Misplaced Pages

User talk:Dragon695

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rogue 9 (talk | contribs) at 12:37, 6 February 2006 (→RfC: Formatting.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 12:37, 6 February 2006 by Rogue 9 (talk | contribs) (→RfC: Formatting.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Current time: 02:46. Purge page cache Welcome to Dragon695's talk page

on Misplaced Pages, the 💕 that anyone can edit

Messages

  1. Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). If you're new to Misplaced Pages, please see Welcome to Misplaced Pages and frequently asked questions.
  2. I will reply to messages left here below your comment, not on your talk page.
  3. Please do not reply to archived messages, but instead create a new topic on the main talk page.

Please add new discussions by clicking here.

Archives (in blocks of 30):

  • None


Welcome!

Hello Dragon695, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask me on my talk page or see Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question. Again, welcome! --Sean|Black 06:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for saying hello! I hope to begin contributing in earnest once I get settled in. --Dragon695 06:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

SC User box

Thanks for your help. I was surprised that there were none that I could find, so I made it. This my first template I have ever made.--Adam 02:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

pls check the talk page on this template.--Adam 02:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a great idea! --Dragon695 02:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
No problem :). Initially, I had wanted to change it is so that it would be the same height as the USA template, but you know, once I got started I decided to throw in the other changes as well. --Dragon695 02:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Not encyclopedic, Violation of copyright?

How does including the lyrics to a song violate a copyright and in what way is not encyclopedic??

I believe usage of the lyrics is not covered by copyright and even if it were it would be covered under a fair use theory of law.

Definition of Encyclopedia (merriam-webster.com): a work that contains information on all branches of knowledge or treats comprehensively a particular branch of knowledge usually in articles arranged alphabetically often by subject. 

(Headsinger 19:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC))
The lyrics were reverted at least twice before (check history). Misplaced Pages is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files (nor is it a repository of lyrical source material). As to lyrics not being covered by copyright, I believe the author of that song would beg to differ. Also, it is one thing to selectively quote song lyrics, it's quite another to reproduce the song lyrics in their entirety. Reproduction of written works of any type, in their entirety, is rather dubious where fair use is concerned. --Dragon695 22:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Re Uncle Fucka: Dragon695 is correct. - brenneman 23:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I second the above. Most people believe that "fair use" laws cover a far more cases than they actually do. In personal life or private websites, that is unlikely to turn out to be problematic. On a large encyclopedia that also happens to be one of the top-50 most frequently viewed websites in the world, it is a problem. It is, however, nice to have information about a song, e.g. what it's about, how fans reacted to it, or if it won any awards or sparked controversy. Radiant_>|< 11:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

EFF userbox

Please keep the width of the image at 40px, it f's up the layout for many people; userboxes are meant to have the smaller box to the left at 45px maximum. Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 08:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

My bad, I'll be more careful in the future! --Dragon695 17:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Improper userbox deletion

I'm sorry - but is there some misunderstanding? Could you please refer to which actions I have conducted which are questionable? And also, I am unsure of what action you wish me to take - I am not an administrator, so I can not delete nor undelete things, so may I therefore ask you clarify your statement. Thanks! Ian13|talk 17:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Never mind, I thought you were an admin ;-). I'll tak it to nightstallion. --Dragon695 17:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
No problem, its just because it sounded like you were questioning some of my actions. Good luck! Ian13|talk 17:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh no problem, sorry if that was the impression, my beef is with Tony Sidaway. --Dragon695 17:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Removing comments and/or positions on an RFC

Is extremely, extremely discouraged. We are talking really really discouraged here. Please don't do it again (and yes I do suppose this counts as an official warning and all *sigh*) Kim Bruning 03:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me??? I didn't remove anything. Please clarify! --Dragon695 03:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Crap, you are correct, my sincere apologies. It was an anon, and I was briefly mislead by the way in which the anon had written it. (Please feel free to refactor this section off of your talk page, once you have read the apology) Sorry again. Kim Bruning 03:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
No problem at all, I was worried I accidently deleted somthing by mistake. Thanks for clearing it up. --Dragon695 03:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
And here I finger the real culprit WP:AN/I#Interesting_edits_by_anon_to_congressional_RFC, sorry for the misunderstanding. Kim Bruning 03:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Don't sweat it! I know you probably have your work cut out for you with that RFC ;-). BTW, unless you want it, I'd kinda prefer to not delete talk entries in the interest of openness and full disclosure . I'll go ahead and put a strikethrough to indicate that it was just a misunderstanding :-). --Dragon695 04:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

thanks!

Hey! Thanks for the Murrow pic barnstar thingy! Actually, I felt I didn't deserve it -- I haven't really done much work on the pedophila articles, I just put together a project structure -- so I gave it over to Lotusduck who deserves it more. But thanks! Herostratus 09:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

RfC

I take it you were referring to the RfC I'm preparing against Tony Sidaway, as that's the only thing of the sort I'm undertaking at the moment. The charges are outlined, and I'll gladly add the anti-Randroid box deletion to the list of grievances. What's still needed is more diffs proving that people attempted to reason with him on all the listed violations; I haven't gotten around to that yet. If you want to help, the RfC is being compiled here. Rogue 9 12:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)