User talk:east718/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please contact me on my talk page.

Archives

Current Late 2004 and onwards March 2006 and onwards November 2006 and onwards July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June–July 2009 August–December 2009 January–June 2010 July 2010 and onwards

Marsden

Thank you for stubbing and protecting the page again. This really needs to go back to Arbcomm for a clarification of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rachel_Marsden. I know Jimbo is taking a personal interest in this. 209.217.75.171 (talk) 03:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I call Arthur. Will ^(talk) 03:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

ActiveStills

hey, do u know whats going on with Activestills?

thank u, Doronef (talk) 06:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

yes, few weeks ago. Doronef (talk) 13:33, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Ticket#2007121610008338. thank u, Doronef (talk) 15:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Kent McCord image

Do you know why this image (McCord5.jpg) has been deleted? I moved it from the infobox, where it didn't pass fair use guidelines, to where it illustrated a specific character, added a detailed fair use rationale to the image page, and disputed the nonfree template. Did I waste an hour of my time trying to get it all done properly, only to be totally ignored? I have no idea who actually deleted the image, but I noticed that you commented it out of the article. Perhaps you can tell me what happened and why. Either way, happy New Year! --Karen | Talk | contribs 09:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Does the Wikipedia have any sort of OTRS system

To make sure that if a user claims that he's the copyright owner, he really is? {1} {2} --Yuval Y § Chat § 11:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed that now you have deleted Bassem18's pictures. I guess next time you'd trust me or something, so there won't be cases such as commons:Image:Persian Fallow Deer 2.jpg, where someone had uploaded the image to commons. Yuval Y § Chat § 12:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yana Gupta

Why did you delete the Yana Gupta Image? It was fair use and free it even said on the site free Yana Gupta Images I wonder why they elected a corrupt abusive adminstator like you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by I2E4S6 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

edit protection needed

Hi. i requested edit protection for Israeli-Palestinian conflict, due to constant edit-warring. appreciate if you could please take a look at this if you have a chance. i am a consistent editor of this topic area. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 03:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Bad justification for Isiah image

rofl. gimme a break, top legal mind. Chensiyuan (talk) 09:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Unblocking of RambutanKing

Thankyou.--RambutanKing (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring my user page

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For thwarting vandals, I offer you this barnstar Majoreditor (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shake (cannabis)

I have nominated Shake (cannabis) for deletion, an article you've edited. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shake (cannabis). Zenwhat (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Faggot, What's wrong with shake? 201.51.169.252 (talk) 21:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Removing Mesut-kurtis.jpg

Has the "fair use" policy changed a lot in the recent months? Does this picture not fall under "fair use"? User:Waqas.usman (Talk) 21:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ahh an engineer

I see you're the one responsible for that new redirect. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 09:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That almost suggests that I come up there. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thanx. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 08:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure you meant well...

...when you protect an apparent sockpuppet page - except that the user in question is not a sockpuppet of mine. Please do a checkuser if you want to clarify this. My edit to the checkuser archive was an oversight on my part - yes... I did not see the red italics. Sfacets 11:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Bot stuff

Worth adding ".*?\/index\.php" to MediaWiki:Titleblacklist? Might help for a bit - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ampang Line (Sentul Timur-Sri Petaling)

The Ampang Line (Sentul Timur-Sri Petaling) article was deleted just a few days ago under your justification that the page was merely a dead-end redirect, but the page was originally a sub-article of Ampang Line, accompanying Ampang Line (Sentul Timur-Ampang). I have no idea how it ended up like this, nor could I find the article anywhere else. It would be very helpful if you could look into the page's history again to verify what happened to the article and restore it if possible, as it basically involved the deletion of an entire article on a transit line. Thanks. - Two hundred percent (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Apparently I overlooked the adjoining categories myself. Sorry for troubling you. :) - Two hundred percent (talk) 14:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Copacabana

Hi, I just saw you edited the article Copacabana, and I take the opportunity to kindly ask you to check on Hu12's actions in that article, which I reported in the Administrators noticeboard... I feel that the way he has handled the whole affair was really unfair, and prejudicial to Wikipedia. Not only he has blocked the article in an authoritarian way, he neglected to correct all the mistakes in that page before blocking it, leaving the page in a sorry state. Thanks.Rsazevedo (talk) 15:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop forum shopping, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Copacabana--Hu12 (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me!

-Djsasso (talk) 17:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverted

here. —Whig (talk) 17:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I already took his comment into consideration in my edit, and marked it as such in my edit summary. —Whig (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Apparently Adam is suffering the effects of some kind of flu, and has left a comment in my talk disregarding the fact that I twice asked him to respond in Talk:Quackery#WP:RSN where I have explained already the reason I reversed the order of the two sentences. Since he disregards what I said, and tells me to take it up with Orangemarlin when he's the one who last reverted me, I am not sure what to do. I cannot revert him but he has given no reason for his revert except he prefers it this way. —Whig (talk) 23:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for tackling the editor I posted about on WP/ANI re legal threats on Oxford Round Table. By the way, I love that smiley face on your user page! Coldmachine^Talk 18:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Removal of wowglider page

Hi East718,

I hope you can help me. I noticed that you removed a page that has great importance to our company: wowglider We did not create this page, but it is very accurate and a solid submission. I think the reason was a dead link, but the URL does work. The page is relevant to our company and important to the MMORPG Industry and Software Development in general as we are in a rather large lawsuit with Blizzard Entertainment/Vivendi. Can you restore this page and/or tell me what was missing link wise so we can fix it? Best Regards, JBeatty —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamut (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

bwk news channel

I notice that the Brunswick News Channel page was delete. Please let me know what I need to do to have the page un-delete.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.56.128 (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I didn't delete that page, but two other administrators, Keilana and Pegasus did. You should try to get in touch with them first. east.718 at 04:08, January 4, 2008

Misza13

Can you explain your block? --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Seconding the need for explanation. Metros (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh hai thar dude. :) I think I know what happened (encountered that problem myself in the past), but I'll give you a while to figure that on your own. :D (Hint: it's something to do with how the IRC rc bot reports usernames created by others.) Миша13 22:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah! Got it :) East718 saw the "bot" in the name on the IRC report. clicked on the creator (you!), hence the block. The IRC bot may well be displaying the second account name yet having a link to the creator's account. Am I right? - Alison ^❤ 22:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC) (doesn't do IRC bots)

Not quite, and the longer East718 remains inactive (save the block and a message) the more probable my suspicions are. Ok, let me explain - the bot that report edits in the irc.wikimedia.org channels behaves differently depending on whether a user is created casually or by another user. If it's a regular creation, the username is put in a field, let's call it 'editor'. So, if one were to run an adminbot (zomg!) that automatically blocks certain usernames like those containing, say 'wikinews', he would just get the field 'editor' and block that username. If however a logged-in user creates a username, then he (and not the created username) is put in the 'editor' field. The actual created username should be extracted from a field I call 'summary', which takes the form 'created new account ...'. How do I know all that? Well, I've been running a blockbot myself (zomg, again!) and it likewise blocked a fellow admin right after he created a test username. This is how I have discovered this "bug" - perhaps East is using an old fork of that software (it's open source). Or maybe all this ain't true and it was all just a slipped button. :P Ok, I'm going to bed now, anxiously awaiting how this resolves (and whether I suspected correctly). Миша13 23:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that explains the insta-block, or the hardblock. FYI East there's a thread about this at ANI. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Page!

I noticed you have deleted the Sevii Island page (your name was at the deletion log). I have used that page as one of the most used page since I needed help with the game. Luckily I did it so I don't care but I ask why did you delete the page? Signed: Write me (Jan 3 08). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Write me (talk • contribs) 02:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: 68.39.174.238

OK, done. Voice-of-All 06:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Leventorous

Thanks for your attention there. Just one thing: Your talk page tag says she can request an unblock by posting to her talk page, but the page is protected. You may want to replace that tag with something else. Just letting you know :) Equazcion •✗/C • 07:24, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)

The block notice is automated, and a mere formality at that. The user is presented with many more ways to contest a block on the actual block screen. east.718 at 07:27, January 4, 2008

Okay, I see. If you could also take a look at User:Devornacrax, it looks like the same deal. User:Leventorous posted on her talk page asking about an autoblock on that account. Thanks -- Equazcion •✗/C • 07:36, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Blocked Devorn. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) Equazcion •✗/C • 07:41, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Talk: Hermy??

Please stop making nonsense talks multiple times, as you did with "Talk: Hermy??????" about 5067 times. Don't be a cunt, stay cool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.24.31.152 (talk • contribs)

Are you fucking kidding me? I warned you because you were making all these spam talks with the title "Talk: Hermy?????" and you're going to warn me? Man Wikipedia needs to check again on who to give the "powers" to. Clearly you're abusing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.24.31.152 (talk • contribs)

RfA Thanks

Dear East718, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Block Thanks

Hi. Thanks for the block. Until it is tracked down, we did not want any more inappropriate edits made. --NERIC-Security (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot for Lotus Sametime?

Hi - noticed you removed my screenshot from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Sametime. Did I do something wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenfromIBM (talk • contribs) 16:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

test

test M-ercury at 16:16, January 4, 2008

I like it. Regards, M-ercury at 16:16, January 4, 2008 16:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to indent. M-ercury at 16:17, January 4, 2008

M-ercury at 19:26, January 4, 2008

M-ercury at 19:26, January 4, 2008

Latchingdon

Hi. I tried to move the article Latchingdon,_Essex to the more logical Latchingdon, since that would clear up about 11 red links and because there is only one Latchingdon in the world as far as I am aware. Only one notable one anyway. So it doesn't need the specifier "Essex" (especially not with a comma screwing up the link as well). However, "Latchingdon" was apparently protected by you on 28th December. Could you possibly explain why and if appropriate unprotect it? Because "Latchingdon" makes more logical sense than "Latchingdon,_Essex" and is more likely to be linked to accurately. Thanks. Ray Ellis (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation and for sorting it out. Cheers, Ray Ellis (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You deleted User:Ryanpostlethwaite

I do not see a user request in the deleted history. This is linked in his signature in alot of places. Did he request the deletion? Seems if his page is elsewhere, the redirect to his current page would be more proper. Now his old signatures link to a dead-end page. JERRY ^talk _contribs 23:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks. JERRY ^talk _contribs 23:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you found the redirect so quickly, but I would really appreciate it if in the future you asked me first - the redirect from my old signature linked to my new renamed account, not just a page. Thanks, Ryan Postlethwaite 23:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

email

Hi, saw you on the admin list and I needed help so I emailed you something. did you get my email? Tkguy (talk) 00:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Altemio Sanchez image

You deleted Altemio Sanchez.jpg, and gave the reason "bad justification given for fair use." I copied the fair use template directly from the Serial Killer Task Force page for mugshots, so I was wondering why this mugshot was deleted. --Managerpants (talk) 05:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Image clean up taskforce

Hi there. Would you have time to have a look at WP:TODAY? In particular Wikipedia talk:Task of the Day#Using Category:Disputed non-free images for our purposes? There are people gearing up to deal with the 11,000+ images in Category:Disputed non-free images as of 2 January 2008, and the idea is to contact the people who help by clearing the backlogs (using stuff like scripts and TWINKLE) and to ask them to hold off for a few days after the normal deadline. Betacommand has reportedly agreed to this. Please could you take note and let anyone else you know who uses such tools to clear image deletion backlogs. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy to do book covers. I don't mind grabbing a list, setting up my own gallery using preview, and picking out the book covers, but if you have a better method, please send me a list (copied to that other talk page as well). Carcharoth (talk) 11:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

sniggerfardimungus

I'm deadly curious- what's wrong with the name of User:Sniggerfardimungus ? Do you just mean because it contains the N-word? As I'm sure that's a coincidence- 'snigger' is an innocent word for laughter. Merkinsmum 13:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion question

Thanks for deleting Image:PCMuseum.jpg whic I added the {{db}} tag to. I am a new admin and I was wondering - is it OK if I delete such blatant copyvio images directly on finding them, or is it better to speedy them and let someone else decide? Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for the answer and the vote of confidence - I wasn't sure if it was a checks and balances kind of thing (the same person should not both nominate as a speedy and do the delete) or not. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked for 15 minutes

Hi, I know this is a stupid question but is it possible to block me for like 15-10 mintues just to see how it is like?If not, that's fine.Just wondering. IslaamMaged126 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks,(I know that's really stupid, I just wanted to see what it was like.);)--IslaamMaged126 (talk) 15:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Lists of disputed images

Hi, thank you for offering to make lists of disputed images. User:Jogers and User:SkierRMH have lists of some categories of disputed images in their userspace, which might save you some work:

• Book covers
• Film posters
• DVD covers
• Album covers

All the best, Bláthnaid 15:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Great, we will have oodles of lists now! And your bot gets some exercise, which it probably needs after the Christmas holidays :-) Bláthnaid 15:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Activestills again...

hey, the number is Ticket#2007121610008338. thank u, Doronef (talk) 18:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

John Vincent Atanasoff and User:Monshuai

Thanks for your Dec. 31 reply on my talk page. The user suspected of using the IP address as a sockpuppet to edit-war on the article, User:Monshuai, just left a note on my talk page. The gist of it is that I'm "not very bright" and he intends to continue editing the article to include ethnicity in the subject's lead. Robert K S (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Havelock the Dane's block

Are you sure about this? Altough I don't know him personlly, I am familiar with his work here. This guy has written excelent articles that have been promoted to GA status and could easily become featured in the future. See here. His edits have not been controversial and in fact much appreciated by the people involved in those articles. I checked the Checkuser request, his name is mentioned only once in a list and no specific information regarding him is provided. I took the trouble of checking the edit history of the other names on the list and found that they have made only a few edits each if any, while havelock has been editing quite heavily since he made his account, significantly improving quite a few articles. I don't know if you have any evidence other than his name being on that page but in light of his great edit history can you at least double check? I believe a great editor deserves at least that much. Thx in advance RIP-Acer (talk) 13:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thx for looking into it. RIP-Acer (talk) 13:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

IMAGE DELETION...

Hey..i noticed that u had deleted an judy greer image that i had uploaded...i am sure i must hv been doing something wrong...

can u tell me what wrong did i do??? Sunitmania (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

and please tell me what needs to be done to upload a picture and make it stay there.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunitmania (talk • contribs) 15:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Utada Hikaru - Passion.jpg

I noticed that you deleted this image under CSD I6 recently. However, even if the image was tagged, none of the articles it appeared in were notified (Passion (song) and List of Kingdom Hearts media, both of which are on my watchlist). I would like to kindly request that you restore the image so I can provide a proper fair use rationale. Thanks, Axem Titanium (talk) 15:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Since it affected lots of pages admins use regularly (and I'm not one) and the last time I proposed a visual change at a project a user complained I hadn't gone through the whole rigamorole (although he's now at Arbcom on an unrelated matter), I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask for opinions. But its been six hours since you changed it and no one's come out of the woodwork complaining, so it was a good call. MBisanz ^talk 16:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

Thanks for deleting all the redirects. Bot was malfunctioning - fixed this! Sorry! Ohmpandya (Talk) 17:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

List of things that come on sticks

You apparently speedied this with a deletion rationale of "WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information". Where in WP:CSD or elsewhere did you find that this was a speedy deletion rationale? Please restore and send to AfD, where it will probably be deleted in the proper manner, since it does look like an indiscriminate collection of information. DGG (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

IAR ., which you quoted to me, is not a license to speedy delete everything you think would be deleted, even when you are right about the conclusion. speedy is not a place to use that provision. I think you are using a principle which cannot possibly be supported. DGG (talk) 00:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Grr

So much for getting "whitelisted". 68.39.174.238 (talk) 19:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanx; I'll hold off on more major edits (I hope) untill this gets fixed. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 11:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Reversion War

Gromlakh (Tuckdogg's new account) keeps removing parts from the Yarennoka wiki page which have been well documented prior to the event, especially about Joachim Hansen's original involvement. He keeps reverting things back to his liking which fails to allow the most information to be revealed for the event. Please help out.

Reith52 (talk) 21:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Beliskner class cruiser

Could you please undo your deletion of Beliskner class cruiser? I just merged it (and properly tagged it with {{R from merge}}, but accidently had a typo in the merge target. It should have been Asgard starships in Stargate#Beliskner class cruiser, not Asgard ships in Stargate#Beliskner class cruiser, but you were quicker than I could fix my mistake. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 01:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Because it may not be clear what I was refering to: A merge needs to leave the merge origin intact per GFDL. And the deletion now broke that and should be undone (which only an admin can). – sgeureka ^t•c 03:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Have a nice day too. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorenson companies

Hi, it will be possible to undelete article Sorenson companies? I link it today from List of billionaires (2007) 102-946, other three wikilinks are linked to that article (Special:Whatlinkshere/Sorenson_companies), so i think that subject may be notable (altough i have no idea content of deleted article). --Jklamo (talk) 01:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:CBC Radio 3 programs

Just so you know, this category was actually speedied out of process. It hadn't been empty for four days or more; User:Breno improperly applied the tag just minutes after emptying the category himself, and your subsequent deletion was only 20 minutes later. I've consequently restored it and taken it to CFD for a procedural review. His fault for following improper procedure, not yours, but I thought I should let you know anyway. Bearcat (talk) 03:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Dancing with the Stars (US season 6)

I created the protected redirect to prevent this page from being recreated again since it has been deleted three times before. The empty page it is redirected to is protected as well but will eventually be a valid page as the program is scheduled but all details so far are speculation. --NrDg 03:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

status

As I understand our agreement, it was entered into voluntarily and not as a condition of editing. I am not sure whether it continues at this time as we were to re-evaluate it in the new year, but I have very much appreciated your advice to this point. In any case, Adam Cuerden is making claims here which I would like to bring to your attention and would appreciate any comment you might have. I will also let Mercury know about this since he was mentioned, but this also seems like a good time for me to take a step back and let things cool down for a bit, which I will do. —Whig (talk) 04:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

here I am criticized in some detail, if you would like to take a look. I think you should also perhaps (and maybe first) look at my statement. —Whig (talk) 08:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on my talk. I have replied there in part, but I don't really need to go into more depth. Obviously this is an RfC for the benefit of the ArbCom, and my statement there is not to convince you but to provide evidence, so if you happen to disagree with any of my characterization, oh well. I appreciate the suggestions. —Whig (talk) 18:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I should let you know I involved myself in Talk:Homeopathy when the NPOV dispute was raised. I believe that upholding that dispute prevails over other considerations, and did not think it was necessary to seek your prior approval. Nor am I sure you still expect that provision to be maintained given your previous authorization. In any case, I thought this context might be helpful to you. —Whig (talk) 08:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

"Image:TCR underground shot.jpg"

Hello, i'd like to find out exactly what made this a bad justification of Fair Use so it can be corrected and re-uploaded. Thanks. Mewikiman (talk) 05:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ashley Fernee

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ashley Fernee. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.--Gavin Collins (talk) 14:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Vote for a post-meetup restaurant

I'm charged with making the reservations for us, so let's make it official. We'll do this via voting and everyone including anonymous voters, sockpuppets, and canvassed supporters is enfranchised. Voting irregularities and election fraud are encouraged as that would be really amusing in this instance. Please vote for whichever restaurant you would like to eat at given the information provided above and your own personal prejudices at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#Let's make it official. The prevailing restaurant will be called first for the reservation. If a reservation cannot be obtained at the winning restaurant, the runner-up restaurant will be called thus making this entire process pointless. Voting ends 24 hours after this timestamp (because I said so). ScienceApologist (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Pat Miletich

Pat's page has been protected for 3 months and it doesn't seem like it's ever going to be unprotected. So why has it taken so long for this page to been protected? Just wondering since there seems to be some information misisng and more to be added. (MgTurtle (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC))

User attack page

Sorry you got the automatic notification of the CSD tag for those two. I think the existance of the page, perpetuates the attack. I realize you were just blocking the user. However, the user's userspace files should be removed for obvious reasons. Toddst1 (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Response

Hello its user: write me responding here is the link... Sevii Islands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Write me (talk • contribs)

Deletion of Colonisation of Africa

Hi, while reading Economy of Africa I noticed a redlink to Colonisation of Africa. There are quite a few pages linking to this deleted page: [1] and more here: [2]. What did these pages redirect to? It looks like an accident might have happened somewhere along the line. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 08:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks :) Could you please also restore Talk:Colonisation of Africa and Colonization of Africa? Also, did you check the deleted contributions of the vandal? I wonder if he/she created broken redirects elsewhere. BTW in addition to checking the history, it is a good idea to check the "What links here" to pages that you delete, especially for spam, attack, and hoax pages. It is common that the spam/attack/hoax is perpetuated on other pages by linking to the bad page. Cheers, Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 17:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Woohoo! Gromlakh (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

homeopathy is the future

WOULD YOU LIK TO CONTRIBUTE TO WIKIPROJECT HOMEATPHY? GOOGLE IT PLEASE TO FIND OUT HOW YOUC AN DONATE YOUR ITME AND HELP SAVE MILLIONSOF LIFES EVERY SINGLE DAY THROUGH EDUCATION AND WIKIEDITING. Smith Jones (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

yo sign up please visit this page. Smith Jones (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Battlebowl.jpg

Why was this deleted? I'm pretty sure I did add a FUR since I always add one when I get a warning about an old pic I uploaded doesn't have one. TJ Spyke 00:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I would appreciate that. I have sold my old VHS copy since I uploaded it (and don't have the image saved on my computer anymore), so it wouldn't have been a little hard finding another image. TJ Spyke 00:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

March 29, 2006 Capitol Hill police incident

Why delete March 29, 2005 Capitol Hill police incident as an implausible redirect? It's only one character off, and numbers are easy to mistake. I'm not going to wheel war with you :-) but would you reconsider deletion? Nyttend (talk) 04:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Austrian economics

After you rejected my request for page protection, another anonymous IP removed information from the article and put a bunch of POV stuff about their methodology in the lead that I took out. Check it out

Please reconsider. Zenwhat (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Another mostly single-purpose account Big Brother 1984 (talk · contribs) injects the POV back into the article, while putting in the edit summary some nonsense about me supporting the mixed-market economy. Diff Zenwhat (talk) 08:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

On what grounds do you claim this is a "content dispute"? The unsourced NPOV-violations in the lead were tagged with "citation needed" for over a month now and the claim about Bryan Caplan was clearly cited, but removed along with bad faith accusations of political bias. Articles relating to Austrian economics are persistently vandalized, no different than with other topics prone to violations of WP:FRINGE, such as those on Marxism. If you don't believe me, take a look at the edit history of Debt-based monetary system and how I cried out desperately for help on WP:Help desk until User:Transhumanist fortunately stepped in to help and none of the trolls would dare edit-war with him\her because the amount of respect they have on here. Zenwhat (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You're an admin, so I don't mean to template you but intentionally disruptive edits are the very definition of vandalism:

"Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia."

That would include egregious violations of WP:FRINGE such as, for instance, pushing Young-Earth Creationism on the article on Evolution.

Lastly, your invocation of "long-term" vandalism seems to go against WP:SPP, since the burden of proof for page-protectionism is "severe vandalism" not "long-term" vandalism. Since the violations of WP:FRINGE here are, to use your words "egregious." Zenwhat (talk) 13:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, another editor: here. This is clearly not a content dispute and if you would wish to avoid a tarnished reputation as an admin I recommend you enforce Wikipedia policy or at least attempt back up your decisions with arguments instead of making hasty decisions, then subtly telling confused editors to shut up and go away.

If you ignore these comments, I shall issue an RFC on your behavior, it shall be reviewed by the community, and they shall decide the matter. I'm certain, based on the above, you probably wouldn't want that, though I admit your user contribs overall seem very, very good. It would be a shame to see what appears to be a very good editor's hard work be undermined by one poor decision. Zenwhat (talk) 17:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

After removing Skomorokh's edits and attempting to engage in discussion by noting the contentious edits on his talkpage User talk:Skomorokh#On_Austrian_economics, he has since moved on to make other contentious edits, again, all involving what appear to be an SPA at promoting market anarchism and deleting its Marxist critics, like the others. A review of my edit history and userpage, on the other hand, yields the fact that I take an interest in mainstream economics and Buddhism, making edits entirely neutral about the silly laissez-faire vs. socialism POV pushing on both sides, such as this. Zenwhat (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, to perhaps give some clarity I could've offered earlier: In case there's any denial about the wild fringe views here, I have some interesting source material for you from the Mises Institute itself:

Ludwig von Mises, which the Wikipedia article names as the "uncontested dean of the Austrian School of economics," says of Fascism in Omnipotent Government (published in 1944, re-published in 1969):

http://www.mises.org/liberal/ch1sec10.asp

It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history.

And of Nazism:

http://www.mises.org/etexts/mises/og/chap9b.asp

Nazism conquered Germany because it never encountered any adequate intellectual resistance. It would have conquered the whole world if, after the fall of France, Great Britain and the United States had not begun to fight it seriously.
...
With regard to these dogmas there is no difference between present-day British liberals and the British labor party on the one hand and the Nazis on the other.

You said, "Cheers," so I'll take a wild guess you're British. How 'bout that Nazi Labour Party (UK) and the Nazi Lib Dems, eh? This is why all of the stuff on Austrian economics raises huge red flags and I've attempted to work through it all with them wikilawyering in an attempting to get me blocked. You have a broad array of people doing this: On the one hand you have the conspiracy theorists (some of whom buy into the Rothschild family conspiracy aka anti-semitic "The Jewish bankers" conspiracy). Others aren't necessarily out-and-out insane, but they are, however, anarchists attempting to wipe mainstream economics from Wikipedia and inject their heterodox theories into any article they can.

For precisely this reason, I've been planning on writing an essay on the matter, elucidating the monetary crankery on Wikipedia.

In my personal opinion, the Mises Institute is a cult. I don't, however, put that into articles because that's just my personal opinion -- not something I can verify with reliable sources.

Zenwhat (talk) 20:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Quick on the draw

• 12:43, 10 January 2008 East718 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Karl Wilhelm of Baden-Durlach" ‎ (CSD R1: Redirect to nonexistent page)

You deleted Karl Wilhelm of Baden-Durlach, a page linked to by Special:Whatlinkshere/Karl_Wilhelm_of_Baden-Durlach, while I was in the process of creating Karl III Wilhelm, Margrave of Baden-Durlach, Special:Whatlinkshere/Karl_III_Wilhelm,_Margrave_of_Baden-Durlach. Is there really a need to delete that quickly, frustrating editors who try to fill gaps? And if so, does it have to be you who scores such a kill? I wonder if that funny block of yours is somehow related:

• 10:50, 26 December 2007 DarkFalls (Talk | contribs) blocked "East718 (Talk | contribs)" (autoblock disabled) with an expiry time of 2 years ago ‎ (for being a dick :p)

-- Matthead  DisOuß   12:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

"any editor working on topics related to Eastern Europe". Eastern Europe is considered beginning East of Poland, while Karl III Wilhelm, Margrave of Baden-Durlach and Talk:Karl_Wilhelm_of_Baden-Durlach are topics pretty much in my back yard. When I created the redirect, you assessed it, surely while assuming good faith and that I am here to help the project, and then deleted it. Is that correct, or incivil, personal attack, or assumption of bad faith from my side? Anyway, thanks for restoring it. With just a little bit more patience, you could have saved us this issue. So, as you did blow off steam on IRC among fellow admins, where am I permitted to blow off steam, for example after witnessing this? German Nobel laureates are not exactly topics related to Eastern Europe, yet an editor not under the Digwuren restriction, never having edited the article before, shows up shortly after I did so, coincidentally. See also this, showing how Wikipedia spreads a claim added by another editor. The article has not been edited since, despite obviously having double entries now. Maybe you want to take a break from boring maintenance work to fixed this? Wikipedia:Verifiability is also a policy that needs to be respected, as I believe. -- Matthead  DisOuß   14:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Image deleted

Hi, I see you deleted this image I have uploaded, saying it was Orphaned, but, as you can see here, the image was removed from the article on January 3, and deleted on January 5, just 2 days after! And also, as you can see on the history of my talk page, I didn't receive any warning about Orphaned non-free media before the image was deleted, I think that's unfair. So, can you restore that image, so I can use in the article again? — Jhn* 17:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Re: Image deleted

Thank you! — Jhn* 17:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

A Wikiquette alert involving you

I have filed a wikiquette alert involving you. It was not a "threat," and either way, it is something you should take seriously.

Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:East718 Zenwhat (talk) 19:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Unprotect shareaza

I think the current talk on shareaza seems to have found a solution for the issue of shareaza, and it can be unprotected. (or let the current protection exprire in 16 hours from now.). http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=protect&page=Shareaza 14:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leuk he (talk • contribs)

AfD/Magocracy protection

Please see my comment at WP:RFPP. Thank you, - PeaceNT (talk) 16:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I apologise for stepping on toes here, but I really don't think protection is justified by only 2 vandal edits by IPs. Semi protection effectively means users without accounts are prevented from expressing an opinion on the fate of that article. I think we'd need to see a lot more disruption before semi protection would be necessary. I've unprotected the article. WjBscribe 16:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

That IP has been stalking Jack Merridew and harassing him for a while now - but I'll defer to your judgement. east.718 at 16:37, January 11, 2008

New Roosevelt Logo.PNG deletion

I would like further information on why the image New Roosevelt Logo.png was deleted. I placed the template in as requested as soon as I was notified it was a candidate for possible deletion (2 January 2008) and supplied reasons for including it as part of the article it was uploaded for and the fact that as a logo it is not "replaceable" with a free image. I don't see why this low-resolution logo is any different than ones included for other high schools or universities. Thank you --JonRidinger (talk) 19:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...I wasn't sure if I should remove it. Now I know. Much appreciated! Thank you --JonRidinger (talk) 20:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Please!

Hey Pal. Please put back the "List of Star Fox planets and locations" article. I really would apperciate it. Please put it back on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremy Karp (talk • contribs) 21:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted image

I'm new to the whole Wikipedia thing and made some edits to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wendover_Arm_Canal but you removed an image. Can I ask why? Rob (Wendoverarmtrust) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendoverarmtrust (talk • contribs) 23:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Violation of dispute process - image with disputed fair use rationale requires "Nomination for Deletion" process

Hello.

Sometime before Jan 5 2008 you added a "no use rationale whatsoever" flag to the Nicole_interpreter.jpg image used in the The Interpreter article.

On Jan 5 2008 I added a full and complete "fair use rationale".

On Jan 11 2008 you deleted the image without putting it through a "Nomination for Deletion" - as is required by Wikipedia:FURG and Wikipedia:NFCC (scroll down to Speedy Deletion and Enforcement respectively) for images that have a disputed fair use rationale.

You deleted it with a comment that you had notified the uploader 48 hours previous, however that justification for deletion can only be used for images that do not have a "fair use rationale" and that are not disputed. Images that have a fair use rationale must be Nominated and can not be arbitrarily and unilaterally deleted unless they are "clearly an abuse" or they are not remediated.

Restore the image and rationale then Nominate it for Deletion at Wikipedia:Images_and_Media_for_Deletion as per standard protocol.

CraigWyllie (talk) 00:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I thought about removing the notice myself - but I presumed it would be a conflict of interest or not appropriate, seeing as I was the one creating the rationale. And even if I had removed the notice, I probably would have missed removing the category! I didn't realize that sweeps/etc were keyed off of the category. My bad! CraigWyllie (talk) 00:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Unclear Why Image Ws Deleted

As per the note above by CraigWyllie, I wonder why you deleted an image from this article even though it was from a family member, and thus there was no copyright issue. An explanation, rather than a rash deletion, would have been appreciated. At a minimum, you could have restored the inferior picture that it was replacing. -- comment added by Chomsky1

Courtesy notification of incident report

This is a courtesy notification that I have submitted an incident at WP:AN/I in which you have been listed as being involved. Please review the report, and comment there as you deem appropriate. Thank-you, JERRY ^talk _contribs 01:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with that, but as you will see, my complaint about this situation was more of a systemic one. Your involvement was small and understandable. JERRY ^talk _contribs 01:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Truncated

Did this run User:East718/DFUI/Logos truncate early? or did we actually solve all Logo issues beyond "M" :)!. Its probably a lost cause at this point, of the 11,000 images tagged on Jan 2, only 5,000 have been screened and fixed/deleted, and with all the drama around here, I think the focus on image work has been lost. MBisanz ^talk 06:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Lists of disputed images

D'oh! That would have been the obvious thing for me to do in the first place. I know nothing about bots, so I don't know what they are capable of doing, or if it takes the bot operator a long time to get the bot to make such a list. I will let you know in the future, thank you. Bláthnaid 14:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Indef blocking of IPs

Hey, sorry about this and this. I guess I should know better, but as they say experience is worth it's weight in gold. Rudget. 23:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Request to unblock former TOR exit nodes

East718, I checked the last 5000 blocks via Special:Ipblocklist (mostly out of curiosity), and found that

• 89.185.245.137 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 24.126.65.248 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

which you blocked as Tor exit nodes, are no longer exit nodes. Barring circumstances unbeknownst to me, would you please consider unblocking these IP address? Thanks, Iamunknown 01:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Iamunknown 05:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I award thee...

		The Barnstar of Good Humour
		For this AfD closure! :) the wub "?!" 12:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for arbitration involving you.

A request for arbitration involving you has been proposed. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Austrian_economics Zenwhat (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Request to unprotect SpeakerCraft article

Hello. I'm trying to post an article about SpeakerCraft, Inc. The content I had before was deleted as advertising and now the page is protected. I have edited my content, adding several verifiable references and eliminating the biased tone, and have modeled it after other tech company articles present on Wikipedia. How would I go about posting the new material? Thanks. SCvoice (talk) 01:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for unprotecting the page. I reviewed the link you sent me and created a draft of the article on my user page. Is there some way I can get it reviewed before I post it. Just trying to avoid any further deletion. :) Thanks for your help!SCvoice (talk) 06:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and advice. I appreciate it! :) SCvoice (talk) 21:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Archery Moscow 1980.jpg

Could I get this image that was deleted back. I've seen the author's other contributions, and it seems like it only needs a backlink and maybe a wordier rationale, but it has a source and meets the other criteria. MBisanz ^talk 02:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Done, thanks MBisanz ^talk 19:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol

		The Barnstar of Good Humour
		This is for you for making some hilarious comments, especially, the use of this image that you created several times. Thanks for lightening up this encyclopedia! -- penubag  11:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Quick question, how do you change the color of your sig so often? Is this an automated process or do you just change it daily? Also, why are some random letters a different color? I think this adds interest and uniqueness.-- penubag  11:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Acces_Yea_Community_Education. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TheLoneAmigo (talk) 13:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Lists of disputed images by category

Hi, could you update your lists of DVD covers and posters because I have fixed a lot of the images in those lists. Thank you! Bláthnaid 15:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, these lists are ready for deletion. Bláthnaid 09:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wu-Tang Clan logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wu-Tang Clan logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Alien 5

Hello, a few weeks ago you protected Alien 5 from being created. I was hoping you could make the article a redirect to Alien vs. Predator (film)#Alien 5 and sequel (which i rewrote past few days). The section explains what happened to Alien 5, how the previous directors showed interest, a concept for the story, and how the film isn't being made anymore because of AVP. M3tal H3ad (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. M3tal H3ad (talk) 07:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

lol fakery

At least it's not as bad as when a picture of a wax model of Pavarotti was posted on the Main Page when he died! --Stephen 07:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Australian Army training Team Vietnam Insignia

Why did you instantly delete this image when I had stated in the fair use rationale that it's use in the article Australian Army Training Team Vietnam had been granted by the copyright owner? Rac fleming (talk) 11:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear East718, my sincere thanks for your support (and your help afterwards) in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget. 16:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Facepalm

Hi, could you restore this to my userspace? Thanks, 141.213.150.181 (talk) 01:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 01:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC) (oops)

Wikilinking Cash Warren

Hi. In your opinion, which aspect of Wikipedia:Red link provides a rationale for wikilinking Cash Warren? The Intro of that policy page states: "Red links should not be created for topics that will never have articles, such as a celebrity's romantic interest (who is not a celebrity in his or her own right).. Conversely, I don't see anything listed further below in that page that would justify redlinking him. What is your view on this? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Courtesy blanking

Thanks, a much better template -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Nicolas Cage semi-protection request

Hi East718,

Thanks for sprotecting Nicolas Cage per my request. It's been a week since sprotection expired and the problems continue [3] [4] [5] (all different IPs). Might I suggest indefinite semi-protection?

Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 15:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

OTRS for photos

Please undelete Image:Bracha Lichtenberg Ettinger - 2007.jpg and Image:Bracha Ettinger, Matrix - Family Album series,n.3, 2001.jpg per User_talk:The_Evil_Spartan#Asking_for_help. Thanks! The Evil Spartan (talk) 21:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed rationale

My concern is over this edit of yours. Per WP:NFCC, a rationale must have a link to which article it is fair use in and a rationale for every use (and in this case it has to have 3 rationales for usage). You removed it stating it has a rationale. That is true, but the rationale does not specify which article that rationale is written for and then there are two missing rationales for the other articles it is included on. Please re-review your edit again and review WP:NFCC for furthur reasoning on why that is not a valid rationale. Thank you, — Save_Us † 09:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you have a horrible understanding of fair use if you think boilerplate templates are part of fair use rationales. They are absolutely not part of fair use rationales. I suggest you read WP:NFCC more clearly:

Image description page. The image or media description page contains the following:

1. • 10 (c) The name of each article (a link to the articles is recommended as well) in which fair use is claimed for the item, and a separate fair-use rationale for each use of the item, as explained at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. The rationale is presented in clear, plain language, and is relevant to each use.

It is most certainly disputed, at least upon what WP:NFCC says there. I'm bringing this to NFCC talk page since you insist that there is no violation. — Save_Us † 10:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

And if you think that is insufficent of an argument, have you read the template you even added to the image, Template:Non-free fair use in? It states the following:

To the uploader: this tag is not a sufficient claim of fair use. You must also include the source of the work, all available copyright information, and a detailed non-free use rationale.

That explictly states that the template is not a rationale and a detailed non-free rationale has to be written for each use. — Save_Us † 10:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Help me!!

To whom it may concern, I just recently uploaded a logo of my School badge that I obtained from my friends through the phone via bluetooth. Before uploading this image, I have already asked my friend permission to uploed this logo for the educational purposes (only) to be published on the wikipedia. However, after around half an hour, the logo is no longer valid. My question is, what is the right way for me to upload this logo, so that I can produce an article about my school? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Syfuel (talk • contribs)

Pontiac Montana

Would taking this to Arbitration be a good solution?? --Solumeiras ^talk 17:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, could you take a look at this?

I'm having trouble getting some appropriate action on this: WP:AN/I#Repeated incivility by User:WebHamster. If you could take a look I'd really appreciate it. Thanks! Equazcion •✗/C • 20:19, 17 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Your response at ANI troubles me. If you were just having a bad day then ignore this, but if not, then I ask that you please point out to me where you feel I acted inappropriately. This user has acted disruptively and against policy and I'm attempting to prevent this from recurring. Just because I'm engaged in a dialog with this person does not mean this is just some silly tiff and we're both just as much to blame. Also please see the user's response to that warning Jayron32 issued: [6]. Equazcion •✗/C • 07:04, 18 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it :) Equazcion •✗/C • 18:07, 18 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Have you had a chance to look into this at all? At this point I'm trying to just ignore him, but he just keeps on hammering away at every one of my comments, even when I'm addressing other people, see this and this. He's belligerent or unresponsive on his talk page when either I or anyone else tries to warn him about it. I'd appreciate any advice you can give me on how to deal with this. Thanks. Equazcion •✗/C • 04:09, 22 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Re: rollback

Just haven't bothered making the request yet. Will do right now. Kesac (talk) 22:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

image:cfgvlogo.jpg

why did you delete this image? i actually work for the shows owners and they asked me to upload the image to put on the wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Firsttvasst (talk • contribs) 01:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Might want to have a talk with user:Young Texas Talent

I'm not sure if he's just test editing or what, but that sort of thing can get him in trouble eventually. HalfShadow (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Master Passion Greed

Greetings! You recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master Passion Greed for Master Passion Greed with the decision of delete and salt. However the protection didn't seem to stick as Painjoiker has, once again, recreated the article with the false information. Thanks! Rehevkor (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Rehevkor (talk) 18:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

88.42.221.180

Hi East718. Could you be a bit more specific about 88.42.221.180 [7]? It looks closed to me. It will also help anyone checking it in the future. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Well that's strange, I'm not getting anything at all. Maybe it's rebooting. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Undelete YBR-125_Blue_Ukraine.JPG

Permission granted by picture author.

Nchurmdaz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nchurmdaz (talk • contribs)

This is a picture of bike I'm about to buy. Permision for publishing this image came from it's author, Alexander, who is a current owner of this bike. This pic was made as a part of pre-sale preparation. I might give a 100% warranty that no claims would ever be made on behalf of this image copyright. The image may be also found here: http://ybrclub.com/showthread.php?t=2764 (the ongoing discussion centers around a vehicle pictured) --Nchurmdaz (talk) 02:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

My God! He doesn't even know what's that! :D--Nchurmdaz (talk) 02:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

King fisher322 (talk · contribs)

I was about to reply when you reverted yourself. I have added that user to a checkuser request. Obviously, it needs to be determined whether this is the same person or whether the Acuhill25/Pinestreet vandal is simply looking into my contributions and pulling out my comment from this page.--B (talk) 06:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Images

In User:East718/DFUI/Logos are you picking up the contents of Category:Disputed non-free images as of 15 January 2008? MBisanz ^talk 07:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Okey, looks like a new mega-cat Category:Disputed non-free images as of 21 January 2008, can that be included in ur DFUI scan? And Jan 2 can be dropped now that the backlog's gone. MBisanz ^talk 19:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Your recent response

Hi there..

with reference to this, i agree with refusal for protection, but am unable to understand edit warring can you point out the specific edit which constitute that ?

Thank You --Cult free world (talk) 09:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

JUSTIN DILLON

Dear East718

Can you please explain why you deleted this page: 00:02, 23 December 2007 East718 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Justin Dillon" ‎ (Uncontested proposed deletion)

Justin Dillon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.106.3 (talk • contribs)

Hi! The article was tagged for proposed deletion, which means that it would be deleted in five days if nobody objected. The concern with this specific article was that it was a "not notable vanity page created by the article subject" - the article looked like a résumé to me and I agreed. If you disagree with the deletion, please start a discussion over at deletion review. east.718 at 19:25, January 19, 2008

Cross cat

Could you cross-tab images Category:Brands of the World with Category:All non-free media, Category:All non-free Logos, Category:Non-free Logos. Then any that appear in the first and one of the last three, be scanned with a BCB-like checker for compliance, and dropped into a subcat Category:Brands of the World disputed? These all have reliable sources, and just need human overuse screening, backlinking, rationaling. MBisanz ^talk 21:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

User:East718/DFUI/BOTW is done and can be deleted. Thanks. MBisanz ^talk 05:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:SteveVaught.jpg

I don't understand how this image doesn't qualify as fair use. Please explain why my rationale was bad, and how could I find a proper fair-use image? Thanks. --UsaSatsui (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try that. Thanks. --UsaSatsui (talk) 00:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Sniggeroo

How is that a violation of the username policy? It refers to laughter. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 01:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. And just think how stupid i'm gonna feel if they turn out to be a vandal. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 01:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Image tracker lists and academic journal articles

How do your image tracker lists work? I spotted a load of academic journal coversin User:East718/DFUI/Magazine covers, and I notified the relevant WikiProject, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals#Image rationales. I do some work over there, so I'll fix those images if another editor doesn't get to them first. What I was wondering was how your tracker works. Can it be tweaked to identify groups of images like that? Carcharoth (talk) 04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Maint...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For above the bar dedication, thru continued and continuing maintainer tasks; I Mercury, award you the "Working Person's Barnstar" Mercury at 04:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 04:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

124.217.251.166

I see you just blocked User talk:124.217.251.166 indef today as a zombie computer, the same Ip was spamming on my wiki, and I have blocked indef, I was wondering, are these zombie Ips a result of malicious computing? I don't seem to understand how it all works. 81.153.223.216 (talk) 17:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The computer behind that IP was part of a botnet used by the black hat SEO tool XRumer - you should deal with such spambots by blocking them and protecting their targets from recreation. The only reason this isn't done on enwiki is because there are adminbots which stop such spam on sight. Hope this helps! east.718 at 18:19, January 20, 2008

Deletion Review for GPS satellite/Launch

An editor has asked for a deletion review of GPS satellite/Launch. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - I originally nominated this page for speedy deletion under G6, which you closed. I have since withdrawn that nomination in light of new practices with regard to these templates, which I am attempting to retrospectively apply to two deleted templates, which may be useful under the new system. If you are interested in any way, please see this page. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 19:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I fulfilled this non-controversial request and asked the user to please talk to deleting admins before filing a delrev in the future. JERRY ^talk _contribs 20:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Various image deletions

The recent deletion of several Red Hot Chili Peppers’ album covers was pretty unnecessary. It would have made things less complicated if you had simply alerted the talk page of WP:RHCP. I would have then added the proper fair use tags, instead of being forced to re-add and re-upload everything. NSR77 ^T_C 20:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 21:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Image of Anthony Miner

Hi. I uploaded an image of Anthony Miner, but you deleted it. He is a friend of mine and asked me to upload the image and write an article about him (he works for the show Heroes). He gave me permission to use the image. How do I go about noting this permission properly? - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• I'll go ahead and write the article. How does Anthony go about releasing the image under a different license (such as the GFDL or CC-BY-SA)? - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing

Is there a way to take this list User:East718/DFUI/Logos and split it into sublists. List 1 would have all images that have the terms "www" "http" ".com" ".org" ".net" ".gov" in them (meaning they have a linkable source). List 2 would be all other images. List 2 could then be hosed and list 1 would be focused on to vet for overuse, backlinking. MBisanz ^talk 03:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've pulled User:East718/DFUI/Logos/custom into [8] where I've started work on it (Done with all non-radio/tv images). Delete away (I know your DFUI subspace is popular). MBisanz ^talk 04:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

bad fair use justifications?

Hi, I saw that you deleted Image:Pic moo3 wotc.jpg noting a bad justification by uploader. I'm the user who tagged the img.

I would like your opinion on what to do about two other images that were tagged and have since had what, I suspect may be, similar bad justifications added. They are: Image:FR1ModuleCover.jpg and Image:BeholderGBA.jpg; see these diffs: [9] [10].

Please also consider the rational on Image:Greyhawk Supplement 1975.jpg re its use in Beholder.

My concern is not that these images may reasonably be used in the articles about the books/games they are cover shots of, but that they are being justified for use in other articles about the subjects of the art portion of the covers. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I see that you removed the images from use on the page, however the (bad) justifications are still present on the image pages (Image:FR1ModuleCover.jpg & Image:BeholderGBA.jpg). I am tempted to simply remove them citing your diff, but it may be more appropriate to use {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}} — which has recently been tried and resulted in the bad justifications being added in the first palace. I'll wait for a comment (or action) from you and not do anything about this today. This whole concern re D&D articles issues is contentious and I'm looking for solid grounds for action. re the 1975 image, I take it you mean that the Beholder#Publishing history section and the new rational may be reasonable (which I would have no issue with). Thanks again, Jack Merridew 04:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; for the link, too; I've bookmarked it and will look into it. And I think I, just fix-up the other one. --Jack Merridew 05:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire40.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire40.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire41.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire41.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire43.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire43.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire44alt.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire44alt.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire45alt.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire45alt.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire46.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire46.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire48.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire48.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheWire50.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheWire50.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Tyndall image

Firstly, it would be nice if you could do the editors of this page the courtesy of warning them about your proposed deletion of this image on the discussion page before deleting it. Secondly, this image was created by another editor, who then put it on the page. As a new user (he has a geneological and heraldic website) he may have failed to correctly place his licensing agreement. However, had you given him fair warning, he could have remedied that error. Your actions were arrogant and rude. Please at least do other users the courtesy of explaining what you are about to do before you do it.Francis Hoar (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I hadn't appreciated the constraints you were under and my apologies for over-reacting.

I understand the problems with the upload now. I have uploaded the image myself, setting out the licence (which, looking at the correspondence between myself and the maker, were not as restrictive as I had thought) and sent the correspondence licencing use of the image to the appropriate place. I hope that complies.Francis Hoar (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Please restore PROD article you deleted

Please restore the Our Lady of Grace (Edina) article which you deleted so I can see what needs to be done to fix whatever you found to be wrong. Thanks. -BenFranske (talk) 16:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Viewing and editing Wikipedia while running scripts

Hi there. I'm asking you this as I think you run some scripts (image deletion scripts?) An issue at ANI involves whether an editor can view and/or edit Wikipedia while running a script. Could you advise on how easy it is for this sort of inability to arise, and how easy it is to get around? The idea is that editors should be able to respond to concerns and queries while running such scripts. This was an image deletion script running for 2 hours after a manual check. The thread is here. Any opinion on whether such "script-blindness" situations are common, and what the guidelines/workarounds should or could be, would be welcomed. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Quasar article missing image

You may want to fix the dangling image link on the Quasar page. Looks like you removed a duplicate image but left the link dangling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.85.232 (talk) 00:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

How are you able to delete 30-50 images in a minute? Do you actually check histories before you delete? Do you have bot approval or can you demonstrate consensus for this? (Let me guess: Script, no, no, no :)) --kingboyk (talk) 00:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Where is your user page?

You have a user page, but when I click on edit the contents are "Do not edit this page". You do realise that you don't own your user page don't you? Also, what username did you go through RFA under please, as I can't find any... --kingboyk (talk) 00:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Consider yourself troutslapped. It's totally unacceptable for an admin to hide his user page (I found it using Special:Prefix just before you messaged me) and absolutely outrageous that you should some sort of trick to make the browser switch to right-to-left formatting. If you don't want a user page, don't have one, but if you want one this is a wiki and it should be editable. Thank you. --kingboyk (talk) 00:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Your user page

I must apologise, a few of us got into a terrible mix up regarding the location of your user page. It's currently red. I promise to fix it up in the morning if it's still red then! There was a horrible mix up between admins after I tried to remove the hack on your user page which was affecting my browser. Again, I (and I'm sure the others) are very sorry and I will sort it tommorow if it's not already sorted by then. Everyone has been a good sport about this so I hope you won't be too mad. Again, sorry for playing a part in it. --kingboyk (talk) 01:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry as well, especially since I seem to have caused the major problem. I would like to see this hack in action though, if you have the time. Prodego ^talk 01:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like everything back in the right place and in good order. Now why did I want to look at the page's source in the first place? I think it must have been those green A's above Wikipedia. Pretty cool effect! --kingboyk (talk) 22:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

housing article deleted

WP says you deleted the "housing" article, but doesn't say why. All links to the article are now broken, and I don't know what they should point to. Shouldn't an encyclopedia have some description of housing, i.e. the thing that people live in? It seems sort of important... TVC 15 (talk) 08:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Image

Can you restore that "Image:Bulgarian Ottoman wars.JPG" image? It was made by me by linking together three separate images which are sourced which I can find. --Gligan (talk) 10:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

question

I'm impressed by "Administrators, feel free to undo any of my actions. Just drop me a note if you choose to do so." because i was think of saying something similar. do you think we should have a category: Administrators open to being reverted. the idea might spread. DGG (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, not would I want people redeleting something I had restored or vice versa.--the idea is decrease wheel wars, not provoke them. Let's try to figure out wording for a userbox.?? "If any admin thinks proper to restore something I deleted, or unblock someone I block, or unprotect something I protect, please feel free to go ahead--just please let me know afterwards. I know I'm not perfect." DGG (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for blocking that pesky IP that keeps putting garbage on my user talk page. I also wanted to let you know that I have filed an abuse report of the offending IP range since its a dynamic address. The abuse page is here. I'm not sure if I did it right, but all the information and proof of edits are there, that I can find at least. Again, thanks for your help in this matter. Milonica (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Probable Sockpuppet

Just a heads up - account User:Jagfan82 has been created today which is a probably the same editor as User:Jagfan28 whom you have indef blocked for copyright violations. Editors have same user pages and have edited same articles. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 01:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

LaruaWA11

Unban my User:LaruaWA11 account; these sock or whatever you call them accounts will continue until it's unbanned so I can use it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceventivious (talk • contribs)

What the Bleep Do We Know!?

You protected this page for 2 weeks on the 14th. Rightly so. Unfortunately, since then, it seems attitudes have only hardened. Right now there are two groups of editors on the talk page, both saying they are 'working towards consensus', but unwilling to work together to do so. I'm not assigning blame to either side, but I am asking if the page protection can be extended until some signs of progress show in the discussion. The way it looks to me, the edit-warring is just going to start right up again as soon as the page is no longer protected. Dlabtot (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

OUCH!

[11] My beautiful toes! naw, I'm just playing. :) Jmlk17 00:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Now PeaceNT is doing it

[12] Kww (talk) 01:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Jawahar Shah

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jawahar Shah. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Arion 3x3 (talk) 01:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Czechs

Just to clarify something since you declined semi-protection without going through the history properly, it is not a content dispute, this user IP refuses to cooperate, refuses to discuss and adds false information, also adding comments like "get a life", and "fuck you", and thing of the sort when I prompt him/her to enter discussion, it's not content dispute since it has been factually proven that the IP is worng and he/she has been told multiple times. The same thing happened on the article Czech Republic. The person has also vandalised the article under the IP of 71.99.117.144 and 71.99.126.188 among others.--The Dominator (talk) 02:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It just seems like a dynamic IP, and there are loads of users who could confirm what I said as they have experienced the same problems with that individual. Sorry about the foreign speak, but he replied to me in Czech, and it seemed like the only way he would talk, note that throughout the discussion he continued to curse at me in Czech and I did prompt him to speak english.--The Dominator (talk) 02:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Mercedes-Benz VIN codes deletion

Hi I am writing about the deletion of Mercedes-Benz VIN codes. It is not my article but I was recently looking for it and wondering where it went when I couldn't find it. I then found a link that I had bookmarked in my favorites and found out it had been deleted. As per the Wikipedia article "Why was my article deleted?" I am contacting you, the admin first.

Thanks for your help, I'm not too familiar with all of this stuff yet.

--Pmb600 (talk) 03:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Raycashdelivery.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Raycashdelivery.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My first photo!

Hello. The first photo I ever uploaded onto Wikipedia was deleted just after. I have permission to use the image from the author who also has a commercial website for photos which is not related to me. If you can, please undelete this the files "Image:Bouskila Kornecki isr.jpg" and "Image:166349 Finn start 01.jpg". Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clare2409 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I apologize - and again

I guess I was a bit unsure with how the image backlog worked. I was under the impression that tagging the images that *still* don't have a valid fair-use rational with the I6 tag would result in their quick removal, thus getting them out of everyone's hair. I apologize for any problems my actions may have caused you. DJBullfish (talk) 07:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the revert there. The person in question made the same edit to my talk as they did to yours. I saw the edit to your page in their contribs list, and though I'd do a courtesy revert of what appeared to be vandalism. Sorry to have been a bother. DJBullfish (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thsoe 4 images from the January 18th disputed were the last four images left in that day, having managed to fix a few of the fair use rationales for the others left. I was hoping to get that day cleared out of that section, and for some reason I thought putting them in the speedy delete queue was the best idea. I'm sorry. DJBullfish (talk) 08:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Toolbar

Thanks for the help re: the thing above. Being a developer of sorts I thought you might be interested in this: I began a project to build a browser toolbar extension for Wikipedia. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Toolbar and let me know what you think. I'd be interested in your thoughts. I'm also wondering if you have any suggestions for drumming up interest in this to get more people involved in development, since I'm fairly new to browser extensions. Thanks! Equazcion •✗/C • 08:45, 24 Jan 2008 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Firefox extensions... but wouldn't bookmarklets achieve the same purpose? east.718 at 22:53, January 24, 2008

That's a distinct possibility; I didn't know about those. Equazcion •✗/C • 02:10, 25 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Carlotta Champagne

Why did you deleted Carlotta Champagne's wiki page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Didysik (talk • contribs) 08:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

"Oh that's just Libs"

Thank you for that. I nearly passed an entire piece of toast through my nose when I read that. :D although I don't see where reading, acknowledging and rm'ing a message... which was a "message blunder" in the first place... counts as a transgression minor or major... but anyhoo... Stalkers and trolls annoy the hell out of me. My Viking God stalker disagrees with consensus... disagrees with the fact that I edit by said consensus... and has been persistently trying to stir up anti-anon sentiment wherever he can to complain about me. I can't count how many WP:?s he has violated in his agenda? Sooner or later he will get bored. I hope :D . I'm just glad these sorts of "Doug and Wendys" are only allowed 20 minutes on their recess breaks to issue their complaints. I've reverted more vandalism in the past 2 days then he's done in the last year. Anti-anons puzzle me. I revert just as many "red name" vandalism-only accounts as I do IP vandals... sometimes more in any given day... and yet the anti-anons keep pressing for an account-only Wikipedia? If Wiki is still around around in 5 years will this still be an underlying 'evil'... probably... which is unfortunate because it goes completely opposite of what Wikipedia was meant for. But I digress. My horn-helmed stalker keeps using the words 'edit war'. I will just assume he doesn't know what an edit war is? Making an edit based on a community consensus... and leaving behind a detailed edit summary to boot??? I am baffled. There is actually a lot of "behind the curtain" talk that my anti-anon stalker is actually a sock, or meat, or meat inside a sock eewwwww! for another Norse "logo-ist" who has already been nabbed with his hands on another account's keyboard. The logo debate over the musician template has actually given birth to a possibility that 2 users are speaking via 4 different throats. Which is putting a black mark on the whole debate process. RCU's are almost as much of a pain in the a** as 3RR reports are. I hope reason (and account honesty) prevails. Sockpuppeteers, vandals, trolls, crufters, POV pushers, linkspammers and soapboxers and anti-anons are all scourges of quality and community on Wikipedia. Anyways, Libs thanks for your humour. I don't recall ever crossing paths with you before? So I owe an extra thanks that you recognised my range the most noble IP range in all Wiki :D Have a nice day!!! 156.34.142.110 (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You took the opposite route I did. I had an account with over 20000 edits... a few scattered FA's and a user page that been vandalised by "my fans" over 100 times. Half my edits were vandalism warnings on IP talk pages. But I always held on to the idea that the IP was just as important as the veteran user with over 20000 edits... like me. And when I saw an ever growing "anti-anon" movement... something I felt was opposite of what Wiki was for... I rejected my account I never wanted to be an admin anyways :D and sped off into the "purity" of anonymous editing. And no regrets. Thanks for the note. Have a nice day! 156.34.142.110 (talk) 23:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you help an old anon out? I am sitting out at the cottage (hense the non-156 range) and decided to do some good old fashioned editing. THe Mick Taylor article (one of my favourite guitarists) had been lowered into the realms of fansite. I decided to start a healthy "cotton-candy" cleanup and then build the article into something resembling an encyclopedia article. Problem is I've run up against a couple of newbie editors who prefer the fansite crufty version over the encyclopedic attempts. One of them is the fanbot editor who out the into into its "check yesterday" state. The other is not a regular. Both are "red name" editors. I don't know if they are the same person or not. The main one has some serious anti-anon issues(says he would contribute only if I got an account). He also may have some WP:COI issues as he claims to be an advisor for a book related to the topic. Can you help me in some way so that my contructive "do's" don't get undone by the fanclub? Thanks. Libs 142.167.73.151 (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Now there's an IP sock trying to buffer the cruft. Frustrating! Libs 142.167.73.151 (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Aha! Turns out all my adversaries were one person (caught them correcting an IP sig) I've requested some advise from a couple of auld mates as to whether an RCU should be filed. I have run up against a "false consensus" push trying to undo me. And posting very uncivil NPAs to boot. :D. Everyone likes Libs :D. Don't they? 142.167.73.151 (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

East718/Archive 9, I wish to tender my sincere thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 37 supports, 2 opposes, and 2 neutral. The results of the RfA are extremely bittersweet because of the recent departure of my nominator, Rudget. Hopefully I can live up to his and your expectations. I would especially like to thank Epbr123 and TomStar81 for mentioning that they were preparing to offer me a nomination. The past week has been one of the most stressful weeks in my life, and I appreciate your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need anything, just get in touch. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

She won't be taken out.

Ever. Give up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hextine (talk • contribs) 04:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Pink Floyd 68

East718; I think you prematurely deleted the image I uploaded by the name in the title. It is the sister image of Pinkfloyd_50.jpg and thus requires the same tags. How to apply such tags I know not, but perhaps you could help me? I know that this image is valid for use on Wikipedia. --Soakologist (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Special DFUI

Well it seems I now have an amazing 1312 image backlog at User:East718/DFUI/Logos that would fry my computer if I tried to load it as a visual gallery. Care to run the search script again and drop in a subpage? Terms to look for would be "source, from, scan, www, http, com, net, org, info, gov, co". MBisanz ^talk 07:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Works great, thanks. Now only 600 images to play with :( One of these days I'm gonna get someone with a bot to create a sub cat (Non-free radio logos) and move a bunch of those images around. MBisanz ^talk 20:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocking on user:Hoserjoe

Thank you for assisting with your actions here. Not sure why however but your block appears not to have worked see here for edits apparently made after your block was posted. I have unblocked and then reblocked. Cheers--VS ^talk 08:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• Okay yes my bad perhaps? I certainly see you point - I will return his edit - Your call if you want to change your block back - certainly not trying to "wheel".--VS ^talk 08:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough - will adjust back your block back though - I was also trying to be fair (and wish to be seen that way). Alt account should be blocked in my understanding otherwise isn't it just a sock?--VS ^talk 08:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed - thanks again. (Would have asked earlier but you appeared off-line).--VS ^talk 08:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Please restore OrigIchatLogo.gif

Hi, you deleted a logo for the older IChat (not iChat) logo. Please restore it. It totally qualifies as fair use, as it is the icon/logo of a piece of sortware and is used to not only identify a piece of software, but to distinguish it from iChat, the Apple product.

To wit.

This is an icon of copyrighted computer software. It is believed that the exhibition of icons to illustrate or identify the computer software in question on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content and Copyrights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodger (talk • contribs) 09:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Blinadrange

Hi East, you seem to have banned Blinarange from vandalism. To me, it doesn't seem like they engaged in any vandalism and were a good editor, the vandalism notice on their talk is from a bot and seems to be a "false positive". I don't know if there's anything else, but if it's just from the scientology page then it seems an innapropriate block.Ticklemygrits (talk) 09:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough East. They did seem to get stuck in awfully quick.Ticklemygrits (talk) 04:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

aaa life insurance should NOT redirect to aaa automotive club

AAA Life Insurance should not redirect to AAA Automotive club. They are separate companies. Please remove the redirect on AAA Life Insurance Company that is going to AAA. Thanks. --Mktgupdate (talk) 21:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Your mentorship of User:Whig

Are you still mentoring Whig? I ask because he, among other things, has filed a tendentious RFC that nearly all respondents believe is an example of vexatious litigation. Your input on his talk page, here, and here would be appreciated, as it seems that he is within a hair's breadth of exhausting the patience of the community. Cheers, Skinwalker (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Vanderhye Photo

Hello... I noticed that you deleted the image Image:Vanderhye.jpg citing bad justification, and indicated you had contacted the uploader 48 hours prior. I was the person who uploaded the image, at the request of the elected official pictured, and can attest to not being notified prior to the image's deletion. It is the same photo visible on her campaign website at www.vanderhye.com. She is an elected official and gave me permission to post her picture on the wikipedia article. Could you help me clean up my rationale to make it conform to wikipedia image uploading standards? Thank you! --IsaacSarver 01:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I was reading Criterion 12 under the unacceptable use policy you directed me to. Specifically the section that states "pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) would serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image. However, for some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career."

This makes me wonder... what constitutes a new free picture? If I used my own camera to take a photo of her at her office specifically for the article, and then uploaded it to the same location, would that be a free picture? Your assistance in better understanding copyright and public domain issues. --IsaacSarver 23:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem... Thank you for being patient through this process. I figured out that was a possibility because a friend uploaded a similar image, a picture taken by him, then released it under license on Creigh Deed's page. I'll do the same, and might try and clean up similar pages for current Virginia politicians in the process. Look forward to seeing your work around the wiki. --IsaacSarver 00:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa

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 17:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Need some help

hey East, if you don't mind can you block this guy. User talk:81.205.3.84 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marty Rockatansky (talk • contribs) 01:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Can I get all the deleted images from User:Whoasuckaa User:McTrixie User:RemembertheAFL undeleted? They seem to have left the project, left images with sources, but no backlinks,a nd the images got hosed. Won't be able to tell which are which till I see the undeletions, but will CSD any lacking sources. I've finished all the DFUI/Logos/custom images and am now branching out, thanks. MBisanz ^talk 03:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Much obliged, just finished correcting what I could, good 40 images saved. MBisanz ^talk 07:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Email address

Ah, I thought I'd removed that myself a while ago, but obviously I hadn't. Thanks anyway for the heads up. ≈ The Haunted Angel 03:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

TOR block of 121.7.90.106

Hey, I noticed that you've blocked 121.7.90.106, as a TOR node, which, it is no longer. I was wondering, if you'd consider either allowing me to unblock it, or, unblocking it yourself please. SQL^{Query me!} 09:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Lil Wayne

Hi East, I know you did a superb job expanding Dedication 2 after surviving AfD. There's a similar situation with Da Drought 3 and The Drought Is Over Pt. 4 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Da Drought 3 (2nd nomination). This is not at all meant to be a canvassing message, I just think it's worth bringing this to your attention. At the moment, I'm neutral with regards to the tapes. I generally favor keeping if it can expand and if it's official, but with all the mixtapes in Lil Wayne discography, it's hard to tell which ones are official. Spellcast (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

category:critics of Islam at Wikipedia:Deletion review

I listed the category:critics of Islam that you deleted in Wikipedia:Deletion review. I cannot think of a good reason to delete it, except that it is not clear whom to include and who not, but clearly this is the most appropriate category for people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders who became famous mainly because of their criticism of Islam. If you know a better category for them then please let me know. I cannot think of one. Andries (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jade small.png

Why the hell did you delete this image?!? --MrStalker ^(talk) 21:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Er, no it's fair use. And if you think it's copyvio, why the hell did you delete it per CSD I1?!? --MrStalker ^(talk) 21:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't help notice you didn't answer my question. --MrStalker ^(talk) 21:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Nah, it's not pointless, it got your attention. Does it matter if it's used in mainspace or not? The large image I don't exactly where it was used but the small one I used for my userbox which I liked very much. Isn't that allowed? Ubisoft as granted permission for use of shots of their software for any purpose, so I don't see the problem. --MrStalker ^(talk) 09:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Why erasing this ?

Hi, i just want to know why you erase my article ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Nicolas+Frespech&go=Go

It was just waiting for a tranlation of the french version ! It's not fair(e) ?

Nicolas http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Frespech

nicolas@frespech.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.246.252.228 (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Nicholas! The English Wikipedia has stricter standards for inclusion than the French Wikipedia, and you don't seem to meet those. If you still disagree, you can pursue redress at deletion review. east.718 at 21:54, January 27, 2008

Deletion Review for Image:Jade small.png

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Jade small.png. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MrStalker ^(talk) 23:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Image:BGE ART 02.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:BGE ART 02.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MrStalker ^(talk) 23:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

About Bishonen.

About this, I just checked the policy and noticed that it said "recommends," not "requires."

I still do think it's in somewhat poor taste, but yeah, my posting on ANI is a waste of space and a waste of your time. In order to avoid any of either of those, and further self-humiliation, would you mind if I moved it into the archives? ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 00:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It's been moved. I apologize for my poor reading comprehension and tendency to do stupid shit like that. It's been moved. [13] [14] ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC) Because I hadn't slept and have a tendency to read into things. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 10:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

More image requests

East, if it isn't too hard, could I get the deleted images for User:CrazyLegsKC, User:Vargklo, User:Caldorwards2, User:Buttreyfood, and User:Caldorwards4 to User:MBisanz/Logos? PS: I have no idea how time consuming what I'm asking is to you, so if it takes more than 5 minutes, just let me know and I'll wait till I'm an admin someday to tackle this sort of stuff. MBisanz ^talk 05:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll be hitting them this evening and will leave you a note when I'm done. Didn't realize about the confusion, but yea seeing an image in a non-existent ancient deletion category probably would've confused me. MBisanz ^talk 19:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok the images commented to the top can be deleted. I'm still working on the lower list. MBisanz ^talk 05:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Done, listed images can be re-deleted. Thanks. MBisanz ^talk 07:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Gripen pix

I see you removed some Gripen pix from the entry. May I ask why? They were new and arguably unique. Zerbet (talk) 07:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response...

Could we not can them at the alternative locaions and leave them on the Gripen site? They would arguably do more good there... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zerbet (talk • contribs) 08:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

DVR Poker Hall of Fame

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Poker Hall of Fame. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Balloonman (talk) 08:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Delete Governor Foster photo

I noticed that you deleted the photo of former Louisiana Governor Mike Foster. The info "claims" that the uploader (me) was notified more than 48 hours before it was deleted. I've not noted any such notice anywhere. Also could you please explain what was wrong with the photo info or justification I put as well as what would be acceptable? Could it also be that maybe you had this photo confused with a totally different photo of the same person that had VERY recently been deleted that was uploaded by another user. I never did get to see what was wrong that other photo. I can only assume that it was rightfully deleted, which was why I uploaded a different photo that I thought was within policies. Sf46 (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

deleted image

U deleted one of the image before I could even post the link for the licensing... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Amblem_HRM.jpg&action=submit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic of orion (talk • contribs)

Hey East

Here is a message about a concerned user that was accidentally placed on your userpage. the_undertow ^talk 02:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

My monobook.js page

I want to import a script. Can I? --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 14:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

TheJosh's Recentchanges patrol script. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 00:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Also known to download freaks like myself as:

importScript('User:TheJosh/Scripts/RecentChangesPatrol.js');

--Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 00:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm editing from my PS3' crappy browser, but I'll be using it before I wake up tomorrow, I'm sure. Happy editing! --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 19:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Fast_Times_at_Ridgemont_High_400.jpg

image:Fast_Times_at_Ridgemont_High_400.jpg was properly documented as a FU image. Why'd that get deleted? --evrik ^(talk) 14:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a question re: improper admin etiquette

This message was left on my static page. I have re-read the conversation in question and do not see where very obvious humour/sarcasm are uncivil. I carried on a very "conversational" conversation with an editor and ended most my posts with "Have a nice day", which is how I end many talk page posts. The other "conversationalist" was very uncivil in most of his replies and actually posted the comment "Calling a counter-vandalism tool "anti-IP biased" is like calling rat poision "anti-rat biased" ". But I can't see where the admin who chided me has issued any sort of similar post in the direction of the other editor? I am not so familiar with this particular admin. Are you aware of any "register-user-only" leanings? It is very "out of the blue", unsettling and very "Anti-Wikipedia"... if you catch my drift. I can be nice and rm the "no agf for idiots" note from my header.. most people already know that I don't Could you give me some direction as to what sort of direction I would take? I would politely ask the admin myself what he felt ws uncivil... but he seems to think my "polite" is uncivil so I don't want to stir up anything that would have a negative result. Thanks and have a nice day! 156.34.219.91 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Why is my picture deleted?

I read the reason, but still I do not get it. Should I explain the context of the article where the picture is needed? Thanks! Benjamin, Holland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.45.67 (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Do you have the name of the image on hand? east.718 at 21:25, January 29, 2008

Image question

One of the images I didn't add back was the Caterpillar Inc. logo, since it was commented out by Mike Godwin as an office action. In these cases should the logo itself be oversighted or somehow specially tagged when deleted (it was originally deleted as being an unused image through the normal process)? MBisanz ^talk 21:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Block of John Travolta IP vandal

Hi, I've just blocked him for 3 hours without seeing your 3 year block. DO you know something I don't? --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I was sure I saw a 3-year in his block log, but then I didn't know you ran a Bot either. No harm done. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 10:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Image undeletion

Is there any reason you undeleted Image:1129price club.jpg, Image:Brokerage retail 002.jpg, Image:Freeholdnj.jpg, Image:Lil JJ.jpg, and Image:Montgomery Ward logo.gif? None of the pages has an image attached to it -- they're just image description pages. --Carnildo (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Mistake at WP:RFP

The editors are not acting in bad faith, they are mistaken. The pages I listed need to be protected immediately.--STX 03:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Pong

Someone else cleared it up. It had to do with image backlogs. Thanks for the reply tho. :) Lara❤Love 04:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Undeletion request for Template Fiume

Hi, would you mind undeleting this one: it comes in very handy when translating articles from the Italian Wikipedia. Thanks. —Ian Spackman (talk) 09:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Fine - thanks. Ian Spackman (talk) 12:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

UFC 84

A discussion is happening right now on the fate of UFC 84. Because the outcome of this discussion could affect other MMA event pages and how/when they are created, your input would be greatly appreciated. The discussion is happening here. Thank you for your assistance! Gromlakh (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi. Would you please tell me a bit more about this block (Blinadrange). You mention checkuser but you are not listed as having checkuser privs and there is no clue in the user's talk page history either. Thanks. --JustaHulk (talk) 18:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

OK. Just so I am clear on the jargon, by "checkuser" you mean an admin with checkuser privs, right? Stupid question, I know but the only real stupid question is the one that you do not ask. Thanks. --JustaHulk (talk) 18:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --JustaHulk (talk) 18:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Checkup on my reversion progress

Am I doing a good job reverting vandalism so far? I need to know so I can know what I'm doing wrong and what I'm doing right. I'm trying to be the next RickK, see. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 19:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:PROTECT#Content_disputes

How long will Lyndon LaRouche be protected? Thanks. CM (talk) 21:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The article is still protected. Just want to ping you again on this issue. CM (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Help with Use Rational

Hello, I was trying to use SXSW_2008_logo.jpg in compliance with wikipedia's Non-free use rational; using the templates for logos. What else is required to assert fair use?

Thanks, Trabisnikof (talk) 01:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Image Deletion

Hey there! It has been brought to my attention that you have deleted the image Holycross.jpg. I have offered the new user help on the uploading process. I ask that if/when the user re-uploads the picture, you give him/her and I a grace period to work through the teaching and learning of uploading basics. Thanks in advance! --omtay38 03:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Picture bobdurie.jpg

In your deletion message, you state that you notified me before deleting this picture. How did you do this, as I didn't receive anything? JMB (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

you deleted my sandbox?

hello! why did you delete my sandbox? are we not allowed to have them? (really, i'm not being smart). Thanks! Sallicio (talk) 11:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Sallicio

• • WOW! I'm a dummy. I sure did tag it. I was just trying out the db template...I guess it worked, huh? Thanks! Sallicio (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Sallicio
• hi, again! i noticed you're an admin. could you check out the debate of my alleged sockpuppetry and give me your take on the situation? Thanks! Sallicio (talk) 21:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Sallicio

Help uploading images

You deleted the ULTra_PRT_testing.jpg image based on CSD#I3. How should such images be uploaded? The owners permission is generic: You are welcome to use these images which are of the highest resolution available, but we do ask that you use the caption: "Advanced Transport Systems Ltd. www.atsltd.co.uk". The class of users doesn't limit use to commercial, non-commercial, educational, or any other, so Wikipedia is in the class of authorized users. It seems that as long as the caption reads as specified, there is no limit to how or where it can be used. I appreciate any help you can provide in making it happen within the WP rules. Thank you. --JJLatWiki (talk) 18:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm trying it again per your suggestion. What are the odds of survival? --JJLatWiki (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Bollywood blog

Why have you deleted images which are OTRS affirmed? You have no idea actually what agreement was made. Do you think users such as Riana or Videmus would have have affirmed it if it was false. Bollywood blog was stated as being part of a major media corporation which distributes images to many bollywood related websites and owns film, TV and media related images. The contracting company was disclosed to myself privately and is was made quite clear wikipedia is free to use the images. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^$1,000,000? 22:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll trust you by sending you the disclosed licenser of the images. It is a Mumbai media distribution company and it was confirmed by Bollywood blog that the contractor can freely license the images for wikipedia. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^$1,000,000? 22:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Just some headsup - the "OTRS has seen and approved it" line is humbug. OTRS seeing it and approving is moot and besides the point. As is the minor fact that the license info on the site(CC-2 ie., non-commercial use) and on wikipedia (CC-3, ie., allows commercial use) do not match a full three months after it was promised that it would be rectified. The point is, the blog does NOT own the images at all! The blog has bootlegged stuff from even other amateur blogs, not to mention from professional sources. And I have proved this in the case of several of the images that were deleted 2 months ago - right under Riana's watch or perhaps by Riana herself. Sarvagnya 23:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Read and re-read that page where all the discussion has taken place. For your convenience, here are some diffs to what Yamla, BSF and Coren said about the matter last. If its difficult for you to understand the thread of events on that page, I suggest you start by looking at the history and seeing where each one stood at the end of the long drawn discussion. And while you do that, I request you to re-delete the images and the category pronto. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Wykagyl

Hiya, just a minor thing... We recently rewrote the Wykagyl Golf Club article (the old version had been tagged as a copyright violation).[15] I'd like to setup Wykagyl Country Club as a redirect, but I see that you deleted it a week or so ago. It also appears to be under protection. Since I'm an admin too, I could of course just re-create the redirect, but as I was involved with the rewrite (though I have no other connection to the subject), I'd like to proceed cautiously here. Do you concur that the redirect can be re-established, and if so, could you undelete and/or unprotect Wykagyl Country Club? Thanks, Elonka 22:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.  :) And yes, I was confused about that too, since nothing appeared in the log. All's good now though.  :) --Elonka 23:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Bbuenn

Hi East718, humorous block reason ;) Just wondering why you tagged it as a confirmed TougHHead sock, I think it's a Tile join sock? Regards --Oxymoron⁸³ 22:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

This edit confirmed what I had assumed some time before, that this humor guy is a sock of the genesis vandal, because of the usernames (5 or 6 random letters). The only difference is that the humor socks are created directly before they start to vandalize instead of weeks before. I'm rather sure this is TJ (who is back nearly every day with another sock), not TougHHead. --Oxymoron⁸³ 23:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)