| Revision as of 03:56, 5 December 2008 editGodblessyrblackheart (talk | contribs)404 edits →Kyle Justin← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:21, 5 December 2008 edit undoMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 22 thread(s) (older than 3d) to User talk:KoshVorlon/Archive 1.Next edit → | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| == Thanks == | |||
| Not sure if you want messages here...but thanks for the heads-up, I'll watchlist it. Thanks! ] ] 17:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh, I've finally seen it. I don't know what I was looking at last time but I feel it was a wrongful deletion on my part. The image is graffiti on a wall, and therefore it's too original for it to be a copyright violation. The colour's different, there's sufficient original lighting, and it's at an angle. It's a bit like using an image of a work of art. If it's not over 100 years old, then I can't use a photo of it; but if it's my own original photo, taken with original lighting and distance, it would be my own work. If you strongly disagree with my decision, I'd take it to ], but if you do, please notify me and paste this comment on the page. Hope this helps. Best, ] ] 16:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == "Say no to fair use" == | |||
| Have you ever considered that Fair Use is actually a freer system than GFDL? Fair use has a history under US law. Copyleft, as far as I can tell, does not. What happens if someone says "I change my mind?" I don't know - it hasn't been tested in court. More importantly, of course, we have thousands of images in Misplaced Pages which are tagged as GFDL, and ownership is claimed by a person known only by their username. If you were a company interested in reusing Misplaced Pages content (ie, one with real assets that made it worth suing), would you really trust an image tagged by a person known only by a username? | |||
| It's complicated, but I don't think that fair use is necessarily less free than GFDL. ] (]) 20:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Image:Laughing man - Chicago Sticker Graffiti .jpg == | |||
| I undid your tagging of this as a speedy as I can't see evidence that the image is a copyvio. --] (]) 21:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :No probs. :) I don't take it personally. I'll make a statement in a second. Best, ] ] 13:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I think you left a message on the wrong talk page there chief. ;-) --] ] 19:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==My recent edits== | |||
| So I made an none constructive edit to my own user page. Are you having a laugh? Please explain what i did wrong and explain how it was none constructive. ] (]) 16:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Warning? == | |||
| What vandalism did I do on ]? I simply warned him/her for removing a SD template for a vandalism page they created. ] 18:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Not a problem. :) ] 18:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Misplaced Pages Articles == | |||
| Hi, Misplaced Pages articles are intended to be the products of teamwork. No article should be owned by one Misplaced Pages editor in particular. Am I correct about this? Thanks. ] (]) 18:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Vandalism warnings == | |||
| Hello! | |||
| I noticed that you have been placing vandalism warnings on some editors' talk pages after some edits that couldn't really be considered vandalism. Here are some examples: | |||
| * was placed on the editor's page in regards to of his. That edit was constructive. | |||
| * with regards to this editor's edits on article ]. He made no non-constructive edits there. | |||
| Also, barring some other aggravating circumstance, 1 warning is usually enough for 1 non-constructive edit. You have placed several warnings on user's talk pages after they were already warned about that edit. Examples: , , , and others. | |||
| Please be careful to check if a warning has been placed on the userpage already and, if it has, consider the user properly warned until their next non-constructive edits. Adding to that, if some other than yourself actually reverted the vandalism edit, chances are that they will be the one to place the warning on the vandal's talk page anyways so just keep an eye out for that. | |||
| But the most important thing to remember, by far, is to make as certain as you possibly can to never incorrectly accuse someone of vandalism. When in doubt, refer to ], the official Misplaced Pages policy on vandalism to help you determine if it is or if it isn't vandalism or feel free to ask someone for a second opinion. | |||
| Thanks! ] <small>(] • ])</small> 17:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm sorry, but I hope the fact that I incorrectly wrote ''user<nowiki>'</nowiki>s'' instead of ''users<nowiki>'</nowiki>'' doesn't change the fact that , , , were warnings placed by you on other users' talk pages after they were already warned about a specific edit. You've been duplicating warnings and that's what I was trying to say. Check those links and you'll see what I'm talking about. | |||
| :Also, I'm afraid that edit is not vandalism. It's not sourced, it may be a BLP violation but it's not vandalism even though warning stated that it was. ] requires an edit to be made ''in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages'' which the above edit fails to prove to obviousness of such an intent. | |||
| :I'm not trying to be a dick either but your warnings were incorrectly placed and I was trying to nicely inform you of that. Please do be more careful in the future. ] <small>(] • ])</small> 18:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hey there! | |||
| ::No intention of beating a dead horse but I want to come back to edit. First of all, the subject of the article is dead, therefore, ] doesn't exactly apply here as strictly as it would if he were alive. Second, many men have female sounding nicknames and it shouldn't be immediately assumed that it's derogatory if a statement like that is made. A simple two step process might have led you to find out that there was no vandalism in that edit. In the first step, you could notice that the article, even before the editor in question got to it, mentions racing stables named ''Eve Stud Ltd'' after which the editor suggests that ''Eve'' is the male owner's nickname. In the second step, you could perform a Google search from which you might come across article which specifically states ''In India Sir Victor raced under the pseudonym of 'Mr Eve'. When he established a stud at Newmarket he named it the Eve Stud.'' I agree that the above editor should have provided the reference but there are other ways to deal with a situation like that. Accusing him of vandalism is the most incorrect way possible because that's as ] as one can get towards a newcomer. | |||
| ::Anyways, I'm glad you see my point of why we need to be careful about things like these. | |||
| ::Peace! ] <small>(] • ])</small> 19:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == WikiGoon == | |||
| I moved it to the Extended Fauna list, where new discoveries belong (See ]). But if you were to kick some earnings upstairs, we could talk ;p ] (]) 18:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == CarolSpears == | |||
| Trivial changes are not protection, and she did not always make said changes: for instance, look at the sentence in the first comparison beginning "Lake Kimilili is surrounded by sparse C3 shrubland dominated by Alchemilla, Helichrysum, and Dendrosenecio..." That's a very long passsage where the changes are as likely as not accidental, as that book cannot be copy-pasted from. The third diff has one complete sentence, unchanged at all, and one sentence that is simply slighly abridged from the original. ] (]) 16:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC) Nor did I show everything. Look at the Google cache of Agrostis gigantea and you'll find a lot more copyvio than I quoted: | |||
| {| | |||
| |- | |||
| | | |||
| | | |||
| |- | |||
| |'''The preference is full sun, moist to mesic conditions, and a loam or clay-loam soil. This grass adapts well to worn-out soil in agricultural fields.''' | |||
| |'''The preference is full sun, moist to mesic conditions, and a loam or clay-loam soil. This grass adapts well to worn-out soil in agricultural fields.''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |'''It has a circumpolar distribution, occurring as a''' now '''native grass in both North America and Eurasia.''' | |||
| |'''It has a circumpolar distribution, occurring as a native grass in both North America and Eurasia.''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |'''The wind-pollinated flowers attract few insects. The caterpillars of several skippers feed on the foliage of Redtop, including Amblyscirtes vialis (Common Roadside Skipper), Hesperia leonardus (Leonard's Skipper), Hylephila phyleus (Fiery Skipper), and the introduced Thymelicus lineola (European Skipper). The caterpillars of the moth Leucania pseudargyria (False Wainscot) feed on Agrostis spp. (Bentgrasses). The seeds are eaten by the Field Sparrow to a limited extent, while the Cottontail rabbit occasionally browses on the foliage. Redtop is quite palatable to livestock.''' | |||
| |'''The wind-pollinated flowers attract few insects. The caterpillars of several skippers feed on the foliage of Redtop, including Amblyscirtes vialis (Common Roadside Skipper), Hesperia leonardus (Leonard's Skipper), Hylephila phyleus (Fiery Skipper), and the introduced Thymelicus lineola (European Skipper). The caterpillars of the moth Leucania pseudargyria (False Wainscot) feed on Agrostis spp. (Bentgrasses). The seeds are eaten by the Field Sparrow to a limited extent, while the Cottontail Rabbit occasionally browses on the foliage. Redtop is quite palatable to livestock.''' | |||
| |} | |||
| In the end, the entire last two sections differ from the source only in a single word, and in having some footnote numbers stripped in one paragraph. There's similar copy-paste elsewhere. Please strike your comment, you were clearly unaware of the situation. | |||
| ] (]) 16:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Thanks == | |||
| I was perusing the ] stuff, and some how I got to ]. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, and wanted to thank you for lightening up my day a bit. Much appreciated, and happy editing, ] (]) 22:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Talk:George Carlin == | |||
| I'm not sure what AGF or NOTCENSORED has to do with it. ] --]]] 17:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Betacommand == | |||
| ''In response of your comment :'' | |||
| :::::Put your dunce cap on, buddy, because that's the exact situation I was talking about. Nothing was "proven", so I don't know where you came up with that. It's laughably absurd to think that the edit he made with the alt account would have been a tactic at sock puppetry. Everyone knows by now that Beta uses more than one computer, he even has a "Betacommand 2" something account for the sake of some customized monobook or javascript setting. When he made the edit with the wrong account he did so without hiding who he was. He posted under that different account ''as'' himself, acting as he was just moments before. Given the way people have been treating him, it's no surprise, whatsoever, that he would have wanted to make a new account to start fresh with. | |||
| :::::Just because he might have some problems with how he handled some past situations does not make him a dishonest user. You have no basis to say that he's done anything dishonest. He might be rude sometimes, be might be right or wrong about policy, but what you're accusing of him is completely out of character. You don't even have to like the guy to see this. -- ] 01:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==NAMBLA== | |||
| The conntroversial topics are always the most difficult to tag up. I have copied your comment to ]. Please remember to sign your post next time. Thanks. <b><i><font face="Times New Roman" color="darkblue">]</font></i><font face="Times New Roman" color="blue">]</font><small> (])</small></b> 00:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : You'll notice there is also an LGBT project tag on ]. He's not LGBT either! His article is within the scope of the project. | |||
| : ] (]) 21:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Recent edits== | |||
| KoshVorlon, edits like are completely unacceptable. Whether said jokingly or not (I honestly can't tell), it is never a good idea to suggest somebody "off" them self; please don't do that in the future. And incidentally, the correct spelling is w'''ei'''rd. - ] ] 01:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == re:TALK: John Edwards == | |||
| I think you might have accidentally removed 2 user's comments: both "Intelligent Mr Toad"'s fairly innocuous comments, and "MrKing84"'s quite rude posting. When I restored your deletes I didn't notice MrKing84's comment and meant only to restore Intelligent Mr Toad's somewhat on-topic post. If you redelete MrKing's post I won't object. (That said, this particular talk page does have a of somewhat censoring/undo-ing on BLP grounds which is why I was so quick to undo deletes.) ] (]) 23:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC). | |||
| == Family trees == | |||
| I got your message about family trees and I also received the edit conflict message. Please don't remove it or it will be reverted and taken as vandalism.--'''''] (]) (])''''' 13:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| I'm perfectly safe as long as you can't prove that you are an administrator, and my reason for that is no risk of being blocked. I have reverted your vandalism. And will keep doing so.--'''''] (]) (])''''' 16:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :KoshVorlon, could you please stop editing Andy Bjornovich's various user pages for now? I have proposed a block of this user at ], and I think it's best to work it out there instead of possibly antagonizing them any further. Thanks so much! — <span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype">]</span> 19:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| You forgot to sign your message.--'''''] (]) (])''''' 20:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians== | |||
| Stop trying to reopen this discussion. It was not the appropriate place for a deletion discussion, as it was not an article, and it was correctly closed. Do not reopen the discussion. - ] ] 17:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| No template, but you've now attempted to revert the close three times. The close is proper, as pages that are not articles (in the mainspace) cannot, by rule, be nominated as Articles for deletion. You have been instructed to take the matter to MfD; please do so. This AfD has been properly closed, and needs to remain that way. Thank you. ] <sup> ] </sup>~<small> ] </small> 18:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't have a particular opinion on the page itself, but it's not an article - doesn't matter what it is, or what policy justifies its deletion, it can't be reviewed under the '''Articles''' for deletion process. Pages like this are very specifically why we have Miscellany for Deletion, which is where it should go. Thanks, ] <sup> ] </sup>~<small> ] </small> 19:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I'll put it another way; if the page were actually deleted at AfD, it would be overturned immediately at Deletion Review on procedural grounds, since it's not an article. By my math, we've saved you several days of headache. Best, ] <sup> ] </sup>~<small> ] </small> 19:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| *I should probably draw your attention to the current AN thread on these nominations here: ]. –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 19:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| *Point of information. Any page beginning with the prefix '''Misplaced Pages:''' (often abbreviated '''WP:''') is not an article. There's a discussion about this on the Admins' Noticeboard and the general feeling there is that WP:NOTMEMORIAL does not apply to these two pages, but to articles. Respectfully, <font color="006622">]</font><sup><small><b>]</b></small></sup> 20:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Your "protest" link == | |||
| ... doesn't work, nor would I encourage you to keep it there. Do you really believe the closure of the AFD in question is on a par with the occupation of Tibet? ] (]) 16:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : As has already been explained numerous times, ] is not an article and can not be deleted at AfD. Therefor,the AfD was improperly OPENED not improperly closed. If you still have an issue with the page, take it to ] and cut out all the OMGDRAMAZ. '']]'' 17:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| *Replied @ my talk. –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 18:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> <font face="Trebuchet MS"> – ]]</font> 17:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sigh== | |||
| You might be interested in the discussion . ] (]) 18:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Please avoid blanking my userpage == | |||
| Hi. Please avoid . Thanks! --] 21:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Damien, you have a user page consisting of a copyrighted picture (your source is Encyclopedia Britanica). | |||
| :You can't have a copyrighted picture on your user page, therefore it was removed. | |||
| :If you disagree, please file a WP:RFC. {{unsigned|KoshVorlon}} | |||
| ::The image is 200 years old. --] 21:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == You == | == You == | ||
Revision as of 14:21, 5 December 2008
 Archives |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
|
YouYou play the oboe, you enforce fair use policy...I simply can't bring myself to dislike you with these two pieces of evidence in your favor. Nevertheless, I'd really rather you not vandalize my talk page in the future, if you don't mind. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 02:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC) MisguidingThis edit summary is completely misguiding! You revert your own vandalism and say "Undid revision 253906773 by Damiens.rf"! The whole project would be better of without behaviors like yours. --Damiens.rf 18:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC) Dwight LauderdaleI removed most of the quotes because it was started to read like an interview. Yes it feels more dry, but that's what an encyclopedia is. Check out WP:Quote. Quotes should be used sparatically. You did a good job of starting the article, but it looked like you were essentially took your sources and pulled things direct. It's much better to summarize the quotes. Also, the overall tone of the article felt (and still does to a lesser extent) like it was praise. The tone should feel less biased. heat_fan1 (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC) Don't remove other's comments at ACE2008ST47's comments were neither uncivil or BITE-y. He was simply clerking, and properly indented an ineligible editor's vote. Remnoval of such comments could be considered vandalism. D.D.J.Jameson 21:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Kyle JustinMy apologies on the MySpace revert, friend. Please don't take offense. Obviously, I'm new to this. If I would have fully read the Wiki policy's article I would have understood what it meant. When I saw "links to avoid" I thought it didn't necessary mean these links should not be used, yet they should be used with caution (hence, avoid), because they could violate copyright or some other rights. I understand why MySpace links are links to be avoided (not used). I disagree with this, however, so I will try to bring it up on that policy's talk page. My question for you is, for a group whose website is their MySpace page (this is not uncommon, I know of many bands who do this) what do they do? If their MySpace page is an offical band site and it is their copyright, there is no foul in my eyes. What do you think? I say this because, in regards to the Dirty Barby link you removed, that is the only official Dirty Barby website--they have no other offical sites. In the spirit of editing MySpace out of Misplaced Pages altogether... here are some other pages I found with links to MySpace accounts on them, have at it! :) Scarling., Jack Off Jill, The Breeders, My Bloody Valentine (band), Sing-Sing (band), Explosions in the Sky, Spiritualized, Spacemen 3, Marilyn Manson (band), Tool (band), Puscifer, Audioslave, Jucifer, Interpol, A Place to Bury Strangers, Eulogies (band), Dangerbird Records, Silversun Pickups, Sea Wolf There is much more where that came from. Perhaps we should start an anti-MySpace Misplaced Pages campaign. Talk soon my friend. :) M. W. Eilers 03:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC) |