User talk:Dtobias/Archive 2

(Archives for 30 Jul 2006 - 19 Aug 2007)

Want to be my friend?[edit]

Hey! Want to be my friend? :p --Hellogoodsir 06:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Dotla.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dotla.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Fibonacci 10:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Press and Radio/TV Coverage.[edit]

Hi.

I didn't know there was an special page for Radio and TV. Now I see there are special pages for many media.

Thanks for correcting my error.

--Camahuetos 22:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at talk:anarchism[edit]

were greatly appreciated. Any time you feel like contributing to the article would be fine by me. The article is far from well-rounded and has been shaped by much POV for 2 years! :) Whis key Rebel lion 20:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Been there, done that... not particularly eager to jump into that snake pit again. *Dan T.* 20:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a snakepit -- or has been. It's being watched now by a couple of new admins (I mean new to the article). Samir and Woohookitty. Woohoo has been very helpful. Things have a chance of changing now. A good chance. Well, think about it, at least. K? Whis key Rebel lion 00:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy[edit]

Hi. You contributed to the discussion at Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. If you have the time and interest, I'm asking contributors to past a brief summary of their position on the proposal here, thanks. Herostratus 20:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism[edit]

In that name of fairness I thought I'd copy this campaign message from Donnacha over to you since she/he is only sending it to those who are strongly opposed to anarcho-capitalism which biases the vote: "In case you haven't seen it, the AnCaps are trying to delete the Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism article [[1]]. Donnacha 23:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)" Big Boom 15:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:MyWikiBiz[edit]

Dtobias, I have gone and removed the comments both you and I made on this page regarding emails from MyWikiBiz. I think the anon who said we should not be raising it on the userpage is right. The anon may be MyWikiBiz, in which the purpose of communicating with him has been achieved. Since removing other peoples' comments (such as I am doing to you) is unusual to say the least, I am letting you know that I have done so and why. If you feel strongly you would like your comment to be there in the public eye, can you recover it from a history version and paste it in a form which does not refer to my comment on MyWikiBiz' email (which incidentally seems to have been quite different from yours.) Martinp 15:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tag for images[edit]

We ought to propose one. Aqua fish talk 23:31, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible enhancement of template {{Round in Circles}}[edit]

For the {{Round in Circles}} template, how about throwing in [[Special:Random|find another article]] so it takes the reader who knows where? ;-) -- QTJ 19:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It took me to the Miccosukee Methodist Church when I tried it... :-) *Dan T.* 21:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the whole idea. :-) To take the viewer somewhere else (anywhere!) really pronto like. Then, maybe they can find another cause to espouse, real quick, before sinking into the quicksand below the {{Round in Circles}} banner (since That way be circles). -- QTJ 21:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to the query you made regarding Trademarks etc[edit]

Firstly may I just remind you Dan, that it's not my trademark and secondly there are many issues attached to a trademark infringement on the internet especially the ones concerning the use of meta tags, keywords, links, framing on a web page which in turn can cause things like "passing off", "dilution" and "Initial interest confusion" among the potential customers who are searchimg the web with the trademark word for example BHP BILLIT0N. May I suggest that wet give this subject a rest Dan since its becoming slightly how should I put it...Oh yes, "a pain in the ass and boring", by the way what year did you "apparently" become or should i say were accepted as a MENSA member Dan? Fact Finder 16:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which MENSA test did you take in 1987 Dan? Fact Finder 18:45, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Germar Rudolf[edit]

Very good what you have done It is just evidencing that the German inside the Wikipedia do not know anything about what is allowed and what is not allowed. They are talking about things which they did not read and are only using sources from the www to evidence their fatal absolute "truth".--80.142.212.174 10:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Olaf Klenke Germany

You Recently Removed My Text from an Archive[edit]

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. You recently removed my response to your question on this archive page here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2006_October_22 I dont believe that it is fair or proper that you have decided to turn Fact into fiction Dan, Fact Finder 17:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you check the edit diff involved, you'll see that it was another user who did the removal, not me. *Dan T.* 21:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How convenient (shakes head), Fact Finder 02:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: .fk; WCWM; .sl; .gs; .jo; .ne; .uz; List of actor-singers; .li; .gw; .jm; .ml; Ashlie Brillault; .mw; .pe; .kw; .tj; .ky; .ye

Cleanup: DisneyMania; Cow Belles; U.S. Route 250
Merge: John Prescott; Stewart International Airport; List of numbered Routes in Oregon
Add Sources: Callan Peach; Wardrobe malfunction; Pop princess
Wikify: New York State Route 25; AllOfMP3.com; Meralco
Expand: Bas-Lag; Network Solutions; Route 22 (Massachusetts)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Categorisation of DOND models[edit]

Thanks for pointing that out to me! It seems I left the option enable after doing another run earlier in the week, on, as you guessed - Shopping malls in Wisconsin". I've cleaned up the problems now. Thanks M a rtinp23 21:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DOI resolution?[edit]

Hello Dtobias! In the Digital object identifier article, in April '06, you made a statement about getting the 'doi:' prefix approved by somebody, but it's not clear who has to approve it. Do you still have access to the information? If so could you add it to the article? Thanks, EdJohnston 00:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change to Common.css[edit]

Per recent discussions, the way in which Persondata is viewed by Wikipedia editors has changed. In order to continue viewing Persondata in Wikipedia articles, please edit your user CSS file to display table.persondata rather than table.metadata. More specific instructions can be found on the Persondata page. --ShakingSpirit ^talk on behalf of Kaldari 00:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rentamark.com screenshot[edit]

A screenshot without broken image links is available here. I don't know how to upload and replace an image with the same name, so I thought I'd let the originating editor do the honors. Jokestress 05:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

image source[edit]

Image:Dotcx.gif has no source. please add. --Ysangkok 18:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dot eu.png)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ~ Bigr Tex 02:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cznic.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 04:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Intelcom.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 04:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dotmobi.gif)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emmalina[edit]

I was a bit amused ot see that Emmalina's involvement got into your Wiki Whiners article. It actually goes back much further than that - she nominated her article for deletion, and later objected when I added her birthdate in on September 5. But I actually hadn't added it - someone else added it on July 2, and I merely added it to the {{Infobox Biography}} infobox. After all of the offending entries were removed, it went through AFD for the third time before getting deleted. Hbdragon88 06:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HB![edit]

Happy Birthday! Your birthday is on the same week as mine... Anyway, just thoguht I'd say happy birthday. :) Spawn Man 06:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks... but my birthday is July 4th... do you celebrate yours every month? :-) *Dan T.* 11:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol - Born on the 4th of July. Anyway, just trying to be nice... no need to get snappy! I musta gotten the wrong idea from your user box that says This Wikipedian is 43 years etc on: April 4, 2007. Lol... Spawn Man 05:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday.Ghosts&empties 17:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your enforcement of a non-policy[edit]

Your essay WP:BADSITES, by its own admission, is not a Wikipedia policy. Thus, you have no business "enforcing" it by altering other people's comments on talk and project pages. *Dan T.* 13:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I not the page made any "admission" of its merit. New pages start as Essays, move to guidelines, then policy, I believe? The essay/guideline/policy 'status' is fluid, and the true status is what reflects actual practice and precedent. Anyone can enforce anything that is applicable and 'right'. We do not support hate, or attack sites. Do you support in any fashion websites that can cause personal harm to editors here? - Denny ^(talk) 14:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That last question has a vaguely McCarthyist sound to it, like "Are you now, or have you ever been a communist?" And it seems like your campaign to suppress links to such sites is a witch-hunt. Personally, I think we ought to "know our enemy", meaning that it is sometimes necessary to read and discuss the things they write on anti-Wikipedia boards. It does us no good to suppress such discussion by banning such links. *Dan T.* 14:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Events can be discussed, but can you think of a single, solitary good reason to link people BACK to revealed personal info of editors here? NONE. - Denny ^(talk) 14:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Denny Colt is an impressive mind reader, isn't he? He can see right through the Internet into your head.

But seriously, that lot is determined to pursue the senseless policy of rooting out all possible answers to the question "who do they think they are" when it is asked about WP admins. Admins should voluntarilly give up pseudonymity. Its use has already done serious damage to Wikipedia. --Pleasantville 16:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're about to be dragged into an RfA[edit]

User:DennyColt is taking your name in vain WRT my case concerning misbehavior in the WP:BADSITES talk page. (See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_User:DennyColt) Sorry about that. Mangoe 20:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

arbitration requested - you are named[edit]

User:Mangoe has filed for arbitration about Wikipedia:Attack sites at this address. We are named parties. - Denny ^(talk) 21:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your note[edit]

Don't leave an aggressive note like that on my talk page again, please. If you wish to challenge the ArbCom's ruling, you're free to do so. In the meantime, it will be enforced. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Denny Colt[edit]

I have asked for mediation on Denny's talk page. His behaviouir is becoming increasingly virulent and making for an unsafe environment for the rest of us and mediation is a necessary step on a further process which I hope wont happen but if mediation fails is likely to, SqueakBox 17:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

aaaaahahahahaha[edit]

LOL. I was tempted to reply with something about a malicious Man in the Yellow Hat affecting bans on headwear, but I wasn't sure if that would be helpful. Milto LOL pia 18:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award[edit]

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your sterling efforts in trying to defend the integrity of wikipedia and treading a middle path through the Biographies of Living People and Attack sites controversies, SqueakBox 18:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool out[edit]

I'm tiring of your snide comments on the various discussions scattered about related to the attack sites proposal. If you are incapable of remaining civil, then I recommend you take a break. Thanks.--MONGO 21:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too happy with your comments either, but we can't always get what we want. *Dan T.* 21:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making accusations about editors, suggesting that I need to get a clue, etc. We can do without all that. I'm not your enemy.--MONGO 21:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AMBC[edit]

I saw your note on Talk:American Mutoscope and Biograph Company#Legal threats, and also on the other site. For several reasons the editor there appears to be the same person as the fomer editor here.[2] A misconception that the editor is spreading is that he was minding his own business when editors with an agenda started attacking the article about his company. In fact, he had been engaged in his own campaigns to disparage "competitors" and to even scores with perceived enemies of his father.[3] He was community-banned for legal threats, but his POV pushing, conflicts of interest, incivility, and other offenses were contributing factors.[4] -Will Beback · † · 22:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Fine work in addressing his points over there. -Will Beback · † · 22:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PPS: If your curious about the company's productions, a couple of their shorts are posted on Google Video. In one, "Duck Noises", I believe the actor playing the bartender is also the studio's VP and legal department. If you enjoy that there's also the similar "Fire!" -Will Beback · † · 23:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much at the end of my patience[edit]

What with friendly missives like this, I'm giving up. Mangoe 02:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kellie Pickler picture[edit]

Their is no evidence that the original author gave permission to use the file. The original author (Joel Telling) posted the pictures to flickr but I don't see any evidence that he cleared them into the public domain. If you look at the Commons page, a user named IWonderBR uploaded the image. And I see nothing saying that he had the permission to do so. I must admit. I don't have alot of experience with flickr. But I don't see any special permissions. Some of the flickr stuff has the Commons liscence but I don't see that on telling's flickr page, which is here. Looks like he's a professional photographer. And generally, they are pretty prickly about releasing their stuff into the public domain. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 15:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it'd be better to restore the picture and put it up for ifd instead, I can certainly do that. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 12:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mensa-logo.jpg[edit]

Hello Dtobias, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Mensa-logo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Dtobias. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 13:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RhodiumMiner[edit]

Dan, I don't understand how you can call Jeff's edit vandalism while ignoring RhodiumMiner's edits. Can you please explain this? Thanks --Duk 17:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI[edit]

Dan, your edit to the admin noticeboard wasn't acceptable. Dredging up unrelated crap, picking and choosing, all to harass and run down another editor. You should know better and I shouldn't have to explain this to you. I won't warn you again. --Duk 16:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

You are listed here: User_talk:Duk/SPTA 12.158.190.38 17:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC[edit]

I invite your comment here. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hey I like your argument on RFA, would you like to be nominated yourself? You have 7000+ edits, and definitely if you don't want to self-nom I can nominate you. Regards. Wooyi^{Talk to me?} 21:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I'm not sure I would be able to pass one of those... I might have accumulated too many enemies in all the controversies I've gotten in the middle of. *Dan T.* 23:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But it is an excellent opportunity to reach editors who don't take part in the actual discussions. They need to realise that sensible people can take non-orthodox positions--WP:the bastion of stereotyped thinking. I can say say it safely; I got through just in time :) DGG 05:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning! Really bad attempt at alleviating atmosphere with dubious "humour"[edit]

Hi. I just noticed you removed a duplicate reference in your BADSITES essay. I presume you have recently had breakfast because you have just had "ex a Bacon"! LessHeard vanU 10:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Please don't ban me...[reply]

But I will not eat Green Eggs and Ham. *Dan T.* 11:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)I can't ban anybody... I'm not an admin, and there's no way I'd ever pass an RfA now![reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Biz logo.gif)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. CountingPine 00:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Dottel.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dottel.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 01:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Dotpro.gif[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dotpro.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.