prodded the article Kalee Carey. I have moved the discussion to AFD, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalee Carey. You are invited to join the discussion there. A ecis Brievenbus 22:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Welcome back! ;)-- U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 22:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
As I stated during on the talk page of the WyomingHS.jpg image, the image was taken by me. The fact that it appears on the school web site does not eliminate the fact that it is my intellectual property, and, as such, I have the right to release it for use on Wikipedia. Read before you delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JagSeal ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Congrats on your team winning today! Bowl or no bowl? Miranda 22:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Can you tell me when this became consensus. It seem odd to me that former professional football players are not notable, but former pro baseball and basketball players are.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:LOTD) 16:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I have mentioned your username in evidence presented at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. Your administrative action was mentioned as one superior (IMO) to that taken by one of the parties in the case. GRBerry 01:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Good to see you back. Definitely missed your insights and your work. I'd really appreciate it if you could take a look at the FAC for 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl and leave a few comments. Since it's a Virginia Tech bowl game, I think it's right up your alley. Thanks, and good to have you back! JKBrooks85 17:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
When you've got the time, could you swing by 2007 ACC Championship Game and see if there's any glaring errors or anything you think needs to be changed in it? I tried to model the article after the Chick-fil-A Bowl article I shepherded to Featured status, but there are still some things I'm overlooking, I'm sure. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Your last edit to {{ cbb link}} broke the template. Is there a way we can compromise to still make it work while limiting the #ifedit traffic? This is the first I've heard about problems with that function, would you mind filling me in (and please dumb it down as much as possible, I'm no computer whiz) Hoof Hearted 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up about #ifexist. I was not aware of that limitation. I'm also active in the US highways projects, where {{ jct}} is used a lot. I just checked, and it does not call #ifexist, so it should be fine. (Articles with long exit lists may call the template over 100 times; because of calls to images, it really makes articles a lot more readible to use that template and not subst it.) You're right, though: cfb link should be subst'ed or otherwise avoided, except where there's potential for a future article. — C.Fred ( talk) 00:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you are about! Sorry - I thought that you weren't, so brought up Profg's return to try and find an alternate mentor thingie. Sorry!
Adam Cuerden
talk 04:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Never mind. talk to you when not sleep-deprived and can speak coherently. Adam Cuerden talk 04:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Yup. nobody can resist the gravitational pull Wikipedia appears to have on people. :) Maser ( Talk!) 04:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I was going to upload that image (amongst others) and put it on my user page, but couldn't find a proper citation for it. When I went back and looked at my user page, I didn't have it on there and I thought I just decided not to upload it. Like I said, I was doing a bunch of them at once and I guess I put that caption in there with the others. This is certainly a BIG mistake on my part. Do you know the process for getting a photo deleted (and this one certainly should)? — BQZip01 — talk 00:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar | ||
For your hard work in the thankless task of image cleanup, I award you this shiny new barnstar made from 100% recycled photons! – Quadell ( talk) ( random) 13:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Thats fine, I viewed the source and it did not provide an author, so I think chances of that image returning to Wiki is slight. -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 01:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes I still have OTRS access. I looked this up (Ticket 2007121410018321) and the agent handling it decided (for which I agree) that getting a free license out of the owner isn't possible. They want attribution on the article, which we don't do. They also don't seem to really understand the free license part, putting restrictions such as "not uploading to Commons" which would be perfectly acceptable under a free license. My thought (with the agent that handled it) is that we have no hope of a free license and should delete the image(s). It was worth a shot, but doesn't seem possible now. MECU≈ talk 03:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It got muddled in a collection of photographs I have on the subject. I may have taken the photograph, I don't know, I have been in contact with the guy on the blog in the past, and it may well be my image. Though I cant be sure. Iwas at that parade, and recall taking pics. So feel free to delete that image while I clarify. Sorry for the trouble. My bad. Lobojo ( talk) 03:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
It is in the second-to-last paragraph under Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#Instructions...
“ | Note: Images can be unlisted immediately if they are indisputably in the public domain or licensed under an indisputably free license (GFDL, CC-BY-SA, etc.—see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for more on these). Images which claim fair use must have two people agree to this. | ” |
If I misunderstood this, please correct me. It strikes me that this rule was probably intended for those editors who shoot off an invalid fair-use claim in response to a claimed-as-free image being challenged. WP:IFD would have been a more appropriate venue for the ip editor to nominate the image in question. WP:PUI largely deals with possibly unfree images that are being claimed as free. That being said, both venues generate very little traffic, and two (now three) editors in agreement seem to indicate that I made the right choice. Best, IronGargoyle ( talk) 00:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I replied to your post on the sophia image deletion discussion [1]. jbolden1517 Talk 13:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
So sorry, didn't realize that person was still alive. sorry. KitHutch on the other hand should have tagged the info, instead of unilateral deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerome709 ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. This is a bit of a curiosity - someone else took the image from my upload to 'Find-a-Grave' (c. 2002) and claimed it on WP as their own. I couldn't really be bothered to argue - but have now tagged it as a GFDL under my own name. Best regards, Smerus ( talk) 10:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I've got a few free tickets to the 2008 Orange Bowl... want one? JKBrooks85 ( talk) 01:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
B, the permissions were forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the images are now uploaded at commons (see the links at the discussion page for those images) and can be used directly from commons now. All permissions appear at the commons address provided. Once again, thank you for your help and all the best in this season. Jenny Len☤ 09:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I am requesting your periodic monitoring of this page as HappyTalk22 has proven to be dominant in his editing and reverting this article without any "three-revert-edit" imposition placed on his account.
Thank you very much. 74.73.106.239 ( talk) 18:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been working on the 2005 ACC Championship Game article, and was wondering if you happened to have any photos of that game. Thanks! JKBrooks85 ( talk) 03:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I created a selected article, since I couldn't see that one had been, and also couldn't see that any discussion was being held to decide which. I went with the "safe" decision of Paul the Apostle, since I figure he's more than a little bit influential, important, featurable (I know that's not a real word) and the article's a good one. I've basically copied the lead directly across, with a few crops and removed all of the references. Is this how you'd want it? If you had anything else in mind to do with this, feel free to change it, but I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring. -- linca linca 14:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I think I screwed up the deletion/redirect for this article when I was trying to make the article name consistent with what seems to be our style. I'd appreciate any help you could give. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 16:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I see you have added an entry to the blacklist. However can I ask you to please log any entries that you make with a permanent link to the request came in some form. This may seem a little irritating but in 6 or 12 months time the rationale may be impossible to find and the listing will then be removed by someone. I recently had to do exactly that on a Meta listing than no one logged! Let me know if I can help - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 09:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I would like to request for FULL protection for the Christmas article. There is an edit war that I would like to see resolved. RC-0722 ( talk) 01:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
A comment of yours regarding the fact that you were "denied access to the admin channel" has been brought up in an arbitration case, at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Workshop#Some admins are denied access to the admins channel. Do you mean explicitly turned down, or just ignored? Thanks, Picaroon (t) 02:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
B...if you want I can email you notes I made on the process as it is confusing and not that well documented. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I've read your comment here and I am flabbergasted. You've got a lot of nerve creating that stink where you accused me and others of being sockpuppets considering you've contributed under another username which you're trying to keep quiet. You're an admin, in a position of trust, fer chrissakes. Full disclosure is called for here and on your userpage unless you have a very compelling reason why the community should not know your other username. I'm still stunned. Odd nature ( talk) 21:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping clean up that guy's vandal welcomes. =) -- slakr\ talk / 04:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Copy and paste errors. I love 'em FlowerpotmaN·( t) 04:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. You reverted my edit of Template:UK geo article. I must confess that I didn't understand the meaning of "COTM".
So this template is used in one place Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/cotm to change one article title, and the page in question is in it self transcluded like a template. So the template still seems meaningless to me, but I agree that it is not a candidate for speedy deletion.
Then Category:Geography and place-related templates. What is the problem here? — Leo Laursen ( T | C ) 11:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Message redacted Magnonimous ( talk) 12:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I happened to lift the autoblock at the same time that you declined to do this. Feel free to re-block the user if you think he is abusing sockpuppet accounts. Sandstein ( talk) 20:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
In case it's helpful, MLGSP says he's MoonLightGlory [3] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
When I reviewed the block, I wasn't sure that the material that Kjoonlee was reverting definitely fell under the spam exception to 3RR. I've seen a lot of mods that are really strange, but nonetheless real. Reading it again, though, I can see how it could simply be a prank or attack on someone named Daniels. I'm sorry, I will try to be more diligent in the future in reading repeatedly inserted content like this to determine its validity. I believe that Kjoonlee's 8 hour block has already ended, so I can't really unblock him. However, I will leave a note on his talk page to the effect that I have reconsidered his block in light of your reasoning.-- Danaman5 ( talk) 18:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
We'll be in the Signpost on Wednesday, 2 Jan about 17:00 UTC, someone noticed us, be sure to read it, many of us get it, read it on my talk page if you like. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I do have the releases and will forward them within the next couple of days. I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure it's only the three images you mentioned plus two others. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 04:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jim62sch/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 17:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks B. I'll see what his response is, but if you see anything positive before I do I'm more than happy for you to unblock. -- Step hen 00:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Relax and good luck with the game tonight. miranda 01:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, ****. At least the tickets were cheap, and I did take a couple hundred photos (literally), some of which might actually be usable. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm getting really close to wrapping up the writing on the 2008 Orange Bowl article. Just need a few more paragraphs for the Kansas Statistical Summary section, and it should be good to go, except for as-needed updates in the post-game effects section. Could you swing through the article when you get a chance and let me know if anything catches your eye? I know that it needs a pass for style — en-dashes and non-breaking spaces — but if there's anything else, could you let me know? Thanks. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 05:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Good call on deleting that idiocy from the Frank Beamer page! After watching tonight's game, I went check his bio and couldn't believe that an entire section was devoted to the subject. Also, it appears that that bunk was hanging on the page for a while. Regards, AlphaEta 06:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
As I was verbally (textually?) sparring with Betacommand on the talk page it occurred to me that the article was not always named "List of Metalocalypse characters", and was in fact named "Characters in Metalocalypse" (per my suggestion, actually) specifically to avoid the kind of crap that's happened here. Looking back it appears that User:Fullmetal2887 moved the article to it's current name in November with no discussion, fanfare, or (I would presume) consensus to do so. I'll admit there was sort of a silent approval thereof, but I think this latest edit war has highlighted exactly why it would be better off under the former name.
Thus, to make a short request long, (:P) could I persuade you to rename the article "Characters in Metalocalypse", given that you've protected it? -- Y|yukichigai ( ramble argue check) —Preceding comment was added at 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you take a look and offer your opinion again? A lot or tangents over there, and nobody seems to be focusing on the point. See Talk:D._James_Kennedy#A_vital_component:_good_research. Ra2007 ( talk) 19:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I didn't mean to edit your section. I didn't know it was against the rules.
This is my first arbitration case!
It would be difficult for me to move my comments and they might look out-of-place. I thought I saw people at the bottom responding in the way that I did.
If it's a big issue, I have no problem with a clerk moving my comments. Zenwhat ( talk) 23:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Should we simply assume UnclePaco is telling the truth about that anonymous IP, given his pattern of trolling? I'm not fishing here, but I simply want this suspicious diff [4] to be investigated, since Paco was blocked. Zenwhat ( talk) 03:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean? Zenwhat ( talk) 03:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Ah, yes. You're right. Also, I just saw this diff. [5] Sorry to be a bother! Zenwhat ( talk) 03:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know the vandalism went back that far, thanks for fixing that. Sincerely, Sir Intellegence - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 06:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel like idiot.Sincerely, Sir Intellegence - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 06:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I was looking around for a shared account template and couldn't really find one, so I just went with the generic one. Unfortunately there's not a block reason field for that template, but I did provide the reason in the block log. As far as the unblock goes, I tried e-mailing a bureaucrat about it, asking whether or not shared accounts can be unblocked, as it can never really be known if the account is thereafter secure, but I didn't get a response. Pats1 T/ C 14:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and commenting on our stupidity. I don't know why I let the silly remark bother me so much, I guess I felt that it had impugned the good discussion. Either way, I'm going to take a break for a day, if he insists on putting that remark back, I'm just going to leave it alone. Your remarks were quite fair and accurate. Alan.ca ( talk) 18:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
He indicated his brother got his own account and he had changed the password to that account, so I unblocked. Daniel Case ( talk) 21:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I notice you "finished" the unblocking of Dominik92 last night. It seems as though whenever I unblock an editor (which frankly isn't all that often), we then have to do some extra work to also unblock their IP. Is there a way to unblock it all at once? I tried looking around for some instructions on this, but couldn't find any. Thanks -- Kubigula ( talk) 23:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:BIO has a section on athletes, stating: Competitors and coaches who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis. (are notable, that is). jj137 ♠ 02:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, you got me. What is a "DI football or basketball player"? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I would love to request your assistance again with the article on the Dominican Day Parade. A user by the name of "UnclePaco" and I are arguing about the inclusion of information that I classified as lacking significance to the article. He has made snide remarks that can be labeled as an attack. You were very helpful with the opinion you provided on the article in the past and I thought I would request your help again. Please see the articles TALK page for more information. Many thanks!-- XLR8TION ( talk) 03:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, User B. Well i see we are at it again. He was let off of block and starts an edit war. Please go to the talk page and give an opinion. thanks. UnclePaco ( talk) 03:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Guys, I don't know what to do with this one. For one thing, please see
WP:COATRACK and
WP:NPOV#Undue weight. This is a parade that has been going on for 15 years. It's a really bad idea for half of the article to be about violence at the parade one year. Take a look at
Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. There is a small section at the bottom called
Incidents_and_injuries. That's the appropriate proportion. Heck, one of the articles being used to source the violence
[6] has about 20 sentences in the article and 3 are on violence.
[7] has 2 sentences on violence, "Police said one person was hit in the head with a bottle at the parade. Records of arrests were not available by press time." You can't take these articles that just mention in passing that there was violence and turn it into a Wikipedia article where the bulk of it is about violence. So the best solution is to expand the article and make it a quality article, like
Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, then a small section on violence would be appropriate. That's my suggestion. My other suggestion is to quit reverting each other because that's just going to result in both of you being blocked and the article being protected on
the wrong version. --
B (
talk) 04:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I can agree with you here, and even tried to expand on the article. User:Xlr8tion deleted any type of expansions I placed in.
UnclePaco (
talk) 05:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I agreed to unblock XLR8TION provided that he wouldn't violate 3RR, be uncivil or make attacks. He violated 3RR just now. I told him that he would face longer blocks if he violated the terms of our agreement. Nishkid64 ( talk) 06:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't have any, myself... you could get a fair use one from Hokiesports.com, but that wouldn't be free-use, and it'd have to be replaced eventually. You could always try making a post on TSL asking for help... it worked for the 2007 ACC Championship Game. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 16:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I added the information about the blog war between Markos and Brad because Rhobite kept removing all references to Bradblog and adding a quote from Markos. I could not cite the blog posts because Wikipedia bans blogs as sources. Personally, I think that both sources should be left out since neither is neutral. 76.31.249.88 ( talk) 18:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick heads up on him:
ID the future report on one of his campaigns
Bill Greene is, of course, Profg. Indeed, if you look at the link for the podcast discussed there, it's
Adam Cuerden talk 08:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Just had to say it.
I LOLed! futurebird ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
B,
The positioning obviously is dependent on the browser used. I use IE and it looks fine. Not so good without it. Rather than just delete the formatting, will you please try to adjust it so the top line of wikinews is the same height as the top line of Wikipedia new for your browser? Thanks, RichardF ( talk) 04:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Completely understand. I would have done the same thing if I did not go to Tech, but alas, I am bias :). I will fix it later so that it is not a copyright infringement and will make you proud. Jwalte04 ( talk) 05:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then please place {{ hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.
Yes, I can see why you did it, but you should still not remove the tag yourself. I was just about to do it for you. Ros0709 ( talk) 19:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I've unblocked him. However, his lack of civility is a concern. Thanks for the advice. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 14:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Help Please What do I have to do to get intervention from someone on my behalf? I'm being harassed and libelous claims are being made against me accusing me of being a sock puppet and a case has been opened. I left a message with arbitration but what else must I do to defend myself. I'm a known person and not some anonymous user.--
Kingofmann (
talk) 16:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I gave a short description on the talk page [8] of why the map Ceha has provided is the correct one, following the recent municipal changes. Cheers JdeJ ( talk) 20:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Matthew_Hoffman/Evidence#Comments_on_Mateohoffman. Carcharoth ( talk) 02:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
It certainly wouldn't surprise me, but Arbcom are not releasing any of the information Matthew Hoffman provided on himself. Adam Cuerden talk 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 16:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you look at Image:George Washington Honor Medal.jpg and tell me what you think of the licensing? I want to tag it {{ movetocommons}}, but want to make sure it's okay first. -- evrik ( talk) 17:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I took those pictures. I chose the option for "self-made" and assumed that was enough. Apparently I still have to say "PD-self". One of these days, maybe the folks who keep tinkering with the image uploading process will get it right. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
This appears to be a much bigger problem. east.718 at 06:19, January 19, 2008
I've responded to your comment regarding Scientific Apologist where you posted it. - Revolving Bugbear 18:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you move the page so that the R in running isn't capitalized? I don't believe it should be, as it's not the first word in the article and it's not a proper noun.► Chris Nelson Holla! 05:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve.
PS:On those Free Republic blocks you did, I notated it on the logs part of the case page. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Jeez, your talk page is huge. Really slows down my browser. Anyway, please have a look at John Hick to see if the changes I have made are in accordance to your interpretation of BLP. Thanks!-- Hazillow ( talk) 00:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
This appears to be a much bigger problem. east.718 at 06:19, January 19, 2008
I've responded to your comment regarding Scientific Apologist where you posted it. - Revolving Bugbear 18:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you move the page so that the R in running isn't capitalized? I don't believe it should be, as it's not the first word in the article and it's not a proper noun.► Chris Nelson Holla! 05:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve.
PS:On those Free Republic blocks you did, I notated it on the logs part of the case page. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah everyone has their views. As an admin who regularly makes blocks, I suppose you're eventually going to come across someone who disputes your block. Anyway, I'll be watching that user. Hopefully the nonsense edits will stop. Spellcast ( talk) 04:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi B - I believe 207.237.228.83 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has taken over where 74.73.106.239 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) left off - they appear to be the same person, making the same accusation against Happyme22 about Nancy Reagan, in the same manner - almost exactly. The IP has been warned about personal attacks, but more may be needed, and I think an admin should keep an eye on it too. thanks Tvoz | talk 09:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
B, I was looking through FA articles, and saw that Virginia Tech massacre is a featured article! Congrats! When will it be featured on the main page? miranda 15:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I never thought a Wikipedia page would make me cry. JKBrooks85 ( talk) 07:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
My point was that opposing free culture because it allows people to promote thing you disagree with is promoting a lack of freedom. Think of the children! Should they all be raised in a world where information is proprietary and controlled or raised in a world where they and others are all free to express themselves? Freedom of speech is about the freedom to communicate and promote what we don't wish communicated and promoted or it is nothing - there is no need to protect speech everyone supports. Freedom is the right for people to be free to act the way they want to act. The free culture movement is about enabling people to create, modify, and distribute information as text, sounds, images, or video by providing copyleft software tools and content for modification and redistribution. It is not free if the uses are legally restricted to the original content creator's desired purposes. For that, you need to use a non-free copyright license. Wikipedia and WikiMedia have a mission of maximum worldwide free distribution of freely re-editable educational content. If one does not want content that they create to be legally free to be modified and redistributed for causes one does not personally endorse, then they should not contribute them to a free culture site such as wikipedia. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 15:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I have no objection to you or anyone else trying to get Wikia to only promote good things. What I object to is attacks on the legal tool of copyleft copyrights which is needed in the fight for freedom. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 15:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
The right to freedom is not absolute, check any of several supreme court rulings. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any other way to protect images of youth other than the personality rights tag on commons? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 15:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That user page you just deleted. User:MittRomney-something-or-other...'s page. Why? (I'm not stalking your contributions or anything; User:Bongwarrior's talkpage is on my watchlist and they contributed to it, so I noticed the link was blue but went red. That's not really fair, actually; it's their userpage, and a userpage is only the property of the user with that name, unless they say otherwise on it. Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello B:
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I went back to the arbcom discussion page to see what I said.
I should have made myself clear that my "take some time off" note was general, to all the editors in that discussion. I didn't do that and I apologize for the misunderstanding. It was not specific to you, but I can see why you might take it that way.
Very sorry, Wanderer57 ( talk) 02:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
i never meant to vandalize anything, and i didn't understand how to operate the warnings. but i don't think the pages i were trying to make are for promotion, it was simply adding to another page. a lot of people have told me they were interested in seeing the pages i made to be brought up. but how is the best way for me to go about doing that? the pages are already made, what should i change about them? i made it the best way i could just to be informative for wikipedians and viewers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SLICKFINGERS ( talk • contribs) 00:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
On the talk page, I supported this image's removal, though I contend it simply was mislabeled under fair use vs WP:NOR, so I am not quite sure what you are talking about. What can I do to convince you otherwise? — BQZip01 — talk 04:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!-- MONGO 06:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, B. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:Non-free promotional. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. — Bkell ( talk) 17:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. The reason I left the vandalism template was because the article had been vandalized several times within the past few minutes by different people and I thought he/she was vandalizing as well. I'll try to find a message template showing the actual edit, etc. the next time I leave a message for someone in regards to possible vandalism or bad editing. About reverting the comment on my userpage...I did that because I don't want arguments to start on my userpage.-- AgnosticPreachersKid ( talk) 01:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I am looking for help on an article that I have adopted called Single-wing formation. I have expanded the article; however, now I would like to upgrade it to improve its quality. Thanks, Bill Spencer ( talk) 14:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
You were the main proponent of an unblock for User:Profg. You should be aware that he has been running a sock puppet, User:Goo2you since 12 October 2007, which is the very day that your editing restriction on him took effect. PouponOnToast ( talk) 14:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Mike Hart (American football) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Why did you change my Mike Hart? I put my sources in there. They are the one from the Detroit Free Press and the Michigan Daily newspapers. What do I need to do to get it fixed and keep it on there? The sources are listed at the very bottom they just need to be added in with number, right? Its a pretty big news subject. Just go ahead an search google "Mike Hart" "Little Brother" and it has close to 8,000 hits. This isn't a rant about some rival school, its an actual noteworthy fact about Mike Hart.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs)
The viewpoint was very neutral. I explained how the comments were said which angered head coach Mark Dantonio. Mark Dantonio responded by taking a shot at Mike Hart about his size, all of which can easily be referenced. The fallout from the comments are now the little brother and little sister comments between the two colleges, which can also be easily referenced. If the problem is referencing, that can be fixed. How can the "neutral view point" be fixed? All I am doing is reporting history, which I don't understand how you can claim it isn't a neutral viewpoint.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs)
I see that the above statement may be considered a bit biased, but I think its doing a disservice to the wikipedia community to not to talk about it. If this doesn't count as noteworthy, then you need to evaluate every page such as Mike Gundy and take off the portion about his rant. This obviously is a big enough news story to be mentioned in the Mike Hart wikipedia article. LIke I said, if you google "mike hart" "little brother" you get 8,000 results. His comment has sparked a huge uproar between the two colleges and all of it can be referenced. ESPN talked about it. It doesn't matter if that portion is larger than what he did in college, this is actual news event. I think that taking that off would be a shame. This isn't about covering up his college and high school achievements its about reporting news and spreading knowledge. So what is so wrong with what I added? Let's clean it up, reference it, and let the world see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions4superbowl ( talk • contribs) 19:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Those comments about Gagne were for humor. Thanks for voting! HPJoker Leave me a message 18:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know you were rooting for the Giants. Burner0718 (Jibba Jabba!) 23:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
You recently prodded the article Kalee Carey. I have moved the discussion to AFD, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalee Carey. You are invited to join the discussion there. A ecis Brievenbus 22:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)