Hi, the user I removed the content of his talk page from, has no other edits than that talk page. Please read: Wikipedia:User page. It specifically says what people can and cannot do with their userpage. There's a lot more room to play around in user space than in main space, but there are limits, especially for people who don't actually edit anything other than user space. There are several ways people can keep in touch with each other, Wikipedia is not the only way, and this journaling stuff is not what it's meant for --JoanneB 18:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, I noticed you have been doing New Article Patrol. Make sure you read a bit more about some parts of Wikipedia as we do have sections that have tons of case law and cases there. I think the user needs a bit more time to develop the Salvatore v Commissioner article. I will watch it and make sure it moves along.
One thing I added after time was instead if CSD'ing or Prod'ing and article is to tag is using {{context}},{{unreferenced}}, and {{notability}} if I think the article has a snowballs chance of sticking around. Anyway, keep up the good work! spryde | talk 19:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please note, that if possible leave a message on the user's talk page of whom you tag, so that they know there page has been tagged for speedy. If you look at the tag, you can copy the message. However, if you would like to speed up the process, you may want to consider using Twinkle, which is a bot which helps to tag more easily, and also notifies the creator, once an article has been tagged!
Please note that I did not sign the above talk page on your behalf - I unsigned it. I simply noted that you didn't sign it. As per WP:SIG, posts to User talk pages 'should be signed'. Ian Cairns 17:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I understand now - {unsigned|User}. I simply said DO NOT SIGN MY COMMENTS IF I HAVEN'T. Please note this outside of my talkpage, and that goes for the rest of y'all.
Regarding this comment, it really seems to me, like you're gloating about that user's RFA getting an oppose. ONE oppose, a WP:SNOW does not make. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but, it might be better suited at WT:RFA. I'd like to suggest, that you withdraw your comment, please. SQLQuery me! 17:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I could not picture him with a mop in hand, and the comment never totally stemmed from that one oppose (with more likely to follow). However, I have removed my edit in the 'Discussion' section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlae (talk • contribs)
I'm not going to speculate as to whether or not that RFA will pass. Thanks, for removing that comment. I mean, think about it, for a moment, if you don't understand why. How would you feel, if your RFA started off with an oppose (mine did, and, it sucked, but, I still passed.), then someone comes along, gloating about it. Anyhow, thanks again for your co-operation. SQLQuery me! 18:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, again, it was not the down to the fact that the RfA kicked off with an oppose, it was the lack of criterion displayed by the candidate in regards to applying for an administrative position on Wikipedia, in which some cases they may be advised to withdraw themselves. I would not call it "gloating", more like "saving everyone's time", though it was in bad taste nonetheless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlae (talk • contribs)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page :-) UserDoe ☻T ☼C 17:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, it's okay. I was in the midst of reporting them to AIV but someone just beat me to it while I was editing the page. Dlae│here 17:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, please don't use edit summaries such as "aaaarrrrggggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!" [1] when tagging for speedy deletion, it confuses slow witted fools such as myself. It also makes it more difficult for us to later approach the original author to discuss the article. Thanks. CIreland (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Dlae│here 17:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, can I ask you to just take a step back and cut down on the rhetoric you are using when making reports to AIV please. We are not on a crusade and it's not a fight against vandalism. If you really wish to help us keep wikipedia vandalism free, you help us much more by leaving a short concise message, along the lines of continued vandalism after final warning. After that we will ascertain whether it is a vandalism only account and the length of ban to be put in place. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to get in touch. Cheers Khukri 15:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to know it takes a whole bunch of you half-an-hour to "ascertain" whether an account has only made vandalism-related contributions, including introducing offensive/inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Nope, no questions. I saw this coming. Dlae│here 15:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep in mind that this is a volunteer-run project; we do have lives outside of Wikipedia... (and I say this as the person that blocked the account in question). EVula// talk // ☯ // 16:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First please read WP:AGF and for your info I had just stopped by AIV, so please do not assume anything let alone half an hour for admins to make a decision. You can be sarcastic all you wish, but if you are genuinely here because you wish to improve the encyclopedia then let editors like myself point you in the right direction, it's not a them and us, we aren't leaving the message to get at you, and as I said it's not a crusade. If you want to stop vandalism you can help us, please take any messages left as constructive, if you do not wish to then OK. Khukri 16:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not okay. It's never okay these past few days. It's okay when you get wannabes trying to score points off you going by the fact you've recieved a meaningless block that should never have happened, though. And it took what...2 seconds to decide on that? Yet it takes half-an-hour to confer whether an account is being used to [harm] Wikipedia - [2] -> [3] (I assume nothing). If I sounded aggressive or disgruntled towards you when I first replied, I apologise. I can accept editors trying to help and willing to contribute together, but I have no time for the robots, like some sort of Wikipedia cult, who are only on here to earn stripes regardless of what the encyclopedia ends up like. Dlae│here 18:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're assuming I was sitting at AIV, making up my mind whether or not to block the editor. I wasn't. It took me about thirty seconds to review the diffs and make the judgement call. If you look at my contributions directly prior to making the block, you'll see I made just three edits beginning six minutes prior to the placing the block notice. The edit before that was eight and a half hours earlier; I'd been in bed all that time, and had just come onto Wikipedia. I wasn't sitting on AIV twiddling my thumbs; I caught vandalism on my watchlist, tracked and killed it, then decided to swing by AIV, where I saw your vandal and busted him as well. I can't speak for all the other admins, but I would assume that they were doing other things as well. Assume good faith, please. We're all in the same boat here; there's no point in getting upset and pointing fingers over something this minor. EVula// talk // ☯ // 20:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your block request [4] was declined. As noted on the instruction at WP:AIV:
Before listing a vandal here, ensure that:
The vandal is active now, has been sufficiently warned, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances.
Your report concisely states what the vandal is doing (including an edit summary with the IP address or username).
Reports which do not adhere to the above will be declined. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before it was removed/declined, I was in the middle of retracting my statement as the IP address was similar to the one I had reported before, which was vandalising the same page. I am aware of the reporting criteria, I am not a complete newbie. Dlae│here 18:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dutch supercentenarians (2nd nomination). Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Ok, I guess the "welcome to wikipedia" part of this template is out of date for you, but I removed your comment: "See, this is why Wikipedia editors should have pubic hair." from the AfD above. Please comment on content and refrain from derogatory comments about contributors. Thanks. --Storkk (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That was on the day when...nevermind. I would have rectified things myself if I never thought it was too late (I was fully aware of the ageism). This should not happen again. Dlae│here 14:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we let them pile up more, now. Hopefully, the current nom will benefit from the constructive criticism. Oh, well. These things run in cycles.<dlohcierekim at work> Cheers, :) MikeReichold 22:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
for reverting my user page. Dekisugi (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, but I think your userpage actually baits vandalism. Even if someone had the intention to make constructive edits to Wikipedia, they might just "go for it" as something of a dare. Nice statue pic, though, made me chuckle. Dlae│here 22:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re your comments on Ibaranoff's RFA, cut & paste moves are a real pain to fix, and I can promise you that — while someone doing them in good faith would just get a polite note — someone performing them after a warning would likely find themselves with a disruption block. To fix them, the histories have to be manually merged, which can be horrendously time consuming. If you look at the list of moves waiting for repair, you'll see that some can't be fixed at all (generally pages that have forked in three directions since the cut-&-paste), and that Anthony Appleyard is generally the only admin with the patience to do it anymore. — iridescent 22:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May you join this discussion on making the 2007 WWE Draft an FL (Featured List) article. Thanx...HERE IS THE LINK>>>[[5]]TrUcO9311TaLk / SiGn 17:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about an album, not a musician. A7 doesn't cover it. If you believe that it is not notable, AfD is your best bet, but bear in mind that albums by notable artists are automatically considered notable (I didn't check if this was by a notable artist). J Milburn (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your participation in my RfA, and your thoughtful question. I definitely paid close attention to everything that was said in the debate, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. For now though, especially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions, I am going to take it slowly -- I'm working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school, double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. I sincerely doubt you'll see anything controversial coming from my new access level. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, though I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are a few more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status. If you do ever have any concerns about my activities as an administrator, I encourage you to let me know. My door is always open. Have a good New Year, --Elonka 21:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You could be right. The first time I deleted the article a few days ago, it was clearly a G11. While the current version did have elements of G11,it was more of an A7 this time around (a very small grocery chain in the Charleston area). youngamerican (wtf?) 20:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you would check the history log of Faschek Supermarkets, you would see that it was in reach of a CSD G11. I saw this too, and instantly removed such content before applying stubs, redirects and including a dab in its already-given space on Supermarkets in the United States after visiting Google. [6], [7], [8]Dlae│here 20:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please reconsider the nomination for speedy deletion of this article. The creator is obviously new, and inexperienced, but is making valid contributions. Please refer to Land-based shark fishing. He created this article, and I have since cleaned it up. At first, I considered tagging it for deletion, but with a little work, it became a respectable stub. Instead of db'ing it, consider revising, and improving. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!--Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 20:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Um, I'm not sure why you are warning me, and not CBFan. He has now done SIX reverts on this article and has been reported at to the 3RR noticeboard. AnmaFinotera (talk) 21:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There was no need to leave the warning again. I have not reverted since your last warning and am waiting for the 3RR decision before doing anything else. I read the notice and removed it as is allowed on User Talk pages. AnmaFinotera (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was just coming here to say the same thing- please be more careful with your tagging in future. J Milburn (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dlae, you are quite right in noting that the article is copied wholesale from http://www.fbi.gov/hq/isd/cirg/osb.htm. However, this is not a problem: thousands of Wikipedia articles are similarly copied from U.S. government sources. We are explicitly allowed to do, since the source text is in the public domain as a work of the U.S. Federal Government, and I have added a source citation for this reason. It's good practice to add a source citation and acnowledgement, but strictly speaking we are not even required to do that. -- The Anome (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thanks. Dlae│here 17:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Just to finish off my earlier comment; there are a few extra niceties: not all material on U.S. federal government websites is necessarily in the public domain (see Wikipedia:Public domain resources above for detail), and none of this applies to U.S. state or local governments, who can assert copyright on their works. -- The Anome (talk) 17:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On your oppose vote, you said "the math does not add up". Could you please explain the reasons why to me? STORMTRACKER94 18:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dlae. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:Non-free promotional. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. —Bkell (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not assume ownership of articles such as Randy Orton. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Cheers, LAX 23:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm...
Well, every time someone tries to make a productive edit to the article, you find some excuse to revert. Cheers, LAX 19:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tira screenshot SC4 1.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Tira screenshot SC4 1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dlae-sp.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200ptalk 13:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An article to which you have contributed considerably has been nominated for deletion. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Jurakudai Villa 1.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Jurakudai Villa 1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hilde sc4.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Hilde sc4.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nightmare sc4.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Nightmare sc4.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Siegfried SC4 3D artwork.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Siegfried SC4 3D artwork.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Soul vol.1 logo tapestry.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Soul vol.1 logo tapestry.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Soulcalibur logo.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Soulcalibur logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Soulcalibur II logo 1.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Soulcalibur II logo 1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Soulcalibur III logo 1.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Soulcalibur III logo 1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
