User talk:Bat ears

Image tagging for Image:Bat ears.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bat ears.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 21:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Matt Aitch, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking 04:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Listen -- if all you have on all these people is that they are NBA players, with no other information, then why are you posting them? --Mhking 04:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Only because it is important that these notable individuals have wiki articles. Bat ears 04:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

If all you are going to post is the single line about each of the players you have mentioned, I will be posting speedy deletion templates on each; there is no source information, no details on any of them. --Mhking 04:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, you can go on down the list with me because I plan on doing all the List of National Basketball Association players redlinks tonight. Have fun! Bat ears 04:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I am reporting you to the admins for posting multiple empty articles. --Mhking 04:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I knew thats what you were doing. I was going to warn you not to waste your time and tell on me... I am only planning on doing a few more anyway.  Later. Bat ears 04:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

And they're all being deleted. Pretty much a waste of time for everyone. Red links, which may inspire someone in the future to create real articles, are preferable to articles with no worthwhile content. Fan-1967 04:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Could care less. Cheers. Bat ears 04:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

In other words, you have no interest in contributing, you just want to cause trouble. Fan-1967 04:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Talk:Don Asmonga, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking 04:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Page creations
I've blocked you for 15 minutes. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for the article creation, but creating the talk pages with little messages is rather pointless and just creates more work for others to clean up after. Would you agree to stop that and discuss the merits of creating the articles?--Kchase T 04:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I already agreed to cease. Bat ears jr 04:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC) (sockpuppett of Bat ears)
 * No more problems from me. Bat ears jr 04:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No more Talk pages for them, either? Fan-1967 04:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just a note, you can edit your own talk page while blocked. You don't need to create an alternate account. That just, makes you look worse =/. Iced Kola  04:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Look, I honestly didnt know editing the talk pages would also be a problem. Will stop that too though... My fault.  And making a "jr" makes me look bad how?  Either way, I just couldnt stand the punishment and had to have an active account just incase I saw something that needed immediate attention.  Bat ears jr 05:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Oden_150_070628.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Oden_150_070628.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mr. Bat ears
Yeah, I didn't like that the stuff was deleted at first either. Then I made a directory, and makde a link to it - and really, he is right. It was a distraction from the substance, and having it on another page was better. If you want it back and you can get TS to agree, then fine.
 * I dont know. I just think the material is worth being looked at.  Who knows how many people are actually going to click the link you made in the Renner afd discussion to find the extended discussion.  Bat ears 21:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi batears
Sorry I didn't get back to you. I've tons of work to do and I'm a bit under the weather, and I'm traveling, so its all a bit much to focus on this thing. I gave this "ruckus" my weekend, because I felt really sorry for Mr. R, and I didn't want him to get to a place where he felt libeled, and that's where it was heading - besides his being treated poorly, I feel. Yes, I would have preferred that info on the AFD too - I think it is important, but a lot of these guys aren't so ... analytic, and they don't see the connection between a discussion on an article vs. why the topic ever got brought up. Of course this was a clear case of some vidictive stuff, that's ongoing. I answered some of your questions on the link page, and I'll try to work on the article within the next 24 hours. I'm quite tired.

How much do you know about image copyright issues? I said I'd write to the family of Amy - when I was ticked at VO, because he was being so impassable - but I've just looked up the rules on fair use, and it is perfectly ok to use photos which are fair use and in the public domain. Videmus Omnia is pushing for full GDFL licencing very strictly, and that's not the rules. The only difference is that fair or free use pics cant go into the commons (which is a thing VO and his friends seem obsessed with). What do you know about copyright specifics per WP, and where I could go to get some verification, from someone who isn't totally obsessed with GFDL only? Are any admins or others good at this? Maybe I'll put a not on the AN - or where else I should put it. Not sure. Thanks. BlueSapphires 14:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)