User talk:RichardWeiss/Archivehistory

< User talk:RichardWeiss

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Endlessdan (talk | contribs) at 15:59, 6 December 2007 (Beard Liberation Front). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:59, 6 December 2007 by Endlessdan (talk | contribs) (Beard Liberation Front)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

If you want to find some historical talk please go here and use Ctrl F but be warned its a huge archive page and may mess with your web browser. A new search development in Mozilla Firefox is that we can search the editable html text with search. If you have not created an account then do not post here as all ip posts will be reverted unread. Please sign all your posts with ~~~~ and thus avoided the dreaded SineBot

This user is not an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)

Hi

Hi Richard. I just thought I'd drop by to see what you were up to. Far more active than I am, I can see. Well, I hope things are going well in your life these days. All the best. Guettarda 14:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep, still here, ie in the Caribbean city I have been living in the last few years, still working and still involved in wikipedia, SqueakBox 16:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

What going on?

Hello SqueakBox. I was peeking at El Jigue's IP page (seeing how he was dealing, with his banned status); It's seems he's suggesting to someday identify those who he sees as 'Pro-Castro' editors. What's that all about? Should Wikipedian be concerned? GoodDay (talk) 01:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you give me a link and I'll take a look. Thanks, SqueakBox 01:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It's on his IP address page 208.65.188.149. Maybe I'm being paranoid (or EJ is), but this looks similier to the 'Daniel Brandt' troubles, Misplaced Pages was/is having. I hope I'm not over-reacting. GoodDay (talk) 01:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry as no-one is going to listen to him re the press and certainly there is no evidence he is a shrewd operator in the way Brandt is. On the other hand it is an attack by a banned editor against another editor so ideally the page should be semi-protected to stop El Jigue editing on it. Thanks, SqueakBox 01:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I was starting to expect someday a masked stranger at my door, with a gun. Thanks for the reassurances. GoodDay (talk) 01:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, sorry about that! Is it ok if I upload that page again with all the references I have put it to prove its authenticity? Take a look at my user page to see. I’m a bit uneducated in what can be put up on wikipedia. I would like to contribute pages for other professional pipers also. I just thought I’d start with myself. See Jack Lee (bagpiper). This is one of the world’s best bagpipers. Can I just ask why his page is not deleted and mine is? Not being cheeky here, could you just explain it to me? There is not really much on wikipedia about piping so I would like to contribute. I also would like to create pages for piping terms etc. For example B March, which I have linked to a wikipedia page, would explain what B March is.

I will not upload the deleted page again until I hear back from you.

This probably seems like a pretty basic question, but how do you create a box for example to contain several lines of statistics, and how would you situate in the top right hand corner of a page? Something similar to the MMAstatsbox, in Ken Shamrocks page for example.

Also when adding references how do create the name of the page instead of the page address? When I put a page as the page doesn’t come up when you click on the link so I have just kept my references with the page address.

I hope to hear from you shortly.

Ryan User:Ryan McFarland

Copyright violation in Chirilagua

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Chirilagua, by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Chirilagua is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Chirilagua, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, though it is a shame nobody felt able to restore the pre-copyvio version. I have re-created a stub and included the offending page as a ref but obviously without any hint of copyvio. Cheers fort eh ehads up. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLHum2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PLHum2.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 (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLNW.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PLNW.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.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLRB.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PLRB.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.

Okay, thanks for that, I have given a fair user rationale for all 3:

it is a historically significant logo of a notable album with its own article on wikipedia
the logo is only being used for informational purposes;
its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it represents the subject of this article. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Robin Hood External Link Removal

Hi SqueakBox

I was wondering why you removed the link to Tim Pollard's Robin Hood Homepage? It's not spam, is of interest and relevance and is certainly as valid (and non-spam-like, if you'll forgive the term) as the Wolfshead Bowmen or the TV series fansite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurgan5 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

An observation

Let me reiterate that I have a great deal of respect for you, especially your willingness to put up with a tide of POV-pushing concerning pedophilia-related articles. I'm sure your critics have considered asking you: ¿Por qué no te callas?. You've stuck yto your guns admirably. That said, I'm kind of concerned about something: I assume that your intentions were pure, but an edit like this could be seen as canvassing or worse. A blocked editor being requested to nominate an article to AfD (one that you had previously nominated), well, it doesn't look good, you know? The mess has been bad enough at Talk:Adult-child sex that I've mostly stayed away from it, but I wanted to mention this concern to you in the hopes that you'll see my point, which I present here without rancor.

As an aside, you and I have each had reason to become interested in the King of Spain recently. I backed into my interest because of Hugo Chavez, whose policies have been personally costly. I'm glad a head of state can react like any of us peasants, when provoked. :-) Gracias, Ssbohio (talk) 11:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I hardly think my comment to Angelocasio could be seen as canvassing given he has been blocked for a spurious afd, I was just being friendly and would much rather, for the record, see PPA go down the deletion road but this user couldn't even format an afd so I wouldnt worry.

I find your comment about Chavez about stimulates my curiosity, he has not personally affected me at all but I worry that he will. Certainly his inexcusable rudeness towards Zapatero (a politician whom not only do I respect but have had to pay a huge wikipedia price to protect his integrity) was unacceptable and gives the impression to cultured Europeans that all Latinos are rude barbarians) while his latests attack on Uribe and Colombia is equally unexcusable. Honduras is talking about contracting a $750 million debt to Venezueala over the next 2 years (the lifetime of the present government) which I find extremely disturbing and not a wise move, living in both the Caribbean and Latin America I worry that Chavez, because of his monstrous ego, could create huge damage to hundreds of millions of people including myself. Well this is my personal opinion, I will still be approaching his articlke with the samje NPOV I try to bring to all my work here. Best wishes. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Unacceptable

This is not "fixing vandalism." I realize you and I don't see eye to eye on a specific content issue--whether "marijuna" refers to cannabis (which it does!) or whether the word only refers to the drug's "herbal" form, but this is the sort of thing you discuss in edit summaries and on the talk page. You don't revert the lead to a much older (and I would argue incorrect version) and claim you are "fixing vandalism." That's very misleading.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 12:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Cannabis is an inclusive term, marijuana is not and the removal of hashish from the opening clearly was vandalism as hashish is cannabis, so my summary was not unacceptable and I stand by it as I stand by undoing the moving of the name to marijuana (drug) with a far more provocative edit summary. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Having pondered this a bit I am mop\re baffled. I presume you are not claiming that hashish is not cannabis, if it is cannabis then its removal is vandalism even under the Misplaced Pages:Avoid the word "vandal" essay. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Red links

Hi SqueakBox and thanks for your help in Colombia articles.. we've never talked before. Just one thing that I saw and I don't think you should do is erase the red links.. red links function as a reminder that there is and article to be written. Please read Misplaced Pages:Red link. Thanks again and cheers--Zer0~Gravity 01:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The thing with the Betancourt article is that I had redirected the red links back tot he article. That is why I removed them though in this case I do agree that these subjects are worthy of a separate article, especially the mother. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

El Jigue

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I think I'm going to present this on AN, just to get some more input and perhaps get a stronger sense of whether or not this user can be considered banned. Natalie 20:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

hello

Hi. I see you're still fighting, good on you. I've been away but I'll try to come back at least partially and help out. Herostratus 23:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLHum2.jpg

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLNW.jpg

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PLRB.jpg

Carrying on the way you do

Do you, too, dislike whistleblowers? 70.56.67.1 (talk) 00:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Haven't seen it but I have heard its a good tv show. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Beards

Who knew?? Thank you for this valueable piece of information. --EndlessDan 15:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)