User:Grue/archive6

''These discussions are archived. Do not reply here. Use User talk:Grue instead.''

Multiple personal attacks and violations of WP:CIVIL.
Comments like this and this are completely unacceptable per Wikipedia's policies of assuming good faith and no personal attacks. Please do not make any further comments of a similar nature or you will be blocked from further editing. Just because people disagree with you does not mean that they are "antisocial freaks". Moreschi Deletion! 16:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Personal attacks? Do you even know what "personal" means? And regarding the second comment, it is entirely factual. Do you know when Userbox Wars started? I suppose you weren't a user back then, otherwise I suppose you'd understood why I said that.  Grue   19:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

dyk
Backlogged. Baka man  22:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Notice
An article that you have been involved in editing, Seven day roguelike, has been listed at Articles for deletion/Seven day roguelike. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Lankybugger 19:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Pavlovsky
A suspicious person could, of course, say that this image could have been taken at the entrance of any of several dozen other Pavlovsks in Russia...&mdash;Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I never said I didn't believe you, but, looking at the problem logically, a picture of a road sign in the middle of nowhere is a poor proof of the statement in the article. Besides, no offense, but the quality of the picture is such that one can hardly make out "coniferous forests, dirt road, and water reservoir in the background", even if these indeed were a sufficient combination needed for proof.  That's not to say I don't appreciate the effort :)  Any idea why they would call the settlement differently from its official name?&mdash;Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No idea. Perhaps shorter signs are cheaper to make.  Grue   20:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Fuck it"
Randomly clicked on your tag in a RfA discussion and stumbled upon what looks like a good, well-established editor giving up on the project. Yeah, it looks like your article got short shrift, and hopefully someone can undo that one day. Sucks that no-one seems to have noticed you leaving. I'm no-one around here, but hang in there. Rawling 00:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Hidden
I think I have fixed the [hide] instead of [show] error on the hidden template, but please feel free to review this and ensure this is the case. Ian ¹³ /t  13:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

re Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Nerd Boy (2nd nomination)
If a painting's so important to art critics, can't they cite the books or articles of art criticism (even if they're just in print) that verify its importance? If an online webcomic is important, shouldn't there be a source somewhere to prove it? Citing the usenet group it's posted to is no better than citing the web site of the comic itself; we need independent secondary sources to make, analyze and verify claims. It's original research to make the claims ourselves. You can't verify "one of the best known," "has large numbers of fans" or "had a hiatus that damaged traffic" by citing the comic itself. We couldn't get away with an article on the Death of Superman that only cited the comics. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The article you mentioned has no references and two external links, which is less than Nerd Boy had. Now, as for verifying, you'd be surprised how easy is to verify some stuff.
 * "one of the best known," - just ask on alt.ascii-art
 * "has large numbers of fans" - http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=nerd+boy+fan+art
 * "had a hiatus that damaged traffic" - http://groups.google.com/group/alt.ascii-art/about
 * Even if you don't believe that these particular sentences are true, it's still no reason to delete the whole article, because >600 strips (and this is damn surely verifiable) is a reason for notability by itself.  Grue   10:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No, notability means we have independent secondary sources. 600 strips is a sign that someone is likely to have taken note of it and given us such sources, but you'll still need the actual sources. "Just ask" or checking search results is original research, and citing the group is not an independent source. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 13:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean independent sources? It's an ASCII art topic, so of course it's discussed on alt.ascii-art, because that's the place to discuss ASCII art. Most of ASCII artists hang out there. So it is not surprising that most of material about ASCII art is found on that group. If you were researching an article about mathematics, you would search mathematical books and mathematical sites for references. If you research an article about ASCII art, it is obvious that alt.ascii-art should be your first stop. It's simple, really. Just common sense.  Grue   15:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Baba Yetu
about a year ago the page Baba Yetu (the title screen song from the PC game Civilization IV) was deleted. im wondering if i could somehow retrieve the text of that article? it contained the swahili lyrics and also a translation. The lyrics are available on the internet, but I had managed to get someone to make some minor corrections making the wikipedia version the most accurate on the internet. i don't want to argue about whether the page should have been deleted or not, all i need is the text of the article. many thanks for your time. Sahuagin 22:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * many thanks kind sir! Sahuagin 02:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

List of unusual deaths
May be coming up for AfD yet again; check the talk page. You commented on the last vote, so I thought I'd mention it, in case you're still interested. - DavidWBrooks 21:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Adding 'Criticism'
Do you honestly characterize the list of Patchouli edits as simply adding criticism of IR? That just seems such an absurd characterization of obvious POV pushing. I mean, seriously, Patchouli added and re-added a "nickname" for Iran as "land of mullahs" based upon a few disparate sources, none of which called it a 'nickname'. Khomeini's Islamic Leadership was a definite POV fork. The list could go on and on. I hope you reconsider your disparaging remarks towards me, for not only do I think you are wrong in treating Patchouli's edits innocently, but also you have done wrong in your claims regarding me and a supposed 'POV mob'. Also, it would be nice if you would address me with policy & guideline arguments in response to my central WP:USER arguments, instead of speculating that, if you exclude votes, then there was no consensus for delete. The Behnam 15:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Look, I don't really care about these political articles. I think everyone who edits them is POV pusher for one or the other side, so I try to stay away from them. The article in question was something totally unpolitical, and yet you managed to somehow connect it to Iran and all that stuff I never heard of. A cursory look at the articles Patchouli recently edited shows that they are indeed one-sided and I wouldn't say it is exactly his fault...  Grue   16:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The connection with Iran was to demonstrate the strong POV and pushing of POV on the part of Patchouli. They happen to involve primarily Iran- and Islam- related articles.  I don't know why you say Patchouli's one-sided edits are not his fault; it is everyone's responsibility to develop neutral articles without OR.  Patchouli appears to have a problem with that; I find myself running into articles contaminated by his POV OR contributions all the time these days.  But none of this changes the fact that the user subpage doesn't qualify under WP:U; nobody has addressed this critical argument on the deletion page, even though this is my main point, and is central to judging user sub-pages in deletion debate.  The Behnam 07:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

DYK needs updating
It's been 13 hours since the last update, if I'm reading correctly. Can you give it a nudge? Thanks :) Kla'quot 09:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD help
Hi Grue. I was cleaning up an AfD and came across this post. Would you mind reviewing it for me. I'm hoping to keep the pot from boiling over more than it already has. Thanks. -- Jreferee 20:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a joke. Do you want me to edit it to mark it as such, or maybe remove it altogether? I don't care either way.  Grue   21:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * A second review of the post is fine with me. Thanks for taking a look. -- Jreferee 16:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a random visit
This a adamantium comment. All craftsdwarfship is of the highest quality. It is encrusted with rubies, decorated with wagon leather and encircled with bands of elephant bone. This object menaces with spikes of bread. On the item is the image of a vandal in obsidian. The vandal is melting. On the item is an image of a Grue in ASCII. The Grue is laughing.

(Sorry to have bothered ya, but my university assingement is boring me to tears and needed to clear my head somehow. Feel free to remove this :) Best wishes! Charon X /talk 02:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC))


 * LOL! That was... weird. Not many visit my talk page as of late...  Grue   17:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hehehe, I'm glad I was able to er... freak you out a bit (and it helped me too). In hindsight it might prove a liability though... If the comment gets removed I might throw a tantrum, strip naked, beat up random bystanders and then jump into the nearest lavaflow. Charon X /talk 03:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (er, for those visitors scratching their heads in wonder... check out Dwarf Fortress and you'll understand (maybe)) Charon X /talk 21:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

"Wikistalking" and Quarashi
I'm not getting the paranoia here. While I've checked the contribs of a number of users who had problems with sourcing and fair-use images ( and recently), to my knowledge you haven't ever had those problems. I came upon Quarashi when cleaning out the Qua listing of the album covers. I don't much care about Icelandic bands, but I do regularly sweep galleries of non-free images out of band articles and TV station articles (as well as others) when I see them, as they aren't allowed per WP:FUC #3 (they aren't the least amount of non-free images needed for identification) and #8 (they are not needed for identifying the subject of the article and they are not specific subjects of commentary). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Since you're already at the Q, you must've missed Pink Floyd discography, Bob Dylan discography and so on. Removing album galleries in this obscure article won't change the status quo. Also, if you've read the article, there's enough commentary for each album for any reasonable purposes.  Grue   07:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yikes. >_< Looks like this is as big a project as dealing with TV stations. I'll dig in. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, it's not like I'm doing them in order; we have thousands of album covers, and more every day. I pick a few prefix letters and dig in pretty randomly, to keep from burning out. I've had to clean up a few discography galleries in the past. Usually bands I've never heard of, but I've cleaned out the Weird Al article and some others. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

A very personal attack on your conduct, in the name of WP!
I'm surprised and appalled that, even after attaining adminship in 2005 as shown here, you have acted contrary to WP's guidelines and policies.

In Articles for deletion/Nerd Boy (2nd nomination), you made weak arguments for keeping the article, and showed disdain for the policies, and made some pretty snarky comments when people were just making sound decisions based on the guidelines. Mostly, I have problems with your assholedness (I'm taking you up on your free speech banner right now). Even though you were generally right here,, and supported the article with a very good source, you were a giant asshole to A Man In Black. And although it is a small thing, you should know better than to argue to keep an article just because it is "important", as you did in Articles_for_deletion/List_of_unusual_deaths. And I can't believe that in Requests_for_adminship/Doug_Bell, you agreed that someone should be denied adminship for a highly uncivil comment, when many of your comments reek of snarkniness and disdain for anyone who disagrees with you. If there was a way to nominate an admin for recall, I'd definate nominate you. Your work in defense of fair use images does not justify your rude and spiteful behavior, especially since you're supposed to be an example to other editors. Blueaster 05:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh wait... After reading that page on Adminship, I guess that you can still be both an admin and an asshole. Incivility doesn't outright interfere with your administrative duties... Blueaster 06:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word Association (3rd nomination)
I've reverted your removal of my changes to this. This was closed by a non-admin who couldn't delete the pages. The list of pages actually deleted is all that was added to the MfD. I always add the list of pages deleted whenever I close a mass XfD discussion to provide a record of the deleted pages (since it can be a pain to identify them later if the deletion is overturned, or simply to have a record), so my additions to the page can be considered as part of the closing process. Thanks, —Doug Bell 16:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I put the list on the talk page. And if it wasn't an admin who closed the discussion, then it's obviously was an invalid closure and should've been reverted. Man, this thing is a mess...  Grue   17:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

DRV
Deletion review/Log/2007 April 4. Which is what you should have done instead of "unilaterally" (to use your word) undeleting. Guy (Help!) 11:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

WIkifun
Round 14 is starting just about now. --Spondoolicks 17:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice work!
I love the fair use piece you wrote (it's linked on his user page) completely agree. Aaron Bowen 10:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

MfD on you
Hi Grue,

Some folks are trying to kill one of your subpages here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Grue/List of ethnic stereotypes. I did my little bit to stop them, and notice that they didn't even notify you. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Abu badali
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving Abu badali has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Abu badali. You have expressed an interest in this before, so please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Abu badali/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Abu badali/Workshop.

Thanks, - Jord 16:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Amalgamut cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Amalgamut cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 07:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I have slapped my own Admin approval on this image. I believe deleting this image without taking it thru WP:IfD (or whatever it is called nowadays) is suitable grounds for an indef blcok. I am growing impatient with these politically-correct types who do not realize that there is no way to avoid fair use images -- hence Ignore all rules applies here. -- llywrch 05:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It's probably fair use, but it's not in accordance with WP:NONFREE, which just happens to express why it's not in Foundation policy, which a rogue ban wouldn't nullify - David Gerard 21:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm wrong about that image, it is in accordance (illustrating the album article itself). Nevertheless, a block would still be a rogue block and much more problematic than the deletion of an easily recreatable piece of nonfree content - David Gerard 21:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Threats against Betacommand
Threatening to ban someone because you don't like them implementing Foundation policy is probably not an acceptable use of admin powers. Please read WP:NONFREE until you understand why Betacommand is in violation of nothing. If he was, he'd have been stopped long ago. An arbcom case does not constitute marking someone as fair game - David Gerard 21:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Betacommand is in violation of common sense. Something that has been required to edit Wikipedia for a long time. Not anymore, it seems.  Grue   08:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm a big fan of fair use, and recoil in horror at the abuse of the term in common practice on Wikipedia ... that's why WP:NONFREE is largely bot-implementable, because people keep acting like there's an "I wanna" clause for fair use in US law. So the problem is that common sense isn't common, not that Betacommand's doing anything wrong - David Gerard 14:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool Cat MFD on DRV
Deletion review/Log/2007 May 30 -- Ned Scott 05:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

DRV of that pole vaulter
I believe it was highly improper of you to revert another administrator's closing of that deletion review discussion especially through the use of admin rollback. You have been an administrator longer than I have (probably a member longer than I have) and I believe you should know better than that.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 08:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe it's highly improper to early close DRVs by one of the participiants of said DRV. Especially when there is a growing consensus to overturn the deletion.  Grue   08:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * An edit summary would have been a better method, or perhaps contacting the closer on his talk page.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 08:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Grue/ethics
I don't see that this user subpage has much productive possibility. May I suggest that it likely to incite rather than calm, and thus might be a bad idea? Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 08:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's purpose is to be an evidence for the currently running Arbcom case, and it is a work in progress. It is not currently consistent enough to be used for that purpose, and that's why I'm working on it on a subpage. It is not intended for public consumption at this stage.  Grue   09:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Civility
I am concerned about your repeated pattern of incivil behavior. Your contributions are full of arrogant edit ; personal attacks, including a whole page dedicated to ridiculing other users, and foul language in project discussion. Looking at the concerns by Moreschi, Blueaster, and David Gerard above, it looks like I am not the first one to raise this concern. Civility is one of our five pillars; as an admin, you are trusted to help uphold them, and help the project. Please cease your pattern of incivil conduct, and adhere to our conduct guidelines. Krimpet (talk) 09:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, I'm pretty pissed off right now. The Betacommand's vandal-bot is enough to make everyone insane, then there is the whole group of "ethical" Wikipedians, who are not very ethical, to say the least. However, I don't see anything wrong with accessing ongoing genre edit-war on Lagwagon or ridiculous prod on Hot Water Music. I need to focus on something else, I think.  Grue   09:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Fuskerlogo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Fuskerlogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cogny Castries Navarre.jpg
As so ordered by DRV, Image:Cogny Castries Navarre.jpg is again nominated for deletion. Please see the debate at. Regards,  howcheng  {chat} 21:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Lagwagon Blaze cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Lagwagon Blaze cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bounce FM.jpg
Could you please elaborate on your edit summary "idiocy", that you gave for your edit of Image:Bounce FM.jpg?  Dbam  Talk/Contributions 19:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks.  Dbam  Talk/Contributions 21:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks
Please don't make any more pages like this. It isn't nice. --Tony Sidaway 01:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What's nice Mr. Nice Guy? Deleting evidence for ArbCom case isn't what I consider "nice" for sure. Grue 07:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You can see the deleted revisions easily enough, and so can the arbitrators. --Tony Sidaway 07:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't edit them, which is the whole point. It's like, a workshop of sorts. I'm not sure how you became aware of this page since I never announced it anywhere.  Grue   07:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Emacs22-screenshot.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Emacs22-screenshot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Review at Hidden World article
Hi Grue, the reason I removed the Scene Point Blank review from the Hidden World article is because Wikipedia policy specifies that linked reviews should be written by professional music journalists. When I checked out the SPB review site, it looked like they have a significant number of contributing writers, but the scant staff information blurbs give no indication that any of them write these reviews or run the site for a living. I'm not sure whether I'm being picky about this, but I decided to look after I noticed that the SPB review links inserted in various CD articles were all done by the same user, which never looks good -- it looks to me like a method to increase site traffic. Anyway, I'm willing to go either way on this issue, but I'm still leaning towards removing the link and wanted to offer my reasoning before going ahead. -Cue the Strings 05:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that user that you're talking about, this link was added by myself when I was searching around for decent reviews of the album. The site has professional staff and is notable for its coverage of non-mainstream music community. But the most interesting fact is that the review in question is longer, better written and more informative than the other reviews by "professional" sites. Just see for yourself. Do Wikipedia readers really want to look at two sentence reviews by some Paid Staff of Notable Mag, or maybe they want more elaborate reviews to decide whether they'd like the album or not?  Grue   07:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review - Ethan Haas
Hi - no problem for admitting a mistake - like I say, there's little point in fighting to the hilt when I'm clearly wrong. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, and if you are around, perhaps read through the new closing summary. Thanks ck lostsword•T•C 18:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is in it's 5th AfD
List_of_songs_about_masturbation is up for it's fifth AfD. You participated in an earlier one. If you wish to participate again, please go to Articles_for_deletion/List_of_songs_about_masturbation_%285th_nomination%29 -- Lentower 03:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Crimeinstereo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Crimeinstereo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Anna Svidersky
Howdy! Back in May 2006 you participated in an AfD discussion on the Anna Svidersky article. There is currently a Request for comment on the talk page of the Svidersky article aimed at resolving a disagreement over the state of the article and the use of the Anna Svidersky title as a redirect to the Mourning Sickness article that was created during the 2nd Svidersky AfD. I hope you don't mind the interruption. Any additional or outside input would be greatly appreciated by all the editors on the Svidersky page. Thank you for your time. AgneCheese/Wine 14:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me...
Or does "Gruefuck" have a bit of a ring to it?  Lychosis  T / C  02:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Ptyxur
The area of ptyxur is a micronation I have tried to make the article before, but it was judged to be substandard. For more information go to. I was hoping you or someone else could help me write the article well. Statue2 19:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.


You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)