User talk:Herbythyme/Arc4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

;)[edit]

Glad you enjoyed my self-indulgent ramblings! If you liked the translation, you should have a look at the prior version of his talk page before he blanked it... All the best, EyeSerenetalk 11:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarice Cliff article[edit]

Thanks for your recent help on the article... sadly the user is straight back reverting with an IP address [1]...dif [2] Not sure what more can be done? TeapotgeorgeTalk 17:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Clarice cliff is back with same edits as before ban. TeapotgeorgeTalk 06:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for extending the block on the Clarice Cliff article after exactly the same changes the user 'ClariceCliff' had made, were made by someone on 86.137.50.57. Full details of my verifiable background in researching and writing on Clarice Cliff for 26 years are in my user page profile.Len

Commons deletion query?[edit]

Herby, I am not able to post to your other page, so please explain to me why you think you can unilaterally delete uploaded content, namely the photo of George Devol from his page and the robot page. I uploaded the photo, it has been there for years. I followed the guidelines on Wikipedia when I uploaded it and checked all the right boxes. Why would you do something like that without warning. It is very disrespectful, and is vandalism in my opinion. Please explain. Feel free to email me at . Please re-post the photo as it was on both pages at your earliest convenience. Bangthedash101 (talk) 06:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't intend to make life easy do you :) I assume you are referring to something on Commons - what is your user name there? What is the image I am supposed to have deleted - a link would be best or at least the exact name. I delete hundreds of items in a week on Commons so without that it will be hard for me to answer you.
The most likely reason will be that someone has tagged it as a copyright violation. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My user name is just as I signed it. The pages are just what I said in my message. It was not tagged as a copyright violation. It has been posted for YEARS. You obviously didn't even READ WHAT I WROTE! Who authorizes you to delete properly uploaded content?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Devol on 9.28.8 you deleted his photo "from Commons" - George_C_Devol_Color_Photo.jpg. I am unable to undo your deletion. Why did you do that? What gives you the right to permanently delete content without even asking permission from the content provider. My name is associated with the photo as well as contact information. You needed to contact me if there was an issue, not just hit delete. I insist that you put the photo back on the page just as it was and also on the Robot page where it was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot You claim to take vandalism seriously but what you do is even more insidious because you have a higher level of control than a typical user. Please immediately replace the photo in both instances and do not touch it again. Bangthedash101 (talk) 05:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please maintain some level of courtesy - our dealing will be better then.
I did delete the image as you say (on Commons not here). It was moved to Commons by another user on the 22nd September and it was licensed as "fair use". Wikipedia allows "fair use" images, Commons does not. As such it cannot be kept on Commons. However I see no reason why it should not be uploaded to Wikipedia by you where that license is valid.
The image was deleted by another admin here. --Herby talk thyme 09:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The George Devol page says that you deleted the image:

(cur) (last) 09:16, 28 September 2008 CommonsDelinker (Talk | contribs) m (10,871 bytes) (Removing "George_C_Devol_Color_Photo.jpg", it has been deleted from Commons by Herbythyme because: No fair use at Commons.) (undo)

I reviewed the archived pages and it shows that the image was on the page until your edits. Now you claim that you did not remove the image from Wikipedia. Who then removed it? I only can go by what the page history says. I uploaded the photo to Wikipedia years ago and it has never been a problem and was pictured on the Devol and Robot pages. Please have the image returned to both pages. This is my third and final request. Again, I UPLOADED THE PHOTO TO WIKIPEDIA. I don't understand why you now say I should upload the photo to Wikipedia when it was already there until you, or whomever, deleted it. If you did not do it, please identify the person who did.

This may seem discourteous to you, but I don't think you realize the seriousness of your actions. Simply clicking around Wikipedia for photos that have been "tagged" or whatever and then deleting them without contacting the person responsible for uploading them to attempt to resolve the issue, then making that person jump through hoops is very very uncool. Can you understand my point? Bangthedash101 (talk) 03:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be useful for you if you actually read what I wrote.
  1. The image was here on Wikipedia licensed as "fair use" (acceptable here).
  2. It was transferred to Commons (I have no idea why).
  3. Commons does not accept "fair use". In my capacity as a Commons admin I delete the image there as it was unacceptably licensed. Unless it can be licensed freely it will continue to be unacceptable to Commons so if I undeleted I would be in breach of licensing on Commons.
  4. I have already given you a link to the deleting admin here above (here)
So - I have not deleted it on Wikipedia, I did delete on Commons where the licensed was unacceptable. --Herby talk thyme 07:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted the other admin to try to get this resolved, but I think you believe you are without fault when in fact your actions caused the photo to be removed from at least two pages. The photo was on both pages until YOU hit delete. You have a responsibility to foresee the consequences of your actions, which includes what pages will be affected by any deletion. You also have a responsibility to contact the person who uploaded the photo to try to resolve any copyright issues before hitting delete. Simply hitting delete without doing any homework is irresponsible and frankly selfish. If you want to spend time cleansing Wikipedia or Commons or whatever, then understand the tremendous level of responsibility that comes with that power. Understand that Wikipedia is now considered a primary source of information, on par with Brittanica et al. Take your responsibility seriously. YOU should be jumping through these hoops that I am still navigating, but apparently you won't lift a finger if the DELETE key is not under it. Shame on you. Bangthedash101 (talk) 04:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi bangthedash, I remember our heated discussions when we agreed Devol was the real founder and not Engleberger. I just saw the deletion myself and also got pretty irate and wrote to Herby. Apparently someone moved the photo to Wikimedia commons quite recently and it was deleted from there, not from the robot page as such. So all we have to do is put the photo back directly into our page. Luckily I have a copy. However I don't agree that the picture is "fair use" but it's academic if we can simply place the picture back into Industrial Robot (and your other page). Sorry herby to reply on your page. Robotics1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Help with a COI of sorts[edit]

Dear Herby, Perhaps I should be a bit bolder over this. Please have a quick look at [3] where I propose an update to a template which someone has rightly complained is out of date. This template is protected as high risk for transclusion spam (I am not sure it is very high risk) which is not a problem as I am an admin. However, the obvious update from 2007 would be to use the interwiki to link the talk page to the relevant page on the Schools Wikipedia. This isn't too bad from a spam point of view as it is a talk page template and Google as far as I know doesn't cache talk pages, and we do have lots of external links even in article templates. However it would be a link out from a couple of thousand talk pages, and someone obviously is concerned enough about these to protect the template. The Schools Wikipedia is a project in which I am heavily involved. So I thought I would be squeaky clean ask your view on whether this edit to this template is acceptable. Your view (as an admin who deals with spam) ? --BozMo talk 13:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the time and response. --BozMo talk 15:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chaoyang County[edit]

Why did you erase this? Your edit summary said (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup). Chaoyang County is an administrative division of Chaoyang, Liaoning. Seems fairly notable to me.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 14:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was tagged as g6 by someone else and had no content. I'll undelete it if you feel there are issues? --Herby talk thyme 14:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tobryant[edit]

FYI in case you have time to drop him a note: I've given him a spam warning for his first edit since the block you gave him expired. As I've discussed with others, I don't think his command of English is very good. Not only are most his edits promotional, but he sometimes deletes reference lists or the like from articles with no explanation. --Ronz (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good .... :). In practice I think one warning over this one incident is probably enough. However I'm inclined to wonder if this user is going to really understand this project. Certainly further links/disruption should probably lead to a block again fairly quickly. If by any chance I'm not around feel free to point this section out to another admin.
Do you consider the "other one" dealt with now? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 15:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I made a note about the other one above. I just think he needs some time to cool off. --Ronz (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies - missed it - I had some interesting contributors recently..... --Herby talk thyme 15:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marlow Machining[edit]

Hello, Herbythyme ...

Please salt the article Marlow Machining (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ... it has been deleted several times in the last 48 hours, and the same user keeps recreating it ... I am also dubious about these articles created by the same editor, N dummann (talk · contribs):

They both appear to be WP:SPAM to promote this company.

Happy Editing! — 72.75.68.177 (talk · contribs) 15:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Hopefully all sorted. In the end the user seem to be rather insistent on having links in their articles too which I considered makes them a subtle spammer (if such a thing exists). --Herby talk thyme 15:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thnx! — 72.75.68.177 (talk) 15:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles by User:Davion360[edit]

Hello again, Herbythyme ... These articles have been frequently recreated by Davion360 (talk · contribs):

Thnx again! — 72.75.68.177 (talk) 16:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - rather intermittent but it looks sorted now. Regards --Herby talk thyme 07:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for removing his rudeness from my user page - and I don't think I even had deleted his wretched page, though I am sure I would have done if I'd come across it. seglea (talk) 20:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good-Day Herbythyme[edit]

Thanks for making my first steps into Wikipedia a truly exciting and wonderful experience. I question your motives as it appears that my page was considered blatant advertising, and yet I see several pages similar that have been here for a while. At the very least you could have taken a little time and courtesy to write to me and say you believe it is 'Blatant Advertising', maybe with advice on how I can update my work so that you wouldn't consider it so.

Please explain to me how I can re-write my page so that in your opinion, my page is not considered advertising.

Ohanaware (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creatingusernames[edit]

Thanks for the block. Hut 8.5 18:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Alessliber[edit]

I have reverted your edit here. I suppose you wanted to revert the user and inadvertently reverted me as well. I have given him a short block, since he dosn't seem to take the warnings serious. Fram (talk) 09:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think three of us edited at almost the same time :). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Restaurants[edit]

Please restore this article, as it was not advertising but a stub of restaurant chain based in the UK. The article was tagged inappropriately - there was no ad terms, peacock statements or weasel words in the article and did not meet the C11 criteria. It did rely on a single source, the companies about us page, but that is all that was wrong with it.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 12:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore this article, as it was not advertising but a stub of restaurant chain based in the UK. The article was tagged inappropriately - there was no ad terms, peacock statements or weasel words in the article and did not meet the C11 criteria. It did rely on a single source, the companies about us page, but that is all that was wrong with it.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 12:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored it. However it would not surprise me if it gets deleted again unless it gets improved quite a bit. --Herby talk thyme 12:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

metafour technology[edit]

Please restore the Metafour Technology page. Previously there was only a page about a band called metafour who have had one album released on 2003. This page was never deleted and I was very careful to set up the metafour heading with the two pages linked. Metafour technology is a well established company that undertakes about 6 million transactions for major international blue chip companies such as Shell, KPMG, Microsoft, BBC, DX, Deitsche Bank, JWT etc. I was extremely careful to not put anything that could be interpretted as advertising or peacocking on it and just a couple of factual statements, intending to return to it and update it with information reflecting its significance. However it was only posted a couple of hours ago! If the band is allowed to stay then the metafour technology should certainly be allowed.

Cause for deletion of: user:TezveerSingh page[edit]

The cause for deletion of the page was given as the following: Blatant Advertising Please see the definition given below for that: Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.

As you can see, that article was for a 'company' or a branch of my school i.e.e NJIT and I believe not 'blatant advertising' as you have stated. I am going ahead and creating a page under the name NJIT:CAPE. Please suggest changes as you see fit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TezveerSingh (talk • contribs) 20:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did indeed delete your user page as blatant advertising. I still think it was. I see that you created the page you suggested above & that was deleted as blatant advertising. Maybe you should read around some to see what is appropriate for Wikipedia. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:27, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intesi Group page =[edit]

I would like to ask for an independant replacement of the Intesi Group company history page. I was trying to give some input here, and also understandable, it was removed/seen as advertising, but independent input should be possible. I have added some independend sources in the request page. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.11.179.81 (talk) 10:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Webiste[edit]

Can you analyze if this webiste should be blocked or not. Please.

It has arrived here because I put in lot's of wikipedias, and ishouldn't do it. But I only want to undo my error, so you could see the page Park Güell and the website: http://parkguell.net84.net/eng/

The bot page is: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:COIBot/XWiki/parkguell.net84.net#Discussion

Bye--RobCatalà (talk) 20:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the old keep asking everyone until I get the answer I want trick. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, responded on user's talk page :) --Herby talk thyme 08:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, another time, I acted wrongly, I didn't know this rule, so I won't make it more, so now I'll say others administrator, don't to answer it. And I only wanted to contrast opinions. (If you want look more in: User:Waggers User:Ohnoitsjamie and Park Güell talk.)--RobCatalà (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion[edit]

Hi,

OK. I'm new to Wikipedia.

Really hope I'm posting this in the right way to your talk page.

I've got great enthusiasm for Icelandic music.

I had my post on Gogoyoko deleted. I think I understand why, and wish to be given another chance for it.

All help in that direction would be greatly appreciated.

best,


Randver1 (talk) 10:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, what next[edit]

Thanks Herbythyme for taking time to check my case with gogoyko and post answer on my 'talk page'. I really appreciate it.

I got it. I understand that my previous post on Gogoyoko was too much of a paste work of what I've read in the local press. Advertisement style indeed. Gogoyoko actually a music website (not a band) coming out of Iceland. Possibly similar to; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellaband

But I really want to be given a second chance to write it. I've read the argument for the deletion of pages, and what to avoid when posting stuff. I've begun to write on other stuff and post it.

But I really would like to be given a second chance to write on Gogoyoko. I will of course make sure to do a better job.

How to proceed?

(Randver1 (talk) 01:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]


One Team, One Dream[edit]

There was no copyright infringed on the article for One Team, One Dream. Those were MY words, I am the author of the book. They happened to be on the publisher's website, but again, those are my words. Please reinstate the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.173.2 (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have to be licensed via OTRS and within scope of the project for that to happen. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are my words, they are copyrighted on MY WEBSITE. www.1teamonedream.com How do I resolve this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.173.2 (talk) 00:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK - please read my words above. They tell you how to get this licensed. However equally I doubt that they are encyclopaedic - if they are your own words then they will be seen as original research. --Herby talk thyme 09:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for taking care of the commons stuff. I've blocked his account for repeated copyvios. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 13:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gogoyoko story[edit]

Hi Herbythyme,

Thanks for all your help and advice

Now, I've followed instroctions given by Dengero - and created a subpage for the Gogoyoko article. Can you please have a look, let me know if anything might be off - and if possible post it (or let me know who to contact to do make it available).

[4]

best,

(Randver1 (talk) 13:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

AST Dew Tour[edit]

I know you made am mention to a User:ASTLLC about a conflict of interest. I was wondering if there was anyway that you could revert the edit he/she made to the page and redirected it to a new page. As far as i can tell, AST still exists as a company and this user has redirected the page to be Dew Tour, without the AST. It makes no sense to me why this was done..but maybe you could help me out. They said they work for the company and thats why the change was made.. clearly a conflict of interest.cheers--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 19:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate article[edit]

I have accidently created a duplicated article User:Superyacht crew which I intended to replace User:Wilsonhalligan. As a result I need to delete the latter. In addition, the search criteria appears to include the "User:" prefix. I am trying to remove this, as it won't appear in any searches otherwise. Many thanks for any help that anyone can provide. Wilsonhalligan (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)User:Wilsonhalligan[reply]

Gogo[edit]

Can you please re-check this article;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Randver1/Gogoyoko

Should meet all standards by now.

More sources have been linked to the article. Some claims / statements coming from the company itself are, understandably, linked to the company's official website. Otherwise the company website is not used as source for information. Is there anything that might be in need of improvement (or should be removed) to make the article available?

best,

(Randver1 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

User page stuff :)[edit]

Thanks for looking at this - an area where few stray! I'm happy to see these tagged as speedy personally. The advantage (to me) is I check my logs from time to time & so it stands out if they are recreated... Thanks anyway, regards --Herby talk thyme 10:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user page spam is the pleasant stuff as far as I'm concerned, far less obnoxious to handle than the incessant vanity pages. I'm actually an admin (though you'd be forgiven for not having noticed, I'm not around that much any more), but I blank user pages just in case someone wants to make the case they're actually working on the spam in question as an article. Happy editing! --fvw* 10:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reflecting on our approaches (& accept mine could be a bit "bitey" for some). I wondered if replacing the user page with "please see Wikipedia:UP#NOT" might be worth a try. Clears the page, informs the user?

I think I'd still go for delete on the blatant stuff but maybe some might be better with a more gentle approach (& I'm not sure how many would find "history"). Thoughts welcome if you have time, if not no matter. Regards --Herby talk thyme 09:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's fine too, though I don't have any strong objections to deleting it either. I'm not entirely against biting the newbies if they're newbie spammers to be honest. --fvw* 08:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User page deletion[edit]

Hello, Not sure if this is the right place for me to contact you or not. Please advise if it isn't. You delete my entry and I'm not sure why as I simply followed the format of the Microsoft page thinking if that post was alright then mine should be. Even though I modeled it after the Microsoft page you flagged it as advertising. How would you like me to change the post to accomodate your criteria? Thanks for the guidance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LindseyLimo (talk • contribs) 17:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user talk page. --Herby talk thyme 17:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Page deletion[edit]

19:05, 9 December 2008 Herbythyme (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:Ssjgoku420" ‎ (G3: Vandalism: offensive to me)

You were offended by my userpage, so you deleted it? Grow up. Wikipedia doesn't censor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssjgoku420 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion[edit]

17:37, 9 December 2008 Herbythyme (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:Emilywatts" ‎ (G11: Blatant advertising)

My draft was recently deleted for blatant advertising. The entry, about the public realtions firm Jack Horner Commmunications, was modeled after existing entries about public relations firms (Olgivy, Weber Shandwick, etc). How are these companies, our peers and competitors, allowed to have their information posted and we are not? Please advise. Emilywatts (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Deletion[edit]

I created an article about James John Morrish due to the journal that was published in scientific papers, which I referenced. The entire Article is planned as a biography. However It was speedy deleted. I have been trying to contact the admin who did it, but I am yet to find out how that is possible, so I hope this works. I have seen articles with far less information in them and yet published here. Could someone please explain why my article was deleted even though a valid reference was provided and information was legit? Thank you. DLogical (talk) 13:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One "valid" reference does not make for notability I'm afraid. Google ing the name got me nothing in the way of hits for the person you are writing about. Equally the earlier deletion did not fill me with confidence either. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:39, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the first article wasnt the greatest, therefore I created a new one, more modest one. However, if you enter the title of the journal into the google you will get a result. The reason why you did not receive anything from Google is that it is scientific paper. I had one more reference, but that requires login ( as in scientific circle many reports require to be loged in to the portal). Could you please advice me what do I have to do in Order to write a Biography for that person - so it would not get deleted??DLogical (talk) 17:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. However again I must ask you to look at notability as linked above. The publication of one scientific article does not make someone notable I'm afraid. --Herby talk thyme 15:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

I don't understand why the article I put up about Bela Ewald Althans who was featured in the documentary "Beruf Neonazi" was called an "attack page." There was no attack in it at all, just a statement of facts about his activities as a neo-nazi. I can understand if it was deleted due to questionable sources, but as an attack page?? Moebius42 (talk) 05:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC) moebius[reply]

Whatever else the page & tone were very definitely not encyclopaedic I'm afraid. Maybe consider re-writing it in a more neutral way. --Herby talk thyme 08:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my article[edit]

I am not sure why my intelligent article about E-Lybra, a device that uses bio-resonance patterns to balance imbalances was deleted. If you can give me an answer to that question it would be great. CATCHACODE(talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.202.1 (talk) 17:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as a copyright violation which looked to be the case to me. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:44, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seattle Journal for Social Justice[edit]

I would ask that you please reconsider this page. The Seattle Journal for Social Justice is a law review and Wikipedia has entries for other Law Reviews (See Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy, and Loyola Consumer Law Review). I tried to follow their entries as a guide. I plan to link this to the Seattle University School of Law entry. If I did something wrong, please let me know and I will attempt to correct it. SJSJR2D2 (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YEP[edit]

Good idea, that you have reverted this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Herbythyme&diff=next&oldid=256821647

Not so good was your idea, that You/abf/Diti have commented and asked here without clarifying, that Mutter Erde is not longer able to answer because of your block. It would be nice, when you supplement this. Btw: Have You not found another guy, who was not directly involved in that illegally distributed email from me, who could do this instead of you? Mutter Erde 78.48.202.118 (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • 11:46, 8. Jan. 2009 Herbythyme (Diskussion | Beiträge) sperrte „84.152.246.80 (Diskussion)“ für den Zeitraum: 1 Tag (nur Anonyme, Erstellung von Benutzerkonten gesperrt) ? (Open proxy or zombie (more info): ME evading block)

It might be interesting for you that Deutsche Telekom is the largest telecommunications company in Germany and in the European Union (that means: Including the United Kingdom!) MutterErde 15:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.52.219.207 (talk) [reply]

I was forgetting you were perfect Mutter - yes I made a mistake - any proxy block by me will be for a year with very rare exceptions, so anyone with knowledge of my work would know that. I'm afraid I don't care how big your isp is. --Herby talk thyme 15:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year[edit]

Ring out the old,
and Ring in the new.
Happy New Year!
From FloNight

Blacklist question[edit]

Discussion about trying to add a URL that you blacklisted. DMacks (talk) 05:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You quit[edit]

... from being an admin. How come? I see you are still a sysop and CU on Commons. Jolly Ω Janner 16:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've dropped all rights across projects other than Commons now. They are likely to go there in due course. Time is an issue and so is inclination here. I'm sure I will see you around one way or another... --Herby talk thyme 13:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably only on Commons. Shame about the block there, as I have to upload images on en. I hope that the removal of sysop has made Wikipedia more enjoyable for you. Oh and by the way, Plymouth's GA now! Jolly Ω Janner 16:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jolly Janner is not blocked there??? --Herby talk thyme 16:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hard range blocked there. Do you reckon I'm eligable to vote in the 2008 picture of the year? I've read it and according to its rules, I can vote. Jolly Ω Janner 16:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow - that was nasty of someone...
To me you are eligible to vote. Do you reckon you should be "blockexempt" there? --Herby talk thyme 17:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes :) I can't see the point in uploading free files to en. Jolly Ω Janner 18:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry[edit]

Hi Herbythyme,
I enjoyed working on Dartmoor crosses, but I just realized
that you probably wished to start this article yourself.
May I please ask you to forgive me for being so insensitive?--Mbz1 (talk) 16:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I assure you I had no plans to work on that page in the near future (or the time :(). As soon as I get time I'll look at some of the books I have & contribute what I can - thanks for starting it. --Herby talk thyme 12:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Love it![edit]

Dedicated to Janners! Jolly Ω Janner 17:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - the team/sport are questionable (!) - more of a Chiefs fan myself - but I love the piccy - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dartmoor crosses[edit]

Updated DYK query On February 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dartmoor crosses, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 15:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Crazywell Cross[edit]
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Crazywell cross 1.JPG, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 07:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work, Herby! --Kanonkas :  Talk  16:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Photographer's Barnstar[edit]

The Photographer's Barnstar
I award this Barnstar to Herby for taking an image that was promoted 4 times!
as DYK here
as English Wikipedia FP here
as Valued Image here
and as Commons FP here.
Not so many photographers, if any, achieved such a thing! Thank you! --Mbz1 (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Many many thanks Mila, sincerely appreciated as is JJ's comment :) --Herby talk thyme 15:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Belated congrats from me, too. Nice work, Herby!  —SMALLJIM  15:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lake district page edit[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lake_District&oldid=260188340 I added a link to a website which attracts many hits from walkers and contains useful information and pictures for anyone wanting to walk in the lake district, but you have removed this link? any particular reason?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazhiley (talk • contribs) 13:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:EL. You will see that such links are very rarely required as we have an encyclopaedia here not a web directory. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Required" no. "Useful" yes. If someone came to wiki looking for information about the lake district this would be a useful site. If that link is not allowed, why should any of the others? What criteria has been used to decide that this link is not required, but the other there are? I have read the link you have suggested to the best of my understanding, but cannot see any information that prevents this link being there... in the "nutshell" section is states "but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article." this is meritable - (there is no other walker's website listed), it is accessible (not entirely sure quite what is meant by that though) and is extremely appropriate to the article... Gazhiley (talk) 12:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So we agree it is "not required" by the article. I will certainly remove it, however if you feel it has some real value then post to the article talk page & see what others think. --Herby talk thyme 12:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"eh? you have already removed it, hence my annoyance... nothing on wiki is actually "required"... It's all information that people can access if they want to learn about it... Show me something that is "required" and I'll point out that it's only "required" by those who wish to learn... for example, in order to open a tin, I "require" a tin opener... In order to learn about a tin opener I "require" information about it... But if I have no desire to learn about it, then a link to information is not "required"... The same with links to informative sites... They are not ever "required", only useful for those that wish to learn more... So removing a link as "not required" is wrong... Gazhiley (talk) 13:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gazhiley, we work on consensus and the article's talk page (Talk:Lake District) is the place to hash this out. Please don't add this link back until there's a clear consensus supporting its inclusion. Also, if you are associated with this site, you may not add it at all as it's a conflict of interest. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VI nomination[edit]

Hi Herby,
May I please ask you , if you have a time, to review this nomination?
I understand that you feel rather reluctant to support your own images, but it is perfectly allright, everybody does. :)
Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As usual - many thanks :) --Herby talk thyme 13:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Childe's Tomb[edit]
An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status
Your image, File:Childe's tomb 2.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tiffany Giardina[edit]

Hi it's me Matt and i was wondering why u deleted Tiffany Giardina? Tiffany Giardina is a real artist and she made a real album called No Average Angel… It's on Itunes… Also she has lots and lots of Christmas songs that she made ever since she was young, like maybe 10 years old or something… And she also sang on the Another Cinderella Story Soundtrack so i don't know why u would delete Tiffany Giardina… i wasn't the one who created that article or any other article that might've been create within it, but i just discovered it a couple of weeks ago that someone had created the article and that it was deleted… Can u tell me why 785 Records is notable enough to stay on Wikipedia and Tiffany Giardina isn't? 69.121.122.105 (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morts623 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Old spammer talk pages[edit]

FYI: deleting old talk pages is being discussed again. Please see Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Proposal at Wikipedia talk:User page#Non-contributors; this follows earlier discussion at Wikipedia talk:User page#Non-contributors and Wikipedia talk:User page#OLDIP removal. I have added a subsection, Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Old spammer talk pages asking that old spammer talk pages be kept. Your opinions, whether pro or con, would be helpful. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ruin Arch[edit]

Hi Herby, really hope you don't mind but I've restored Ruin Arch which you deleted a while back as A1 "Not enough context to identify subject". I think I've salvaged it sufficiently to make the subject clear, and I've categorised it as Fremont culture so hopefully whoever's looking at that topic will pick it up and take it further or merge it appropriately. WereSpielChequers 12:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK with me - I ceased to be an admin some time back. --Herby talk thyme 17:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Lac de Monteynard Avignonet[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Lac de Monteynard Avignonet at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

DYK rules require inline citation of reliable sources for statements in the "hook". You can remedy the lack of sources relevant to your hook by adding sources, or by changing the hook. An alt hook could simply mention that this lake has a cable suspension bridge for non-motorized users; the photo then is the source. By the way, are horses specifically not allowed? If not, then it is a pedestrian / bicycle / equestrian bridge. I would like to see this article, and the photo, make DYK. --Una Smith (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Herby.Sorry about this. I'll try to take care of this. Thank you.--mbz1 (talk) 14:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Châteauneuf-du-Faou[edit]

Updated DYK query On March 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Châteauneuf-du-Faou, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 23:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Lac de Monteynard Avignonet[edit]

Updated DYK query On March 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lac de Monteynard Avignonet, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might have missed it, but here it is - your image at the Main Page:
--mbz1 (talk) 04:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Mila - appreciated :) - regards --Herby talk thyme 11:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Devon Birdwatching and Preservation Society[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Devon Birdwatching and Preservation Society, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Notability of this group not established

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RadioFan2 (talk) 12:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking for a proper period of time[edit]

After reverting vandalism by 208.131.61.33 (talk), I was going to issue a standard warning when I discovered that you had previously blocked it as an open proxy. Knowing that these might be blocked on sight, I blocked it indefinitely, after which I went to reread our policy — and discovered that "Because the IPs may eventually be reassigned or the proxies closed, blocks should not be indefinite, but in some cases can be very long term". This is the first time that I've ever encountered an IP that I knew to be an open proxy (I know what one is, but I haven't a clue how one may know whether an IP is an open proxy or not), so I'm unclear on what to do. Would you please check this IP and modify the block to a reasonable length? Nyttend (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK - no longer an admin (here) so feel free to ignore me :)
Open proxies are usefully spotted here so maybe check that out. en wp has varying views on proxy blocking from indef (mad IMO as numbers do get re-allocated, systems get fixed etc) to a year maybe. I've tended to err on the lower side - they can always be blocked again & getting unblocked can be a bit difficult! However if it has been blocked before I'd likely do two years. Hope that helps - have fun! --Herby talk thyme 15:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Devon Birdwatching and Preservation Society[edit]

I have nominated Devon Birdwatching and Preservation Society, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devon Birdwatching and Preservation Society. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RadioFan2 (talk) 02:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

Thank you so much for that! :D I added your picture to the Devon portal. There is also a Devon Barnstar. Jolly Ω Janner 17:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks from me too. I feel sure that your photographic foray to Eylesbarrow mine will earn you something in return!  —SMALLJIM  16:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dartmoor Archive website[edit]

I noticed that mass spaming of that website on several articles and thought I'd check it out. It's actually pretty useful for Wikipedians (not so much for readers as the links are just to the home page). I know that you and Jim have a fetish for Dartmoor crosses and I found an old (out of copyright) photo. Anyway, just in case you haven't checked that site out, it might be of use to you or Jim. There's probably loads more stuff on there. Jolly Ω Janner 18:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odd one in many ways - I agree it is useful but linking on that many pages.... Not at all sure about "fetishes" tho :) And yeah we are both aware of the site - indeed I emailed them about an image last week! --Herby talk thyme 19:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon Gents, I am the manager of the Dartmoor Archive. Although I fully agree that there should be a ban of advertising on wikipedia, our website is an online museum run at no profit. If I cannot add it as a useful resource for the various towns it features then where can I put it? We are not here to make money or promote any particular issue, we are merely an online image base for the moor and I strongly feel that it is in the interests of those who visit the various wikipedia pages. Your advice would be greatly appreciated. Latitudehopper (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has actually been added back on a couple of pages & I do know it is a valuable resource. However when the only action of a user are to place 20/30 external links that really does look like spamming I'm afraid.
Please do contribute to Wikipedia in areas that interest you however you will need to let others add the links to the Dartmoor archive - you would be prevented from added them yourself due to our conflict of interest policies. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not needed on every Wikipedia article that is featured in the website. It might be of use on the Dartmoor article. Other than that I think it could be used as a reference (inline citation), if there is a specific statistic/sentence/phrase etc that is backed up on a page in the Dartmoor Archive. Jolly Ω Janner 15:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your comments and feedback. I completely understand your concerns and I think that it is great that there is moderation with wikipedia. I genuinely feel that it is a valuable resource for people who visit all of the pages that I added the link to irrespective of the current content on the page but will work within the guidelines. All the best. J —Preceding unsigned comment added by Latitudehopper (talk • contribs) 09:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Herbythyme/Arc4&oldid=1096255134"