User:Celestianpower/Archive23

Possible legal infringement on a page
Dear Wikipedia Admin

I have contacted you concerning the following article: Windows Genuine Advantage. Users are using this page to spread information on how to bypass anti-piracy technology used by Microsoft. Please see my discussion topic on the article for more details. Any help in this matter is appreciated.

Thanks,

Kyle 15:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism from 62.171.194.0/26 range
You participated in a discussion concerning vandalism from the 62.171.194.0/26 IP range about 3 months ago (Dec 2005). An indefinite block of this range was discussed, and you reported that it was from your school and that a block would block you as well. The decision that was reached was that you would manage the block, and unblock for your own use when you needed to. Since then, vandalism from this range has started pretty heavily again. According to the block log, you seem to be refusing to keep the range blocked, and instead saying "Just revert the vandalism then". The entire reason for the block in the first place was that the vandalism was unmanageable, to the rate of dozens of pages of vandalism per day per IP. It is unacceptable for you to expect other editors to mop up the mess from the vandalism range just so that you don't have to keep unblocking and re-blocking the range. I would like to know why your position regarding this IP range has changed. -- Renesis13 16:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

You wrote:


 * 12 vandalisms per day? Oh no, how terrible. Have you every been in the vandalism channel? About that much comes in every 2 minutes. 12 is a very small amount comparatively. Also, how much do I unblock, once every two days? It's reblocked pretty soon anyway so I don't really see much of an issue. I feel that something is being made of nothing here, impacting me in the process. Plus, I often revert vandalism to pages of my watchlist at school, when I see it. Probably a few a day. This, and any good article editing or commenting I do, surely cancels out 12 vandalisms each day? --Celestianpower háblame 17:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

So surely you're in support of not blocking any IP addresses at all? (" ") If you reread my comment I said dozens per day per IP address. So, several hundred per day&mdash;on an isolated, blockable IP range. It doesn't matter that the range gets blocked again "pretty soon"&mdash;you have the ability given to you to unblock IP addresses because it was determined that you would use the ability for the benefit of Wikipedia. Back when this was being discussed, all other editors felt an indefinite block was needed. You volunteered to unblock and reblock yourself, not to unblock and then wait for vandalism to occur, then wait longer for Curps to instate another 30 minute to 3 hour block. Back in December when I went through all 30+ IPs cleaning up the vandalism, there were several bad-faith subtle edits and other vandalizations that had gone totally unnoticed. I never had a problem with you unblocking temporarily during the time you would be editing. I only have a problem with you dropping the issue that was only resolved based on your agreement, and letting the flood of manageable vandalism come back in. -- Renesis13 17:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

You wrote:
 * I see. Okay, I now understand you and see your point. Sorry for my uncivility. I don't really know what to do about it then - I suppose I'll have to not edit from school, how moronic. Whatever happened to that proposal to distinguish between IP edits and accounts - surely that would solve all of my problems. --Cel es tianpower háblame 17:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you able to unblock just when you need to edit and then reinstate the block? It seems like it was going pretty well for a while. About that proposal, it seems to me that it would be an obvious decision &mdash;registered users should always be allowed to edit (especially sys-ops!) unless they are specifically blocked, also. The proposal seems to still be active and I voted my strong support of it today. Also, I appreciate the apology and apologize if I came across as attacking. -- Renesis13 17:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)== GA Trouble ==

Oh just great
Hey Cel, I'm in kind of a mix up, someone's shouted at me and I'm wanting a second opinion on whether I deserved it.

I recently added Torchic to the Good Article nomination page, and have judged a couple of articles while I was waiting for someone to rate Torchic. I've not had any trouble with my decisions (I've had three with no troubles) until I did the Queen (band) article today.

Although it's a good article, I did fail and gave it a thorough reason (I'm kinda over critical times), but I was fair and tried to stay objective. I wrote this: Talk:Queen (band).

This evening I received a message from the nominee saying:


 * I don't buy your failure for one second. You judged it on intenstely high standards. Okay, so there were a couple of grammar usages you didn't like. That just means the article isn't ready to become Featured. The assertation that a few sentences that you felt could be improved mean that the article isn't good is ridiculous. Some of the complaints aren't even valid - why should I define terms such as "arena rock" and "glam rock" within the article? They have separate pages! That's what they're for! Adding defenitions would simply lower the quality of the article. The article is absolutely a good article - I'm putting it back up for nomination right now, and I ask you to not to judge it (or any other article nominated to become good) any more, because you do not seem to be clear on the difference between "good" and "Featured". TheImpossibleMan 19:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm kinda shaken up (I replied on his talk page saying): ''So just because you disagree with my decision you're telling me not to participate in the process again? I'm sorry but that is nothing short of personal attack! I would happily award the article good if you adapted it but this is not a good article status article! I have read Beatles article are of much a higher standard, I reccommend you read some of them before harassing other users! Highway 19:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)''

Probably not the best of ideas, but I'm really mad.. and upset, though I know I shouldn't be. Could you reply back to what I should do, I'm feeling really bad. Thanks, Highway 20:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I just received:

''* I encourage you to actually read my statements before concluding that I'm harassing you and making personal attacks. At no point in my above statment did I disparage you personally. I simply did (and do) think that you're holding articles to far too high a standard.''

''Additionally, you may not realize this, but the Beatles are, by far, the highest maintained group on English Wikipedia. There are literally over a dozen Beatles-related articles that are Featured, and some (such as the Sgt. Pepper's article) are just short of being Featured. Even more, read articles like Something, then tell me that the Queen article isn't even good. TheImpossibleMan 20:01, 29 March 2006 (UTC)''

I'm not replying until I know whether to keep going or to hide.. Highway 20:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for replying, I'm feeling better now, especially since Corbin just failed it again XD. I think the PA came from the telling me not to review anything, which felt pretty bad, but I will look into it. The guy could use some grammar usage tips though XD, Thanks Highway 22:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalbot?
Hi, Celestianpower, I see you and I blocked 209.123.28.250 at the exact same moment, and both for 31 hours, too. I've asked about their editing speed here on WP:ANI, please check it out. What do you think? A bot? Could they be blocked for longer? Bishonen | talk 17:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC).

Torchic
WE PASSED! : P I'm grinning at the moment, it passed! Okay, it was a user I haven't come across, but they appear to have very good judgement (I was trundling through everything) and OH my god!! I'm so annoyingly happy : P Anyway, just to let you know, but this a good step, see you later. Yay! Highway 23:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

List of words mainly used in American English
Apology accepted. Nothing wrong with deleting incorrect entries, just so long as people know they are incorrect. Unfortunately, as fast as some are deleted, they are replaced by other editors. I'd suggest that rather than just deleting the text, this is a case where commenting it out makes sense, with an explanation, as it signals to later editors they need not bother putting it back in. WLD 14:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Image question.
Sorry to bother you on something so trivial, but you were the first username I saw. I asked someone to help me out and do something with a few pictures because I was having trouble doing it myself. The following two pictures, he says, look exactly the same (the way I wanted it), but it doesn't look that way on my computer, signifying that the upload didn't work properly. Could you just give me a quick yes/no as to whether the two pictures are the same? Thanks a bunch! → &ensp; J @  red &ensp; 03:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * commons:Image:Olympic flag.svg
 * Image:Flag of the Olympic Movement.svg
 * I know CP is sleeping right now, so I'm taking the liberty of answering. Yes they are the same, and I've had this problem before, make sure you do a hard refresh between uploads, otherwise the old image will dispaly, making you think you haven't done it correctly. Good luck, psch  e  mp  |  talk  04:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

You currently on IRC?
Are you currently on IRC? I need to discuss something with you about admission to Esperanza. NSL E (T+C) at 09:24 UTC (2006-04-03)

Bulbasaur
The narration is Ok...but its quality is quite low as it is very soft. Thanks-- Tdxi a  ng  陈 鼎 翔  (Talk)  Contributions  Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 09:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Starfleet ranks and insignia
I am currently underfire on this featured list candidacy with issues regarding copyrights.

I and other wikipedians recreated rank images that appeared on Star Trek listed at Starfleet ranks and insignia. The curent contravercy is weather or not should the recreation be considered a derivate work.

In my view simple geometric shapes (a circle or 4) cannot be copyrighted. And copyright concerns enter a grey are at best if not being examples of Copyright Paranoia.

I can understand if you prefer to stay away but I was wondering what do you thought regardless.

-- Cool CatTalk 17:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Something odd
Oh, look at that. I'm absolutely baffled as to how it got there. -ZeroTalk 16:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Spam message from MiszaBot
This is a spam message from the friendly Misza13's spam bot! This message carries virtually no information, so please feel free to delete it altogether.

Stressed?
Hey, I noticed your last few changes. I'm sorry you feel that way, I hope you'll feel better soon. --Joann e B 22:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)



thank you
For copy editing my statement. I Lov  E Plankton 12:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Borrowed commas
Sometime back I borrowed two commas off of your user page - I took very good care of them and they have now grown up (one is semicolon and the other a percentile) and are proud parents of their own little commas - I would now like to return them to you with their offspring (principally because they are keeping me awake at night) ; % ,,,,, --Alf melmac 12:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Pokémon
I have no clue what to do... the pictures are still in the archives (heheh) but I normally write everything on the Sunday.. which I didn't because I was unsure. Personally, I'd rather not update it without pictures and leave it where it is until this is sorted out. Thoughts? H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 12:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)