Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:28, 12 November 2007

Archives

1. User:IrishLass0128/Archive 1

Grant Chuggle socks blocked

I have extended his block to a week and blocked both socks. Daniel Case 19:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I blocked all the socks, then semi-protected Santo DiMera and Tony DiMera in case he tries to do it again (You can still edit those articles; he can't do it anonymously, and if he tries to set up a new account he'll have to wait four days). Hopefully he'll start getting bored of this at some point. Daniel Case 15:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked that sock (for a month now, as opposed to a week). I will be extending Grant's block again for a few more weeks, although my patience is running low, especially after my post and advice to him late last night. We usually don't block IPs indefinitely (unless they're open proxies) as they are usually reassigned to other users after some time, the vandals give up, and it wouldn't be fair to people who haven't done anything wrong to try to edit without an account and find that they can't. Right now there's got to be a few other customers of his ISP who've been inconvenienced because of the blocks I've had to make.

I don't, personally, have the authority to formally ban him (only Jimbo Wales can do that) ... it would be informal if I got to the point of blocking him indefinitely and no one else wanted to unblock him. I may set up a long-term abuse subpage, though, if this keeps going on. Daniel Case 15:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I blocked the latest socks and have reset his block to three months (as in, three months from today). I didn't go to indefinite yet because he wasn't trying to edit the same pages and took his time before coming back. Daniel Case 15:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I see Yamla lowered the boom finally. But I doubt this will be over. As I indicated on Yamla's talk page, if it continues we may have to request a community ban just to make this even more serious.

BTW, don't threaten a range block casually as you did on one of the sock talk pages. You're not an admin (yet ... think of it that way :-)), and even among admins it takes some skill to do it. And because of its effect on innocent bystanders (so to speak), it is not a move we take unless there is no alternative (that's why I protected those pages first). As Yamla has suggested, it might well be so in this case, but we would have to get some consensus. Daniel Case 16:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I modified it to what I meant for it to say. That I hope they ban all his IPs. I wasn't threatening in any way to do it, I think he knows I can't, but you're right, I should have phrased it differently. I do hope that all his IPs can one day be banned, and I'll keep reporting him everytime I see him, but I know, as he should, I don't have that power and hope you know I didn't mean it to come across in such a way. Again, apologies if it did. IrishLass0128 16:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The bitter end

Grant has called it quits. Daniel Case 14:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

If it's true, fantastic. But I'll keep a watchful eye on the pages just the same. IrishLass0128 13:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Colaatje5

Hmm. This is intriguing. The edit history does show a similar tendency to soap opera articles, and "Colaatje" sounds like it could be something in Afrikaans (we know Grant lives in South Africa).

The procedure you're thinking of does exist — it's called Request for CheckUser. The process of making it is very formal since only a limited number of people have been trusted with the authority to do it since privacy is very important to Misplaced Pages.

And it is so formal that an out-of-the-blue request won't be accepted. Not without first opening a case at suspected sockpuppets. If you want to open it go ahead ... I am going to be out most of the U.S. Eastern Daylight Time day, and I can either do it when I get back or look over a case you've started (remember, Colaatje and Grant will have to be notified to give them an opportunity to respond). I did this once before, and I will warn you it takes a while for some impartial admin to look it over and decide whether a CheckUser should be requested or not, or what to do otherwise. Daniel Case 15:27, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I tried and just got confused. If you could do it, I would very much appreciate it. It is truly bothersome that nearly all their edits are marked with an M for minor when they are clearly not minor edits but in actuallity acts of vandalism.IrishLass0128 17:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

It's open. See Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Grant Chuggle. Daniel Case 05:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

MaryPoppins878

Hmm. This may be more suspicious. The account was opened after we started blocking Grant, and has shown some interest in South Africa-related subjects (Despite the outcome of the SSP, I still wonder. Grant began his editing during a break in the use of that account over the summer). Daniel Case 07:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Ever since I pointed out I had my suspicions about this user, they've slowed down. What I find awfully funny is that all the edits are to the Bold and the Beautiful pages and the Days pages and all are almost exactly like the ones Grant did. The adding of the age thing is the big one. Can we do anything about it? IrishLass0128 15:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

And in further developing news, new user M-townboy is making edits and if they are reverted MaryPoppins878 immediately changes them back. This is easy to do, using two different browsers, IE and Foxfire for example, you can log in to two different accounts. I did see the comments about MP being from South Africa. Can we get a sockpuppetry case going now?? I've also repeatedly warned both about their edits bordering on vandalism. IrishLass0128 17:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, do you want me to go to SSP and open one up? (Sorry, I've been busy, but I see this situation is continuing).

And actually, what if Grant's a sock of Colaatje? Daniel Case 06:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please, their edits are nearly 100% in line with Grants and they are only editing the articles Grant edited. As to Colaatje, they haven't editted in quite some time so I'm no longer concerned. If they pop up again, we'll address that. MaryPoppins, however, is editing actively unless they see me online, then they stop for a while. I do believe they are Grant, especially since they said they were from South Africa also they are adding ages to articles and that was his tell tale sign. Thanks again. IrishLass0128 13:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This is getting utterly ridiculous. They are using the same comments Grant used to make and using the same sources Hen55 used to. When I remove ages per the Soap Project and per Writing about Fiction, they revert the edits and claim to have sources. On soaps ages change daily sometimes yet they, much, much, MUCH, like Grant refuse to adhere to that. Remember the Colleen Brady issues? It's the same thing all over again. Help! IrishLass0128 18:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Soap Character Template

Saving for myself to use.
User:IrishLass0128/Soap-char-stub

Hi IrishLass. I moved the blank template to a sub-page at the 'Soap-char-stub' link above. I think that's what you were trying to set up. If not just revert. --CBD 18:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. That was very kind of you considering the level of pest I've been over this. I do appreciate it especially with all the pages I'm trying to clean up at this point. IrishLass0128 18:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. Sorry I didn't anticipate the impact that changing the blank template would have on you. Let me know if there is more I can do to help format the template for easier use. Take care. --CBD 22:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Ratings and stuff

Hey there, I've left more comments on the issue (just can't stop myself!!) but I just wanted to make it especially clear to you that I really really really don't mean to single you out or boss everyone around. I am very concerned about what I feel are negative trends in the soap articles which will lead to "ruin" (so melodramatic!) In any case, I'm so glad you're an active part of the Project and look forward to interacting with you in the future. TAnthony 17:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. That was very nice considering I'm being a little bit hard on you. I understand and if you see my edits, I'm generally in favor of and working on improving articles or running around protecting them from vandalism. I just want the articles to be good, better, and best, without spoilers and opinion. I too look forward to working with you.IrishLass0128 18:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Categorization of the Brady family

I did not randomly tag the Bradys as Irish-Americans. Because I am familiar with their history, I know that they are Irish-Americans. They are an American family of Irish heritage. Shawn Brady and his deceased sister Colleen are literally from Ireland, where all their flashback scenes took place (note that I categorized Colleen under fictional Irish people instead of fictional Irish-Americans, as she's the one member of the family never seen in America). Also, I did not tag a Greek as Irish. "Bo Brady and Hope Williams" was already categorized that way, as was Carrie Brady, when I noticed that most of the Brady family wasn't in the fictional Irish-Americans category. I agree that Bo and his children and granddaughter should not be categorized as Irish-Americans, because he is Victor Kiriakis' biological son. The same for Frankie and Max Brady, because they are adopted. -- Noneofyourbusiness 19:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you are not familiar enough with their history as you DID catagorize Bo Brady as such. Either way, the catagories are up for deletion and your random tagging is a waste of my time deleting the tags as overcatogorization. And to be "Irish American" both mother and father have to be Irish. Caroline is not, Marlena is not, Anna is not, etc. Just because half of a half of a person is Irish be decent, does not make someone Irish-American.IrishLass0128 20:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I assure you, I did not categorize Bo as an Irish-American. I didn't know that the categories were up for deletion, because notice of that fact had not yet appeared on their pages. Thank you for telling me. It would be best to wait and see if the categories will be kept before adding new articles to them. I am not aware of any rule that both parents must be Irish for someone to be an Irish-American. Working by the same logic, Victor Kiriakis' children and grandchildren shouldn't be categorized as Greek-Americans either, unless there's a different rule at work there. -- Noneofyourbusiness 20:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

As a pure Irish-American I can tell you, no true Irish person should be in a catagory of "Irish-Americans" unless they are pure Irish. I don't agree with categorizing Bo as Greek either. I don't agree that these categories should exist at all due to overcategorization. As the categories exist simply because someone was bored and made them up, there is no rule about who is or who isn't in them. That is the problem with random categorization, there are no rules but ask an Irishman and they will explain it to you.IrishLass0128 20:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably so, and you could probably also find many people who consider themselves Irish-Americans despite having non-Irish mothers, and tons of people with Irish surnames who don't even know or care about it. Which points to the problem of the category being subjective, an excellent reason to delete it. Now that I've given it more thought, I think you're quite right about that. Many people have Irish ancestry of varying degrees, so at what point do we consider them Irish-Americans and which point do we not? There's no objective dividing line that everyone agrees on. If the category is deleted, it would be good to nominate similar ones. -- Noneofyourbusiness 21:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

In all honesty, this categorization of fictional people is by and large ridiculous. What exactly is the point to categorizing fictional people on television where heritage changes at the hiring of a new head writer? EJ Wells is a perfect example. James Scott was hired to be a British racecar driver with a mysterious past. New headwriter comes along and all of the sudden we're supposed to believe he's part Italian and what? Did anyone ever know what Susan was? Not likely. That's the problem. And how funny does it look having a tall Brit categorized as a fictional Italian (if he is, don't know) but if you believe the new HW for Days' we are supposed to believe EJ is Italian. This is why I disagree with the entire concept of "Fictional Irish-Americans" or are they "Fictional American-Irish" because they are Irish by decent but American by birth. This is why the categorization of fictional characters with ever changing backgrounds is a odd concept by Misplaced Pages.IrishLass0128 12:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hello IrishLass, I noticed you filed a report at WP:AIV stating you weren't sure about how to nominate pages for speedy deletion. Perhaps you could read the policy at WP:SPEEDY, that may help! If in doubt, give me a shout. All the best, The Rambling Man 14:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh and one thing, if he's persistently creating inappropriate pages, give him some warnings before reporting to AIV. Warnings like {{uw-create3}} are handy for this purpose.--Alasdair 15:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. I'm new to reporting people who violate policy or make up new pages just for giggles. I may have to just assume he didn't know "notibility" or something. I could not find any reference to the character via CBS, or long time ATWT viewers. As it stands, the article appears to be a hoax or about a character that was so minor back in the early, early years of the show, no one has ever heard of them. All in all, the article has no business on Misplaced Pages.IrishLass0128 15:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Jenniferandjack.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Jennifer 10.jpg. The copy called Image:Jennifer 10.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Misplaced Pages's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 18:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. When using certain templates on talk pages, as you did to User talk:Soapfan91, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. AFUSCO 00:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

If you could help, which one? I did two things on that page, one welcoming them (big mistake) and one warning them. Which one was done incorrectly? I won't say wrong since I did try and do it right, incorrectly is far more accurate. Thanks for your help.IrishLass0128 12:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess it was your addition of the {{uw-create1}} template in this edit. Really it's not a huge deal, a bot will be along soon afterwards to "subst" it for you, but it is best practice to try to remember to do this yourself. All the best. The Rambling Man 12:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

A controversial topic...and the help with deletion nomination topic

This. Flyer22 17:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Soap infobox

Please don't think I feel offended or criticized by any of your comments, I know I have a bossy way of putting things and I know I don't know everything. I really do welcome and appreciate your input, even if we disagree. It's especially great to see people caring enough about the Project and these articles to get into discussions and disputes in the first place! And you make a good point, I don't necessarily look at things from the perspective of a casual reader or new editor, so it's helpful to have that input. — TAnthony 19:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Drake Hogestyn

What is going on here? You seem to be as stubborn as CelticPride, as you refuse to acknowledge the correct changes made when I started revising the article. (Personal attack removed by Firsfron). Also, I don't get your incoherent comments you left on Firsfron's talk page, as you defend CelticGreen and paint ME as "the bad guy". Do your homework (compare the quality of the revisions) and get your story straight. Rollosmokes 17:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to help here, but I will be reporting the personal attack you've just made on CelticGreen. I will also be reporting your aggressiveness to me. Your attitude shows you are acting "the bad guy" as you claim. I suggest you look at all the changes I've made, the total package, and you will see that you are being overly aggressive in your behavior toward other editors. Please discontinue your behavior. Not sure what you mean by comments on Firsfron's talk page. I checked my contributions for today, and there is no Firsfron on the list. IrishLass0128 17:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Irishlass,

Thanks for your notes, both on CG's talk page and on mine.

Neither the "petty" comment nor the "do your homework" comment by Rollosmokes are welcome here. The first is a personal attack, and the second is certainly uncivil. I've removed the former, just as I did with CG's personal attack on Rollo. This has got to stop.

I appreciate your work on the article, Irishlass. I'm glad to see you are willing to compromise. That is a relief. You know, I edit several television-related articles, but never soap operas daytime dramas, so have a little patience with me and we will work through this.

You mentioned this statement on my talk page: There is no official word from the show's producer or the production company, NBC/Sony, on the current status of Drake's contract or position with the show. It strikes me that this is a great edit, but it still needs work. NBC and Sony are separate companies, so "production companies" (plural) might be better. And on a personal basis, I try to avoid using the same word twice in the same sentence, so "series" could be substituted for "show" either the first time or the second.

I certainly do count the six edits CG made on my page as six separate edits. Those edits were made over a five-hour period. CG stated she was done with the dispute, and then kept making edit after edit, both to the article itself, and to various talk pages. That's certainly a mixed message. And I did "harp" on CG's use of the word "correct" in her edit summary when she reverted to that poorly-spelled, WP:MOS-impaired revision. "Corrections" shouldn't include typos and reverting manual of style revisions. This is an encyclopedia, not a battle-ground. No one should be reverting to a "CORRECT" version which includes spelling errors.

You are absolutely right about the need for citations in the article. Since CG has refused to edit the page further, perhaps we can get Rollosmokes to add some citations, not just in that one section, but all over the article.

You have made a lot of changes to the article, Irishlass. Many improvements, in fact. Thank you for your hard work. I would like to see a citation, however, for the statement that NBC and Sony co-own the series. I know Sony (in part?) produces the series, but I don't see anything indicating they jointly own the show. Gimme a link. :) More later... Firsfron of Ronchester 21:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Firsfron of Ronchester, I did try and improve the article and address issues that appear to be sticking points, the repetitive linking of SOD awards (Soap Opera Digest) and found a better way of doing in on the Ken Corday page by just listing the single header and a bullet list of the awards and nominations. This is both encyclopedic and MOS compliant. Interesting that as soon as I was not around, Rollosmokes goes back to his version regardless and then makes statements on the talk page that do not address the actual current content of the article. He makes statements regarding issues that are no longer issues. He's determined that that article be his and no one else's, including placing redlinks in the article and removing correct links. I have reverted this morning back to my last version because his tirade on the talk page is addressing issues that are no longer issues. He is obviously set on having the article be his way or no one else's and that is both a problem and a bothersome feeling. As to the question regarding both studios jointly owning Days or having a hand in it, you'd have to go pick up a soap magazine. Not something I think you want to do. Drake's contract is until the end of December, it is also known that he was still filming, but in what capacity is not known, could be a dream or a vision or he could be alive. This is why it is crucial that things like "position" remain position, not "future" position because he is still with the show. I could try and find an online article, there are many print articles that came out when Ed Scott joined and comments that "NBC and Sony brought Ed Scott in to try and save the show" but, as I said, those were all in print. Or I could try and screen cap the end credits for you tonight when I watch the show. What that is is my lighthearted way of saying I'll do my best to get you confirmation. Thanks for your help. Off to reply on the talk page. IrishLass0128 12:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Future Characters on Soap Operas

I wonder what is the policy (written or unwritten) about the notability of future characters on a soap opera. Are they important enough to warrant their own page just yet? Take a look at Charlie Baker (B&B) for me when you have the time. I am asking you because I notice that you are a member of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Soap Operas. Thanks in advance! --Alessandro 22:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

No, he is not warranting a page. I will tag it. Even if he gets on the show, unless he is a prominent member of the cast, he should not have his own character page. IrishLass0128 12:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sami Brady Article

Whoever makes the decisions for that article make B.S. deicisons. It is common knowledge that Sami gave birth to both her babies today and they are unnamed and living. How could she miscarry something she already had???? The information was factual??? SMH...hopefully, if anyone is going to edit that page, they'll make a decent edit to it, one that makes sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.28.110 (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages policy makes the decision. You need to look at the page more closely before making edits that are not a matter of consensus per the Misplaced Pages Soap Project. As for the "common knowledge" that Sami gave birth today, you are assuming that people read spoilers. Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball and until the show is broadcast, we don't make assumptions. And it must be broadcast everywhere. In the future, please sign your comments. IrishLass0128 20:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment

My comments were not abusive, they where the truth. Fonting my mind in other words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.28.125 (talk) 07:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, yes, they were rude. This is not a forum where you speak your mind and vent. This is a talk page to express ideas for improving the encyclopedia, not complain that you don't like the way things are done when they are done correctly. And, FYI, no, you can't miscarry at 9 months, but you can certainly deliver a stillborn child that died in the womb. IrishLass0128 12:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Soap box

Hey there, sorry if I freaked you out, but there are 111 articles in the Days characters category and thought I'd give you a head start. AWB is not completely automated, it makes an edit but requires me to look it over and make adjustments before it actually performs it. I did a little tweak here and there but don't think I "undid" anything that was correct. Sorry if I did. Would it help you if I simply changed all the {{Infobox character to {{Infobox soap character ? Also, many of the stub articles don't have an infobox at all, would it help if I just added a blank one to only those needing it? Let me know if any of this will help, but otherwise I will leave Days completely alone. ;) — TAnthony 18:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the Brady mixup, bad coincidence! I was actually noticing that there are a lot of stubs of past characters that would be better merged in a larger article as we discussed in the past, but was going to suggest that to you at a later date. You're probably right to do that one-by-one as you go through and cleanup the boxes. Let me know if I can be of any assistance. — TAnthony 18:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You should read the message I just left you. We are thinking alike on this, I can see a true need for combining articles. Since it's been discussed, do we need consensus or could I create the page and just start the redirects? IrishLass0128 18:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You know me, I like the steamroller approach (LOL) but seriously, I think for the stubs like Melissa and such you can just "be bold" and do the redirects, etc. From my experience doing the same thing with OLTL, you shouldn't get any resistance when you're dealing with old characters and stubs. Current characters may obviously be trickier, but you probably have a good sense for what should be combined and what shouldn't. Anyway, if Vivian Alamain came back, the article could always be restored and the redirect undone, right? — TAnthony 18:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tango1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tango1.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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages 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 21:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I already took care of the fair-use rationale for that image, as you may have noticed. Flyer22 07:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The order of events of the EJ Wells and Samantha Brady article

A new editor to this article (an IP address-editor) recently added more plot summary to it, which I had to return to present tense per Misplaced Pages policy for plot summaries. I also left a message on that editor's talk page about that. But I need you or CelticGreen (though I've come to you about this) to make sure that that article is in correct order of events. I know that the character John Black recently died, so a few things in that article are out of order at this moment. Flyer22 07:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to ask CelticGreen about this matter, since I see that she's actively on Misplaced Pages today. Flyer22 20:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I see that the IP User insists on her/his version of the article and doesn't understand that the article is about EJ and Sami and not about EJ's supposed nefarious deeds. I love it when you get people who are convinced they've seen something that hasn't/didn't happen. Thanks for fixing this. I'll keep an eye out when I can.IrishLass0128 18:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The main "Soap Opera" article and fan boards

It was my understanding fan board, message boards, non-official sites weren't supposed to be listed under "external links" but there are a bunch in that article. I removed a couple that were blatant this morning. What is the official rule?IrishLass0128 12:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The policy itself is discussed at Misplaced Pages:External links, which of course is both specific and vague; note #2 (unverifiable research), #11 (forums) and #12 (blogs/personal sites) in the section Links normally to be avoided. I think it's pretty much a common sense thing: a site where anyone can write anything without a source can't be relied upon, and I think your instincts are good. I would argue that there are instances where fan sites or whatever may be notable or useful or of interest, but for the most part the bulk of these sites have limited (if any) encyclopedic value and are increasingly redundant of each other. Good catch! — TAnthony 15:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Joshasroman.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Joshasroman.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages (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 Misplaced Pages 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. BetacommandBot 15:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Johnblack2007.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Johnblack2007.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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages 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 23:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

On west GG and El Modena

I saw your comment on Alanraywiki's talk page, and saw the mention on El Modena.

I'd have to say that if you put it in there, I'd probably cast a keep and clean up, but only because it has some sort of distinctive history as a former city that was annexxed into Orange. Another local (to you, at any rate) case in point would be Atwood, which is now part of Placentia, or as I pointed out in the WGG AFD, Eastgate and Factoria, down a bit south of me in Bellevue. Then again, an AfD nomination has occasionally been known to help clean up an article. =^_^= At any rate, check out WP:LOCAL - which El Mo seems to pass, but WGG apparently doesn't. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• The article definitely needs to be expanded then. It's a stub if there ever was one. I just think adding it to the OC list as a distinct community and then linking it to a current article is a disservice. The article needs some major expansion. The problem as it reads now references the high school by the name, not the real information. IrishLass0128 15:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kate Roberts.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Kate Roberts.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages (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 Misplaced Pages 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. BetacommandBot 02:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you bot, now, BYE BYE BYE! IrishLass0128 13:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

West Garden Grove page

I removed content from a banned user per guidelines. If you would like to find and source and reword the information about the government, feel free, but do not restore comments by banned members. Any banned member using a sockpuppet is not allowed to contribute to Misplaced Pages and their edits are justifiably removed. Thank you for understanding why this was done. If you can find and source the removed information, feel free to add it in, again, in your own words.`IrishLass0128 13:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• After the text had been removed, after the user had been blocked, the material was reviewed, verified and reinserted. Sources were added documenting the information added. If you have any question about the sources or the material added, I have already taken full responsibility to ensure that the content is reliably and verifiably sourced. Any further removal of sourced content (and this is not the first time) will be treated appropriately as vandalism. I can have no issue with efforts to improve the article, but I will not tolerate playing games whose only goal is to diminish the quality of the article. Alansohn 16:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)