User talk:とある白い猫/Archive/2008/02

General discussion in ArbCom
I realize you mean well, but the general discussion section exists for a reason, as it did in the previous case and every other ArbCom case. Please stop moving it. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 19:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It belongs to the talk page. My GOD I cannot even move discussion to the talk page... You know, just forget it. I won't even try discussing this. I surrender to your revert-waring skills as I clearly can't compete. -- Cat chi? 19:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Always good to see the skills are recognized. Seriously, though, the General Discussion section belongs there. Perhaps what they're discussing belongs on the talk page, but in that case you should have just moved the discussion, not the whole section. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 21:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I suppose I have misjudged you. I am just so sick of revert wars. Why don't you do what you suggested? -- Cat chi? 22:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Very well. Seems a reasonable thing to do. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yay! I owe you an apology. This episode thing has been way too intense :( -- Cat chi? 03:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Starfleet ship classes
An editor has nominated List of Starfleet ship classes, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Indian women artists
Another editor has added the " " template to the article List of Indian women artists, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 21:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Kikuchi_Masami.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kikuchi_Masami.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media 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 this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Ja-0
A tag has been placed on Template:Ja-0 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Ja-0
Template:Ja-0 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Naohiro19 revertvandal (talk) 17:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? -- Cat chi? 17:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Oh My Goddess Logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oh My Goddess Logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:United Federation of Planets flag.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:United Federation of Planets flag.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wargames View at NORAD.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Wargames View at NORAD.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:List of computer viruses
A tag has been placed on Template:List of computer viruses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Afsouth-logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Afsouth-logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 04:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Oh My Goddess Manga cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Oh My Goddess Manga 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 the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 01:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser then?
Surely there is enough for a checkuser for this then? - "#Real identity of Jack Merridew: Could it be Davenbelle/Moby Dick" - whya don't you put it up there? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Arbitrators are capable of handling checkusers. As this is arbitration related on a complicated case, I don't want to spread the disruption in any way. -- Cat chi? 02:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, was wondering about that. Thought it could get lost on that huge page though...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It wont get lost. I wont make the same mistake as I have done with Moby Dick. ;) -- Cat chi? 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Planetes episodes
List of Planetes episodes is under discussion at WP:FLRC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Fullmetal Alchemist episodes
You have made many edits at List of Fullmetal Alchemist episodes which is under discussion at WP:FLRC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Proving Ground (ENT episode).jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proving Ground (ENT episode).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 05:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

CVU
Hey, I don't mean to bug you too much but what happened? I haven't logged in for a while and the link on my userpage to CVU is broken! Thanks! --MADISON (talk) 13:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Essjay had booted me off the group and started a CVN. Since then I avoided it. Counter-Vandalism Unit is still out there. -- Cat chi? 14:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Typical behaviour
How much do you know me to make that assertion? Have we met? -- Cat chi? 23:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've witnessed your behaviour in several places. User:Dorftrottel 23:37, February 19, 2008
 * Can you name some? After if it is "typical", it shouldn't be hard to give examples. I do not consider myself to be remotely abrasive so I would like to know what area to work on. -- Cat chi? 23:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe tomorrow. User:Dorftrottel 23:53, February 19, 2008

OTOH, wouldn't you agree that you have kind of a controversial history? Granted, some if it dates back to your Cool Cat days, but I see a similar attitude at play in the way you've been crusading against Jack Merridew for quite some time now. Or maybe it's my own POV. User:Dorftrottel 00:12, February 20, 2008
 * Umm... Feel free to double check on that. I feel the contrary is happening. I do not particularly feel like a controversial individual. If my analysis on Jack Merridew is correct, Davenbelle/Moby Dick/Diyarbakir would have been wiki-stalking (WP:HA) me continuously for the past three years. -- Cat chi? 00:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll follow the development of that. If half of it turns out to be true, I owe you an apology. User:Dorftrottel 00:30, February 20, 2008

Speedy deletion of Template:User wikipedia/Counter Vandalism Unit2
A tag has been placed on Template:User wikipedia/Counter Vandalism Unit2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Userpagebox
A tag has been placed on Template:Userpagebox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Template speedy deletions
You really don't need to notify me like that. If it needs to go, just speedy delete them :). -- Cat chi? 22:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you nominating every orphaned template for speedy deletion? If so why? -- Cat chi? 23:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seemingly that would be "yes" and "that's a very good question", respectively. In the cause of "cleaning up old data" we're creating further "data" in the form of an equal number of talk-page discussion, and absorbing large amounts of people's time.  Not much time per person, granted, but integrated over the whole wiki, a good chunk.  Here, "speedy" is a complete misnomer;  the not-very-lightweight process involved is really much more in the style of a highly speculative "prod", which really just serves to remove the requirement for any actual deletion rationale beyond "it's orphaned, so hey, maybe it might also be 'deprecated'".  Alai (talk) 01:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm tagging templates that seem to no longer be of value to the project. There's no real need to keep old templates around; in fact, a lot of them seem to be test templates or templates from when users were new and unknowing. I'm (trying) to avoid templates that are substituted or are part of a larger series. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * What purpose does it serve to seek them out and get them deleted? Deleting them wastes more server resources and admin time. So I would recommend leaving them alone as they do get deleted (slowly) over time. Instead of tagging them one by one, how about compiling a list and let people process that. This would save you time as well. -- Cat chi? 03:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a list; as you can see from my contributions, I do letters of the alphabet at a time. Some of the templates I've been tagging are years old. And, I don't mind the work, and I usually end up deleting the templates myself when seven days has elapsed (no admin time wasted). Also, I try not to waste server resources as much as possible (one small step: not using an annoying image alongside my user notifications). --MZMcBride (talk) 04:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Unless there is a problem with the templates, 'deleting' them does cause problems. For example you generate an extra log that wastes server hard drive space. Of course the amount of waste is trivial at best. I really think you should leave the matter to its natural course. We have greater backlog on copyrighted images with possible legal implications. -- Cat chi? 13:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Oop, forgot one thing. The script I use automatically notifies the original creator of the template that is being tagged. I don't check who it is, and unfortunately, getting a list of pages that a user was the creator of isn't particularly easy to do. So, unfortunately, you may get a few more messages. I apologize for any inconvenience. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I would probably get hundreds of messages. If you take a look at my talk page, it has been dominated bu bot talk and that does become inconvenient over time. "You have got a message" pops up and it turns out to be a bot... -- Cat chi? 03:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Kurdistan Workers Party
✅ for 1 week. See if that helps. If after the protection the vandalism resumes, feel free to re-request at WP:RFPP. Cheers!  « Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 20:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Kirill Lokshin/Archive 7
Can you please take a look at this? At the very least confirm that you had seen it. :/ -- Cat chi? 12:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have seen it (though I would much prefer that you guys keep your arguments on the case pages). Kirill 13:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Arbcom /evidence page for episodes is a bit too long and editing it has been rather difficult. I am somewhat panicking because the voting on the arbitration case has started and I feel the late evidence I provided may be overlooked. The sections on the evidence I collected that I would like arbcom to take a closer look are:
 * #Real identity of Jack Merridew: Could it be Davenbelle/Moby Dick
 * #Continuing harassment from Ned Scott
 * #Common editing behaviour of some users (Meatpuppetry)
 * #Gaming the system such as the arbitration injuction
 * So far arbcom has addressed the sections (to a degree)
 * #Bot-like (automated looking) edits by TTN
 * #Not seeking consensus
 * #Revert waring
 * I can understand why arbcom would perhaps disregard these sections in "/Proposed Decision"
 * #Vandalism
 * #Community ignored the issue
 * #Intentions
 * Aside from these I feel the combative mentality (comradeship) exhibited by some of the users has not been addressed. This is more evident in sub pages of the arbitration case itself such as the talk page of the proposed decision. Any time something is said about one of them they all defend each other 'to the bitter end'.
 * I am very concerned because after the first arbitration case the disruption continued. I do not want to deal with 2 more months of disruption just like the past case. As it stands I feel the passed remedies will not be adequate in resolving the dispute. Despite the temporary injunction by arbcom, people have continued to mass remove material. Alas on 'video game' related articles and not 'television'.
 * -- Cat chi? 14:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)