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.

Reason for change:

1) A more current image of the character. 2) A better profile of the character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dstorres ( talk • contribs) -- 17:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed that you created an article about CFZ do Rio, and you added a wikilink to it in the Campeonato Brasiliense article. It is better to remove this link, because the CFZ of Brasília, as you know, is a different club. It is better to create an article about the other CFZ (maybe named Centro de Futebol Zico (Brasília), or something like that) and add a wikilink to this article in the Campeonato Brasiliense article. Anyway, here there is more info about CFZ-DF. Regards, Carioca 20:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Good move in delinking the current squad players at the Flamengo article. We can link them only when/if articles on them are created. Cheers, Redux 15:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Maracana Stadium.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{ GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Abu Badali 15:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Re.:Maracana Image Tagging

The image is not professional. It is available on several sites (none of them official) by the web. It is a non-credited photo, therefore there is no such thing as a term of use in this particular case. Lesfer 18:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone took the picture. The fact many sites use it without permission doesn't imply that we can use it. -- Abu Badali 18:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's no information about it anywhere. What do you want me do do? Fake it? Sorry, but I won't. If you still won't buy it feel free to look for the credits yourself. I don't have to prove anything since you are the one who have doubts. Lesfer 18:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Lesfer, please understand that I am not the only one iterested in the credits for the image. The Wikipedia comunity is completly interested in the copyright status of all images it uses. I think it would be wise to try to resolve this issue with the help of this wonderful comunity we are in. I'm sending the case for the Images for Deletion page. -- Abu Badali 20:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

As the uploader, the burden of proof that this is a public domain image is on you (the odds are that it is not), otherwise the image will be deleted. - Nv8200p talk 21:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

-- Abu Badali 20:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not remove the ifd tag from this image (or any others) or you will be blocked from editing per the 3RR rule -Thanks Nv8200p talk 21:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Remove the ifd from this image and you will be blocked. When an admin processes the IFD, they will remove the tag if the image is not deleted -Thanks Nv8200p talk 21:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You have been blocked for 48 hours. Leave the IFD tags on images until they finish the IFD process - Nv8200p talk 21:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

What?

"Your user name or IP address has been blocked by Nv8200p.

The reason given is:

Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Lesfer". The reason given for Lesfer's block is: 'Violation 3RR rule'."

You'd better prove I've violated the 3RR rule on Maracanã article. Lesfer 21:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You removed the IFD tag 3 times from Image:Maracana_Stadium.jpg, once even after you had been warned.

This has nothing to do with the block, but you were unnecessarily rude to me and User:Abu badali when you could have just added the source as requested - Nv8200p talk 22:13, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for any offense, but what you guys don't seem to understand is that I did not have the source at that time. I wasn't fooling around. As I told before, that image is available on several sites but none of them credit it. I posted the licensing in the very time I found that particular website giving copyright free.

About the block... 3RR rule says: "Do not revert any single page in whole or in part more than three times in 24 hours'." And I have not reverted any single page more than 3 times in the last 24 hours. I've reverted that article three times, but not more than three. I'm unfairly blocked. Lesfer 01:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Lesfer, I'm glad everything is resolved now. Thanks to you for your time and devotion and to Nv8200p for his intervention. I'm sorry about all the misunderstandings during this process. And sorry again if I ever sounded rude to you. It's wonderfull news that we can really keep using that nice image. I'm removing the ifd indication. See you. Tchau. -- Abu Badali 14:30, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I unblocked you in good faith. Please leave the IFD tag in place on Image:Maracana_Stadium.jpg until the IFD process is done or I will reinstate the block. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 22:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You keep editing the SHB on the Batman page in a way the rest of the editors disagree with. Please come to the talk page to discuss what you are doing, so we can determine if those out-of-continuity characters should be there or not. Until a consensus is reached I'm reverting your changes. Simnel 04:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You keep editing the pictures on the Flash tv show page in a way I disagree with. If you would like to discuss it, with other users, of which there are not many yet as I just created the page recently, please do. But I think one picture of the Shipp is enough. AriGold 15:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• Again, you changed it without discussion. Please stop. AriGold 15:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lesfer. I see that there's some back and forth going on at the "current squad" section, which you introduced. Anons keep changing the player's numbers, and in some cases, although not all (hence my doubt), you've reverted them. Is there a vandalism problem there, or do you believe that generally the anons mean well? I am considering enforcing semiprotection in the article. I don't know if you know this, so I'll explain: semiprotection is not the same as the "regular" [full] protection, a semiprotected article is locked only to anons (IP addresses) and "new accounts" (I believe the threshhole is four days), but other users can still edit normally. I await your feedback. Redux 01:22, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Great to hear. One way of [at least] trying to cut down on those would be adding a temporary, small template to the top of the section, informing people of this, and possibly encouraging them to discuss on the talk page before adding those numbers. I can't guarantee that it would work though, since the editing in that section other than yours is being done by anons, and they can be oblivious to recomendations and talk pages. But it could be worth a try. Redux 02:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Adding the categories "Green Lantern Villains," "Fictional Mass Murderers," and "DC Supervillains" is perfectly legitimate to the history of the character. You need to stop erasing them. You may prefer Hal in his Silver Age (and current) incarnation, but his 5 years or so as a villain needs to be documented. Spookyadler 09:18, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Since Spookyadler has taken the initiative to start a discussion, I am confident in a consensus resolution to the issue. Even though I don't really know the subject (hence I can't provide an educated opinion on the subject), it appears that the controversy revolves around adding the article to certain categories, which would implicate a certain interpretation of the character. There seems to be no reason why we can't reconcile any different interpretations. I would recommend starting a discussion at the article's talk page, so that other users who might be interested in contributing can notice it as well. But if I may suggest, it would be far better if we could avoid reverting the article again until an agreement can be reached. This way, we keep the article stable, and prevent any unnecessary complications, such as 3RR violations or revert wars, which really don't help in solving any problems. If necessary, I offer to mediate, or assist, in any way possible. Thanks, Redux 15:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Darkseid_simonson.gif. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{ GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{ db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mongul.gif. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{ GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{ db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo.

It's not possible to simple erase entries from your block log, but there are some options you can try.

• You can ask User:Nv8200p to reblock you and unblock you while leaving a message which states that the previous block was a mistake on his part.
• You can request a username change at Wikipedia:Changing username. Your new username will have a clean block log.
• You can ask a developer ( User:Brion VIBBER, User:Tim Starling, User:Robchurch) to manually erase the entries from the database. They are pretty busy, though.

Cheers, — Ruud 02:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey. I agree with you on two points, listing the family members is redundant, plus I looked at other GL SHBoxes, and see that SH aliases aren't listed, so I'm all for following convention. However, why do you insist on removing the "JSA reserve" note? If you think it's false, check the references (which need to be properly formatted, I know). Also, looking at your Contribs link, you have a bad habit of not writing edit summaries. It's not helpful to anyone when you don't specify why you're removing material. dfg 17:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, calm down, it was a mistake, ok? About my bad habit of not writing edit summaries what can I say? I may not write edit summaries sometimes, but all my edits are in good faith. So, I have a bad habit... so what? Deal with it. I'm not harming Wikipedia. Lesfer ^(talk) 19:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lesfer. Indeed, the articles you listed are in fact, as I see it, candidates for speedy deletion. They were all created by a newbie though, so we might want to drop him a note about how Wikipedia works and how to create a decent article. But I will take care of those articles. Thanks for the note. Regards, Redux 13:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

While they are not called Captain Boomerang II or Thunder II that is their designation in "official" encyclopedias. Thus that is how I designate them. I would be happy to forward you scans from such entries if you wish. Dstorres

• I never saw anything that stated that the roman numeral couldn't be part of the name. The only entry I saw was concerning whether to put a roman numerial or the character's name. Why don't you point me to the article that says the numerical can't be part of the highlighted name? Dstorres

Hello. I'm pretty new to editing, so I thought I'd ask you about a recent edit of mine that you worked on afterwards. In Hawkman, you changed Infinity, Inc. to Infinity, Inc.. Is that right? Thanks, PJ 21:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I was going through a punctuation dump, and [[Infinity, Inc.]] comes up as having no period at the end of it, so the way I had it took care of that... ah well, still learning PJ 04:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

RE: Cage. Good pt! :-) — Tenebrae 03:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lesfer. I'm considering a project related to the upcoming 2006 FIFA World Cup. In a system similar to the country-specific articles created for the Olympics, I'm considering the creation of an article titled Brazil at the 2006 FIFA World Cup. Even though the competition has not yet started, I was thinking that work could already start: we can list the results for the South American Qualifying stage, as well as any matches played in preparation specifically for the World Cup, Tivia facts, etc. Once Parreira drafts the team, we can list it there, plus all the detailed work to be done as the competition progresses. I'll be contacting other Brazilian users who might be interested in joining this effort as well. Maybe this will even encourage others to do a similar job for other countries (I'm not aware that any such project is underway currently). Redux 19:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! Truth is that I never heard of him before (not a San Lorenzo fan), but I've been able to find a couple of things about El Loco Doval. " on his move to Brazil, and his death", " Ciudadano Honorario de Río de Janeiro". About his retirement I haven't been able to find anything, sorry. Mariano( t/ c) 07:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

What exactly was your reasoning for deleting Supergirl from notable relatives but keeping Cir-El who was erased from existence. 161.38.222.14 19:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey. I noticed your edits of a couple of userbox character powers. I think not having a line break after each power is actually the better, more aesthetically pleasing way to go. I had just been following the example from the Comics WProj template page, forgetting that it's not set in stone. You wanna give me a hand in rounding up support to get the change done "in writing"? dfg 02:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Recebi uma mensagem me advertindo que eu estaria vandalizando paginas... no entanto há tempos não crio um verbete, e nunca editei nenhuma página iniciada por outra pessoa !!!!!

A mensagem é a seguinte:

"User talk: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Lesfer (talk) 21:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)"

Esse controle é feito pelo IP? por que no meu caso acesso a Wikipedia do trabalho e pode ser um colega, mas até onde eu sei, ninguem mais tem meu login...

(

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.66.1.155 ( talk • contribs)

I don't know if you read in Portuguese, then I will write in my poor English.

I work on a large company (more than 5k employes) and here I'm using a proxy to access the Internet -- including the Wikipedia site. I can't know who are performing this acctions aganist Wikipedia. Agaro 12:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. As User:Redux is an administrator, and also edits football articles (like the Flamengo article), it is better to contact him first. He certainly knows how to deal with vandalism. Regards, Carioca 21:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lesfer. Indeed, according to the Whois querry, this IP is registered to Banco do Brasil S.A., which means a number of people may have access to it. However, the "vandalism spree" seems to have lasted roughly 48 hours, according to the IP's list of contributions, which would indicate that, at least within that period of time, it is quite likely that the same person was controlling the IP. So here's what I'll do: I'll keep an eye out for this IP, and if that person returns to vandalizing again (which is never certain when it comes to shared IPs), I will immediately enforce a 48-hour block, and if the IP returns to vandalizing immediately after the block expires, I will impose a longer block, as it will have become clear that the IP is being used only to vandalize Wikipedia. In fact, if you see any pattern of editing that would seem to indicate that the same individual may be vandalizing under a different IP, please let me know, and I will block both this 170... IP and the new one. Thanks, Redux 13:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. I've been having technical difficulties with my PC, so I haven't been online as much. I have blocked the anon for 48 hours. One of his latest edits (that hadn't been reverted already) seemed ok, so I didn't revert it, but the other two where clear spamming: this person is a Vasco da Gama fan (in all likelihood) and was roaming the articles of famous Brazilians on Wikipedia and adding notes about them being Vasco fans — an information that, even if true, was completely irrelevant in the articles at hand. If this was a first time, I would have called it a newbie mistake, but in light of his previous history, and our warnings ignored, it is clear that it was spamming, which is grounds for blocking as vandalism. Thanks again, and let's see how and if he will behave once the block expires. Redux 17:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here [1] Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 05:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi. That's actually a very common doubt (that kind of activity is actually more common than one might think). Actually, it is not vandalism technically, since the Manual of Style (section on dates and numbers) states that both formats are accurate and acceptable. By the same token, however, there is no reason to replace one for the other, and people doing it usually act following a personal preference — this user may be from a part of the world where they prefer to have the day before the month, or this particular individual just prefers it that way. This is also a common newbie mistake. I see you have already started a contact with the IP address. If the activity continues, he will be disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, and that usually falls within the disruption section of our Blocking policy. But that can only be done once the individual has been contacted and had these details explained to, and still continues to carry the changes. So, it may not be vandalism, but it is not ok either. Redux 03:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The user you mentioned is active mainly in articles about football and football teams, according to the list of contributions, but I didn't see (or I missed), amidst his recent edits, a similar activity of changing links to dates. If that is the case, though, this could be a case of sock puppetry. This is not always prohibited, but using more than one account/IP to break Wikipedia policy or disrupt the project is also grounds for blocking, or even more drastic measures, in extreme cases. Redux 00:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

=)

WTF?

Vandalism? WTF? I was actually trying to fix it. Seems like people like it screwed up and out of order. It's ok. I wasn't trying to experiment, though. It was me who updated almost all numbers and positions. I'll stop trying to help wikipedia. I never touch anything here, I'm a Flamengo supporter, so I'd love if people could, actually, update it right. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.32.183.155 ( talk • contribs)

Right.

Yeah, right! Whatever. Não acha melhor colocar todos em ordem de números ao invés de posição?! Kinda fùcked up, sorry but it is. Mesmo assim, não vou mais mexer, só gostaria de ver certo. Thanks. BTW, vandalismo? Porra... ok. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.32.183.155 ( talk • contribs)

Valid content? I didn't even notice. I apologize. Btw, I am afraid you and I are the only people who actually update the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.32.183.155 ( talk • contribs)

Thanks for the award Lesfer! :D Kusonaga 05:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Award extra

Okay, so here I am and I find out you don't have one. That's just weird.

Hi, Lesfer. CBF allowed the competition to be disputed, but it was not an official Campeonato Brasileiro, so, we should change the Campeonato Brasileiro article and add some kind of comment (like what has been done in the info about the 1987 edition), explaining that the Campeonato Brasileiro was not disputed in that year, but, instead, was replaced by the Copa João Havelange, organized by the Clube dos Treze. What do you think? Regards, Carioca 21:04, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for updating the article. Your edits are very good. Regards, Carioca 22:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

No response necessary. Just wanted to thank you for you support of my RfA. It was successful!-- Rockero 00:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Please, please do not upload commercial art and apply Template:Promotional to it. This is an egregious copyright violation. We have no defense for publishing that image outside of an article about the author's work, and absolutely cannot use it to illustrate our articles about the artist's subject. Thanks. Jkelly 02:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted this as you requested. Chick Bowen 04:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Roy boy crash fan 04:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how what I did was "low" - the image didn't have a fair use rationale (as the admin you quoted also said), and it wasn't in use when I tagged it. Neither was a lie. - SoM 22:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Lesfer, your comment "Check things before giving wrong info" was uncalled for and in error. Notice that my edit at 11:52am today took place after Titans had become the primary rather than redirect page, as it was changed earlier today at 12:27am. After my edit on the Justice League page, another editor reverted Teen Titans content back to Titans (comics) at 12:03pm. So by all means, please "check your facts". Regards. NetK 20:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

If you do not have time to check the time edits of your fellow editors, then it may be the course of wisdom that you avoid making accusations in your edit summaries towards their contributions. Regards. NetK 21:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, thx for the assist on the Al Pratt article with the creator information, and including his correct powers/abilities. I agree, more of the heroes/villians need their own separate and distinct articles tied in with the main "name" articles. NetK 22:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Based on Kelly Martin's statement "A cover image should only be used to illustrate an article about that issue. Do not use a full cover image to illustrate an article about a character." [2], should we edit Template:Comiccover in order to remove the line saying that in fact we can use comic covers to illustrate "the copyrighted comic book character(s) or group(s) on the cover of the issue in question"?

• No. We thrashed this out on Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use and also note that a comic book is different to a magazine. A magazine cover featuring a specific person isn't fair use unless critically discussed since other images can be found, and the image itself isn't intended to promote the person in question but rather the magazine's article on that person. A comic book cover is intended to promote the character or characters shown, since the character is a fictional entity, any image of a copyrighted fictional character is going to have to be used in a fair use capacity by definition and cover images have a greater fair use protection since the cover is a promotional tool. There is nothing in fair use policy which states we cannot use them, there is certainly nothing in fair use law which states we cannot use them, so I don't see why we shouldn't have that line. If you read tyhe exchanges, you'll notice I challenged Kelly on the point and she never responded. I don't think policy should be decided by Kelly's dictate alone, and on that point I think she's wrong. However, I hope she would agree with me on the broader point that all images should only be used where no better image can be found, and every image should have the strongest fair use rationale possible. So whilst a comic book cover is, to my mind, fair use to illustrate an article on the character's portrayed, this applies only if the image is tagged to make it clear it is the cover to X-Men #24 and also explain briefly why that image is used, for example, Wolverine's first cover appearance in new costume or whatever. And articles should have the fewest fair use images possible without reducing the illustrative points. Hope that helps. Steve block The wikipedian meme 19:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Sweet. If you need any other help on the issue, let me know. Steve block The wikipedian meme 20:43, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm sure you've noticed that the Major football rivalries article has perhaps a little bit too many Brazilian derbies. I don't know if you've seen the talk page discussion regarding the actual parameters to consider an rivalry for inclusion in the article, but it seams clear to me that having three loca derbies fom Brazil, some of questioned importance, seams an exageration in comparison of having only one from other very important leagues such as the Spanish and Italian. Since the article's title referrs to Major rivalries, I would like you to trim out the article to avoid it from becoming an extensive list of local derbies in medium international importance. I know its a hard thing to ask, but sooner or later it will be necesary. Also, you can contribute to the discussion regarding parameters to consider a rivalry a Major one or not. Thank you very much, Mariano( t/ c) 08:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

- Slo-mo 03:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed you made changes to the names of the Brazilian teams. I know that the Portuguese and possibly even the Spanish and French Wikipedia sites may use the traditional 'single name' but for the English site it was my intention to have the full names listed. For example not just Pele, rather Edson Arantes do Nascimento "Pele". It is long but at least on one of the sites people can see the full names. Also because the early world cups (30's-50's) many of the players do not have bios to link to. I also included rosters of the full player pool not just the players in the final tournament because I saw that you removed a player from the list. I had intended to put an asterisk by the ones not in the final tournament, since I included a note about it at the bottom. Libro0 20:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Olá Lesfer, Eu reparei que está a contribuir em artigos relacionados com a lusofonia e gostaria de convidá-lo para participar na Wikipédia em português, actualmente temos mais de 135 mil artigos. Sua ajuda será muito bem vinda. Se por acaso tiver algum problema ou dúvida deixe uma mensagem na minha página de discussão. Continue com esse bom trabalho, Rei-artur 22:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but what's the deal with fair use and cropping? I thought the Zatanna one got removed? Exvicious 07:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:Wonderwomandodson.png]]

the lasso is hard to crop:/ Exvicious 01:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to cause another revert war, so I'm not going to revert it, but would you mind discussing the cropped image with me on the talk page? -- DrBat 21:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello Lesfer, please do not tamper with the Jason Rusch info on the Firestorm page it is there for a reason. Your changes to the page have been reverted. Basique 13:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the fixes on the Zico page, but a couple of things:

• The proper English name of the now defunct top flight soccer league in Japan is "Japan Soccer League", not "Japanese Soccer League".
• "Fully professional" is the correct way to differentiate J. League from JSL. While JSL players were de facto professional, they were still officially employees of the parent companies and clubs operated as divisions of corporations, whereas all J. League players were signed to professional contracts and clubs operated as independent entities (although still owned in part by corporations).

Thanks. Ytny 20:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought "fully professional" was important because, by going from amateur/semi-professional to professional, they were transforming soccer from one of many minor sports that were played in Japan to a competitor to baseball. Bringing Zico was part of that transformation to full professionalism. Ytny 21:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

While the art type is preference the previous picture (IMO of course) is so hideous that it should be burned from Marvel's archives. Ringo's art is so kiddie cartoonish that it hurts the eyes to see it.

On a more professional note, people (Marvel in particular) update their records all the time with newer text & images. The FF pic originaly posted by me (then reposted by Spidey1550) is the superior pic (opion, I know but visually it is).

You seem to be the only one (thus far) with a problem with it so who between the three of us needs to (as you put it) grow up?

However I will be the adult and leave the image in tact, for now. Dstorres

You said: SHB pics should portrait current looks, and this is not her current look. So we use one with various incarnations of her.

You stated that the Montage Phoenix pic portrayed her current look but her current look is a corpse so that doesn't work.

Her last appearence in a series Phoenix used 3 different "looks". The green one (current pic), the Red Dark Phoenix, and a white Phoenix suit. She even switched between all 3 in the last few pages of the last issue of Endsong.

If you go by most recent she should be in a white Phoenix suit (fyi). Dstorres

• One more side point, Jean herself never wore the Dark Phoenix suit, anytime it was the Red Suit it was the Phoenix Force itself.

Firstly, no I don't try to be difficult. I was going for the "accurate" costume that was not even present for the vote.

Secondly: Wikipedia is not a democracy, Opinions of Wikipedians are original research and violates NPOV, both of which are not allowed. So that doesn't really count does it for keeping the pic.

Off the subject a bit I've read that I am not required to keep the items on my discussion page if I chose not to. The first FF message I recieved was from someone that didn't have all the facts. It seems I stumbled upon a rare bug that wikipedia has. I uploaded a new pic to FF (guess which one), checked it in the "show preview" tab and upon saving it mysteriously clipped part of the text. I reverted the field to the mess up not realizing it was there (thinking someone was just mad at the choice of pic because no explaination was given for the revert).

The second is us bickering so I thought it pointless to keep it since I've called it a night on the FF. I will however remain adament about the Jean Grey entry, I'm just not gonna get caught in the 3r rule today so I'll let it be for 24 hrs.

You said: Where the hell have I stated that the Montage Phoenix pic portrayed her current look?

I say: Jean Grey, History Tab, you typed: (SHB pics should portrait current looks, and this is not her current look. So we use one with various incarnations of her.)

It's the 3rd line down from your most recent revision if you'd like to verify this.

As for the rudeness of removing comments, again, there is no rule in Wiki that says I can't (as I previously stated above). I documented my reasoning for doing so and thats that. I don't expect you to keep my statements (but you can, thats up to you). Dstorres

Final Post for the night

5 people do not a community make. While it was decided by a group I (and I image others) were not aware of said vote or we would have made our opinions known. Also these kind of votes do not appear to hold as much sway as you claim or the debate that occured over the Spider-Man costume image change wouldn't have gone as long as it did. The new costume won the vote, but yet the JS Campbell image is the one currently on the site. Should voting for pics actually have weight I will abide by the decision of that administrator.

So if you want to report me feel free to do so but I'm working on going about this a different way so I won't revert the image right away. I do appreciate you showing me that there was an issue over the pic though and will take that into consideration in my next. Dstorres

What exactly is considered "alternate reality." I'm guessing Earth-Two is different, but for Batman and Dick Grayson it's still mentioned. Is pre-crisis considered alternate reality? Kara Zor-El's precrisis foster parents are notable relatives.

I think Earth-Two is definately different, but pre-crisis is kind of iffy apparently in a lot of people's minds. I was about to be all gung-ho in changing everyone's shero boxes, but I want to get people's opinions. Is there anywhere where it specifically mentions alternate realities in the superhero box? Exvicious 01:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)