User talk:Bobak/July 2005 - October 2006

The Gulval disaster zone
Hi, I've fixed up the Gulval page that you tagged, it looks much cleaner now and I've added a bit more info, though I'm not really sure how to deal with the stupid picture link that was left in the middle of the page - can you help me out? I will probably pop by later and try fleshing out the rest of the article as it is a bit barren. - R 11-Apr-06

Something regarding my Photos? You're welcome to look/comment at my Photo Gallery page.

No sorry, you misunderstand me - I have tidied up the page, but as I have only recently started contributing I don't really know how to deal with pictures. The page you tagged has a picture link embedded in it, which when clicked goes to some Wikipedia copyright page. I don't know whether this means that the picture doesn't exist, whether it has been removed for copyright reasons, or whether the original author didn't know what they were doing with the link. You seem to have some skills in this area, and I wondered whether, seeing as you flagged the page, if you would mind having a quick look at the link and tell me what its all about - many thanks - R

Immurement
A search shows that this means merely "imprisonment" which is not a capital punishment of itself. Why is it a death penalty? Rmhermen 19:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Hi, thanks for the question: Often, particularly in ancient/medieval times, the person immured was not intended to be punished by imprisonment, rather killed. This is similar to burning or being buried alive in that it may be intended to kill the person (or not). When I've heard it used as a term to describe a way of dispatching people it's been used as "sealed in a wall" or "walling" (heck, the idea of walling someone was even used in The Simpsons (the episode was "Last Exit to Springfield"), but when the random idea came up to look it up here I wasn't able to find it anywhere. So I looked around the regular web and found the term immure/immurement is the proper word for the process.  Thus, I added the term to the forms of execution, alas I didn't have the time to do a proper article for the link.  For those brief reasons I think the addition was fair and justifiable. Bobak 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The propblem is that the definition appears to be imprisonment, not execution. The online definitions I checked made no mention that it was anything other than a synonym for imprisonment. The list on the article already mentions starvation I believe. Rmhermen 15:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I noticed you editted out immurement without any further discussion.  Well, please let me convince you otherwise:
 * "The problem is that the definition appears to be imprisonment, not execution". This reasoning is flawed: If you want to emphasize on the specific cause of death as when speaking about immurement, then you could easily eliminate "burning" by saying it simply causes massive organ failure and/or asphyxiation, "Crucifixion" is eliminated because death is caused by asphyxiation and/or loss of blood; "Snake Pit" is poisen (I hope!), and the list goes on...  Immurment is the proper definition of "walling" someone.  If you wall someone the intention is to kill as much as the others.  The fact that death results of starvation is secondary to the primary form of intended execution, which is immurment.  After all, as a lawyer, I can assure you that the prosecution of a criminal is the intent (how did they mean to kill someone, mitigated by how awful a way they chose to dispatch the victim), certainly not how the person eventually succumbed.
 * "The online definitions I checked made no mention that it was anything other than a synonym for imprisonment." To base the entire use of a word on a mere online definition misses the greater understanding of word.  Just compare any online dictionary definition to an encyclopedia definition to see how the mere definition of a word can miss entire uses and practical understandings of said word.  Please allow me to refer you to Merriam-Webster's definition of immurement; please may close attention to definition (2), which states "to build into a wall; especially: to entomb in a wall" (emphasis in original).  Now, the term "entomb" does not say, alive or dead when placed inside, but the implication is very clear.  After all the mere definition of the word burning does not imply capital punishment any more than immurement, but both can be used with that clear implication.
 * The use of "walling" (which is even more vague a definition than "immurement") is well documented in history and popular culture. For a quick historical example, please refer to the Wikipedia article on Akaba.  It was used to dispatch a prisoner is the Oz (TV series)(episode 40), where a character's enemies seal him up in a thick concrete wall (death was clearly the intent).
 * The actual use of this for of execution is very old and fell out of favor (likely because the only people who could afford to execute someone in this way were emperors, kings and warlord; and it was probably expensive to build walls that would accomodate the victims). The only reason it was resurrected for a show like "Oz" is that the show took particular glee in dispatching characters in increasingly brutal (and in this case, primitive and shocking) ways.
 * For the above reasons and more, I am re-adding immurement. I am more than happy to go with a different word, if someone can find one that is better defined. Bobak 16:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[With respect, I have moved a copy of this discussion to the discussion page for capital punishment (it's #39) since it would probably benefit from more input and feedback. I feel odd discussing this here. Bobak 16:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)]

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! &mdash;  UTSRelativity (Talk)  01:19, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Naming images
I noticed you've uploaded Image:12-05oaxaca098.jpg and I thought I should warn you about your mistake. You shouldn't upload images with such names, because they're hard to track and we can't really know what is it about without actually looking at it. We suggest you rename your image with an intuitive name that describes the image itself. Thanks, and good editing! Flying Canuck 19:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Ack... :-p I wish I'd known sooner, I just uploaded something like 50 images (see the gallery) just using my old names that go by the date of the photo.  I will make the change from now on, and hopefully get some time to repair the others.  Bobak 19:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Not only the name is a bit unfortunate, Photo taken by Bobak Ha'Eri. December 2005. Please observe license and properly cite in use outside Wikipedia. is not really a great summary. The second scentence should go to Licensing, if at all. And the summary should contain info of what we can see in the picture and maybe the conditions it was taken under. All the best. --Dschwen 07:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well... as an American attorney allow me to respectfully say: don't tell me how I should handle my notices on licensing. ;-)  I'll try to add more descriptions but I was simply going off of the other (apparently bad) examples I saw on Wikipedia Bobak 16:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I was not questioning your competence at all, how would I without knowing you are an attorney :-). But allow me to ask what are the legal reasons for putting the statement about the license (which is essentially contained in the license text in the first place) in the summary section (which is supposed to tell the reader about the image contents) instead of the license section? --Dschwen 17:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm joking a bit, but my point (in that it wasn't made directly) was, lawyers are more careful than most, and since there's no word limit I might as well clarify the license since (frankly) the CC licenses are not very well known and read confusingly to just about anyone outside law. Bobak 18:01, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

UMN photographs
Hey, great work on the aerial views of the University of Minnesota. They're nicely geographically informative. However, I don't feel the nighttime shots of the Washington Ave. bridge and the Coffman Union illustrate their subjects too well. Have any better photos of them? Ziggur 12:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I have a daytime of the Wash Bridge and I think the Coffman photo was better suited to just the Coffman article (which I noticed after posting that photo). I'll ax the one in the UMN article if it hasn't already been. Bobak 20:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow, i love your night-time photographs, they are so clear and crisp. What type of camera are yo using and whats the sutter speed for those night shots.  Thanks.--Gephart 02:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi there, thanks! I'm not a photo expert, but I use a pretty basic Sony Cybershot set to low light exposure --the trick is to place it somewhere very stable (a tripod would be preferable, but I don't have one and have to set it on objects with the timer set).  For more details on each photo, I believe you can click on the image link and, at the bottom of the Wikipedia generated image:[photo] page there should be the details of what settings were used.  If you want a short cut to the photos I've done, check my user gallery..... Bobak 17:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

VGM
I nominated Video Game Museum because I felt it didn't meet WP:WEB notability requirements. Those voting have every opportunity to disagree and cite reasons why it is notable. I have no issue with the main author at all. Garglebutt / (talk) 01:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I am a gamer and as I noted in my nomination, I had a pleasant time looking at some old games from my Commodore 64 days but that didn't dissuade me from considering the web site non-notable. The issue of whether links should be added to game article is a separate matter and I personally think that is more than reasonable however I note that others have considered that to be linkspam. Garglebutt / (talk) 01:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Without delving into an extended back story, I have been a gamer for over twenty years going back to the TRS-80 and arcade days. I browse a lot of forums, in particular IGN and am an avid Nintendo fan. This is irrelevant however, as the article is mostly about the web sites role as a repository for images. I can't/won't retract my nomination and the vote for deletion will be determined by other parties, not me. Garglebutt / (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I am seeking consensus by nominating this article for afd and let the masses decide. I never said it wasn't a good site, I suggested that it wasn't notable for a wikipedia article. Articles should be well written for all; this article is really a bit of an advertisement for the web site, which makes avid gamers happy, but is not encyclopedic. If it comes back as a section in an article on the history of games, that would be a very worthwhile addition to Wikipedia. Garglebutt / (talk) 02:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Bobak thank you for your insight for the VGM AFD. My hope is restored in the world that it's not full of morons. 144.26.117.1 14:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Res ipsa loquitur...
... I'll absolutely have to remember this as a reason for speedy deletion. Best, Sandstein 21:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * thanks... it was my hasty attempt at intellectual humor ;-) Bobak 21:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Savad rahman
I replied to you on the talk page; in short, I complimented you on your quick, rudimentary cleanup, upon my seeing of which I removed my prod tag, in order that the article, now an acceptable stub, might grow (especially with aducements apropos of notability). I also undertook, consistent with your suggestion, to move the article. Thanks once more for your swift work! Joe 23:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Issue
That was quick! I just wanted a better link to use in dealing with other articles and just created this article a few minutes ago. Cheers, from a fellow (now-displaced) midwesterner. Ari 01:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hola!
Greetings - would you like to add yourself to Category:Lawyer Wikipedians? Cheers! bd2412 T 01:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed - I've long had this goal listed on my User page: Under the banner of WikiProject Law, we will make Wikipedia the world's most comprehensive internet source of free legal information. bd2412  T 01:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

The kitchen sink
Thank-you for your kind words on my talk page. That article was a real abnormality, I couldn't think of a speedy category to delete, people would have voted keep on an AfD. So I hit it with the shotgun of tags, in the hopes it'll attract enough attention to get cleaned up. I find that the Cleanup resources page is very helpful in recent change patrolling, I keep it open to place specific tags on pages - normally one, maybe two.

Licensing Options
Thank you very much for pointing out the need to provide the correct copyright information in picture uploads. And thanks for putting the logo copyright information in for me. I will make sure to do this in the future. Thanks and take care. JR 03:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Baghdad College
My apologies. I am new to Wikipedia. I like the way you have handled the Hussein brothers. I think their attendance is historically noteworthy enough to warrant inclusion of their attendance outside just the list of alumni.9591353082 02:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Cyclone1
Well, thanks. It's just kind of a gag page I made for my friends. Cyclone1 17:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:Gmail
I've just answered your comment on my talk page. Thanks for your warning! :) --Caue (T | C) 12:49, Saturday 2006-04-1 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi. I've left some comments on Talk:United States copyright law. Chevin 11:19, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Wkiproject Azeri
Welcome to Wkiproject Azeri. Thanks for joining, we need more input from knowledgeable people like you. Regards, Grandmaster 05:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Re:O RLY
Sorry, the revert in O RLY was actaully my mistake. Basically I reverted to the edit before the IP vandal without checking the history of the page. It turns out, someone already reverted the vandalism before me, so I accidentally ended up deleting some stuff. Thanks for fixing it. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Bobak, thank you for the offer of help on dealing with copyright tags. Being a semi anarchist, I have never understood these legal stuff, so I will take your offer. Cheers and big Sağol. Mehrdad 17:27, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Battle of the Forms
I'm not doing anything concrete in that area; I'm rather hoping that someone who likes form programming, CSS, and JavaScript, and understands Wikipedia's back end will take it on. I'm a programmer, but don't normally do web front ends. There are many programmers who do. That's whom you need.

I put that message in Wikipedia talk:Newbie Recruitment Initiative as well as Village Pump; it might get some action from people who want to help recruit new editors. Try talking about it there; that might have more effect.

And yes, I know what a "battle of the forms" is, and wish it worked on purchase orders vs. shrink-wrap EULAs. --John Nagle 17:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Azerbayjan
Shall we put it past the WP:WSS/P crew first, counsellor? They (we) are in charge of sorting it all, anyway? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, you're right. Turkey is certainly Asian, but Geo, Arm, and Aze oughtta be European. Thanks for pointing this out. And I should know - I am from the Soviet Union. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Go for it. I have reversed myself. What area of law do you practice? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing my mistakes. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 21:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:022306-gatorland04.jpg
When you say license, are you talking about Wikipedia's GNU Free Documentation License? If so, it doesn't automatically apply to images, so I've marked it as. Can you please change it to if that is what you meant? Thanks, Rory 0 96 (block) 19:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Image:MinneapolisSkyline051602.jpg needs to be tagged, too. :-) --Rory096 20:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you :-)  Since this will inevidably be archived, I have moved a copy of the above to my UserPage.  --  Bobak 20:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Civility
Please note that comments like this are considered incivil and thus are against wikipedia policies. All users are expected to be courtious and respectful to all other users at all times. Please keep this in mind in the future. --InShaneee 16:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You mock his edit and imply that he has an 'agenda', neither of which are acceptable comments. --InShaneee 16:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * This is not debateable; your edit is a clear-cut attack. Do not mock other user's edits and do not accuse other users of having an 'agenda' or you may be temporarily blocked from editing. If you have a problem with the edits of another user, discuss them in a civil fashion on their own merits. --InShaneee 17:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying you can't discuss it; I'm just warning you you won't get anywhere. No matter how you try to explain it, those kinds of comments about another user or their activity are not acceptable. --InShaneee 17:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that YOU were incivil, just the comment that you made, and I was simply trying to dissuade you from doing that type of thing in the future. No harm, no foul. No hard feelings? :) --InShaneee 17:17, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Be careful Acuman is trying to have you blocked
user:Acuman is trying to have you blocked. My suggestion is you talk to the numerous experianced editors who work on the Iranian related articles or the Iranian Wiki community and get a overviw of the problems that Wikipedia has been experiancing. watch your step because, certainindividuals game the system in a manipulative way. 72.57.230.179 00:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Bobak
Please check your e-mail. --ManiF 12:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

About the map of colleges and universities of US
Thanks again. I'll ask my friend in US to have a look about the books; then decide to by or not, or find what I can get from them. What a pity they are not free and not open.--Neverland 14:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar
I did not want to mess up your user page, so feel free to move it around as appropriate. Grandmaster 11:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Grizzy polar bear
Hi I just wanted to ask you, why did you say i was the "single-handed instigator of a revert war" when I was not the first person to revert i only did it twice, and there are still people doing it now? It is unfair on me for you to say that when it is simply not true. Fabhcún 19:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC) Thanks no harm I hate when people get sucked into a revert war, Fabhcún 19:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The link-spammer at 216.49.214.3
Thanks for your appreciation. Editor had good intentions, perhaps, but poor execution. But excellent job tracing the IP back to them! --mtz206 16:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:"that article"
If you have qualms about taking the article that-shall-go-unnamed to afd, I have none:-) If you want me to instead of you, drop me a line on my talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Azaris are ethnic Iranians
I provide sources and user:Grandmaster ddeletes them. He has no legitamate excuse 72.57.230.179
 * What is an Iranian other than a nationality? I am Persian, the ethnicity.  My family's been Persian for generations, and I have never set foot in the country called Iran.  Like many Persians in the West, I don't consider myself Iranian.  "Iranian" is just a place to be a citizen, like the US and Canada.  The historical development of Azeris is no different than Palestinians or Kurds.  They were historically weaker (politically) and were thus put under the spheres of much stronger countries, Russia/USSR and Persia/Iran.  If anything, they're more Turkic than Aryan.  That's my position and it will not sway. -- Bobak 16:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Bobak, sorry for you being dragged into this. I’m having a bitter argument with some of our colleagues from Iran, who claim that Azeris are ethnic Iranians, while Azeris as Turkic-speakers are one of Turkic peoples. It’s not just me opposing their view, but also a number of third party editors, who are completely impartial in this issue. The dispute goes on for quite a long time at the Iranian peoples page. There’s nothing wrong with people having disagreement about certain things, as long as the discussion is conducted in a civilized manner. But this guy employs very provocative methods of making his point, such as adding controversial userboxes to our project page, or Iranian stub templates to Azerbaijan related pages, which resulted in some of Azeri editors taking similar actions with regard to some Iranian pages. This should stop, and probably will because of interference of admins. This anon has already been blocked, fifth time already. Grandmaster 17:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * That is not totally true and you are being dishonest user:Grandmaster. You go as far trying to disassociate Azari music form Iranian music. You made a sentence arguing it was based on a specific article that once authenticated turned out to be saying the oppoiste as you. You have delelted other users expressions and user boxs calling it illegal and vandalism. How can that be? Your arguements grow weaker. I provided genetic evidence, scientific evidence proving that Azeris are only Turcophones or Turkic speakers who are a mixture of Armenians and an Iranic strain. In fact it is your arguemnts on the ground of genetics that are overdue now and need solid citations. You have asked other editors to verify their statemtns but yet you do not do so the same. This is hypocracy. ALso trying to through me out of the Azeri Project page becuase I do not agree with you and one other user. Trying to demonize me and other editors. Even trying to force us to accpet the minority perspective and spelling for Azarbaijan. This is not right and you are making false statments about me. In the past you have deleted others contributions and arguments about the Azari people on the talk page and you continue to do so with me. The people of Latin America are not considered SPainish or Portuges due to their language by anthropologists, they only speak that language. If language was an indicator of race or ethnicity then most Africa would considered European, either Anglo-Saxon or other European groups. Sorry to get you involved user, but user:Grandmaster is gaming the system. He addititonally does not tell you how he gets me blocked strategically by ganging up against me with one other editor. He paints a rosy picture but his edits speak for themselves 72.57.230.179

Thank you
I just want to thank you for your politeness and courtesy that you extended to me regarding the Dorsey and Whit article. I have been having trouble with users lately thinking they are despots on wikipedia, so it was really nice to deal with a reasonable person who actually considered my point of view. Because of this, i am going to drop the whole issue regarding amy k; now and in the future. I wish you well and hope our paths cross again on wikipedia.--Gephart 06:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the kind words...I do appreciate positive comments, since they sometimes get overwhelmed. You've got more guts than I do: while I merely posted pictures of myself in tights, you waded into the Persian/Iranian/... mess on here. :-) Jay Maynard 20:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Peppers
Yeah, I'd seen that discussion, though I haven't weighed in yet. You might want to be careful about "canvassing" to bring attention to the discussion - AbrCom has officially frowned on that sort of thing, and it's been added to the guideline WP:Spam. Thanks anyway, though. -GTBacchus(talk) 17:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Talk page is not protected any more.Geni 17:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Bucerius Law School
When you finish that article, can you please announce it at Portal:Germany/New article announcements? Thank you, Kusma (討論) 22:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Well, I'm on the other side of the river right now, but pretty close :-) Kusma (討論) 22:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

International Students at USC
I agree. International students are not hyphenated Americans. Adding hyphenated American at the back in the USC context, was not most accurate--Dark Tichondrias

Beverly Park
Thank you, it was my pleasure to help out. From your street description, I was able to find the appropriate area by scrolling the map, but I couldn't figure out how to get Google to tell me what coordinates I was actually looking at, so I found it by trial and error, which was a bit of a pain. There must be a better way to use these mapping systems - I'll have to try to read up on how to use them to go from a map to a set of coordinates. The other thing I would like to find is the appropriate USGS quad map of the area. Since works of the US govt are public domain, we can screenshot it and add it to the article for a free picture that can accompany the article to the Main Page. Best, Johntex\talk 15:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Neo-Geo
Just want to say that you have some of the best-written reviews on neo-geo.com. Thanks for your hard work! 24.26.195.76 20:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject College Football!
Hi, and welcome to the College football Wikiproject! We are a group of editors who love college football and work to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this sport.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Please add WikiProject College football to the talk page and list your new article in the new articles section.
 * Looking for somewhere to help? Please see our article to do list or project to do list

If you have any ideas you would like to share or if there is any way your fellow college football fans can help you, please feel free to ask on the project talk page.

DYK
I'm lucky I found out, the person who did it didn't mark it here. --Bobak 20:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry. My bad. I was short on time. - Mgm|(talk) 09:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Montevallosportlogo2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Montevallosportlogo2.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. User:Angr 13:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Montevallosportlogo2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Montevallosportlogo2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Angr 13:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Fight On
Saw you're edit/comment on University of Southern California School of International Relations; its nice to see a fellow Trojan wikipedian. I have wanted to develop more with the director page, but I think I have to make a trip to the univeristy archives or something, as I cant find it online. User:Trojan traveler

Image tagging for Image:Garou-screenshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Garou-screenshot.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. 09:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

My edit summary at WP:AIV
Hi, Bobak. If you look at Special:Contributions/71.195.112.193, you'll see the time of his/her last vandalism or last edit. We never block IPs hours after they stop vandalizing, because if the IP is a dynamic one, or if it's a shared one (perhaps from a public library) the person affected by the block may not be the person who carried out the vandalism. When admins go through the IPs or usernames that have been reported, they remove each one with an edit summary saying something like, "blocked", "already blocked", "seems to have stopped", "doesn't seem to be vandalism" etc., and end the edit summary with "List not empty" while there are still some cases that haven't been dealt with, or "List empty" if they've just removed the last username. That means that other admins who have WP:AIV on their watchlists will know if they're needed to deal with the backlog, or if it has all been taken care of. Hope that helps. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 00:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

College Football use of images
Bobak, since you helped the project before regarding media guide images and fair use, I was hoping you could help again. Recently, another user has removed images of school logos and an image of the cover of a media guide and an image about a player from an article (2006 Colorado Buffaloes football team). They were all tagged fair use, with the last two specifically tagged Promotional. I believe that since the images (not the logos) were illustrating the item being talked about (the player is a pre-season award nominee, and the media guide cover says 2006 Colorado football, that's what this article is about!). Shouldn't promotional images supplied by the media guide/university (the player image was sent by e-mail to subscribers of a list, "pushlished" by the university then, so clearly the Promotional tag fits) be allowed to be used more than other images (such as school logos which I was argue in a second) since the university is pushlishing them for media use? From WP:FUP specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text and from the Promotional tag: to illustrate the work or product in question;. I believe this was being accomplished. For the logos, they are also meeting all this, except they aren't promotional, so I could see reserving the use of their images for limited cases, although using their image on a page of these sorts would help clarify exactally what the article is refering to. Please see the discussion and help there at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Yearly team pages format. Thank you. -- MECU ≈ talk 19:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Being ugly
Hey. Are you saying that (in the talk page on the Colbert Report article) that we should have an article on Brian Peppers?

If so - why? DS 03:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, let's analyze your other examples. Joseph Merrick was also grotesquely deformed, to the point that there have been movies and Broadway musicals about him.

Mahir Cagri was also a web fad, one of the very first; he got a lot of mainstream media coverage, he appeared on MAD TV, XOOM mentioned him on their frontpage... Amir Massoud Tofangsazan got a lot of mainstream media appearances as well... Ghyslain Raza not only had mainstream media appearances, his image was used on the Jumbotron in major-league baseball stadiums, and there was a huge lawsuit. Even the O RLY Owl made it into Everquest and World of Warcraft.

Snopes investigates lots of stuff. That's what they do. We don't have an entry on everyone who ever appeared on Snopes. Similarly, YTMND makes fun of stuff. That's what they do, and we don't have an entry for everyone who gets mocked there.

It's not that (feeling sorry for his disability) gets in the way of (deciding notability). It's that, well, what the hell else is there about him?

"Brian Peppers is clinically ugly. He lives in a nursing home in Ohio, and got arrested for sexual misconduct with a staff member there. His police picture looks so ugly that many people online didn't believe it was real, but it is." We had so many utterly garbage versions of that article, over and over again. Stretching out the tiny little bits of data. He may be in the public sphere by dint of having committed an offense for which he was arrested (was he convicted? Did he go to trial? Did he plead guilty? Do we know?), but so are hundreds of thousands of other people who've done much the same thing - and they aren't notable.

Internet memes are damn easy to create, so we have to have particularly strict standards for inclusion. The reason the talk page was blanked as well was that people kept shoving the content of the deleted page into the talk page. Over and over and over again. The same people. People who didn't participate in Wikipedia in any way except to say "HEY THERE SHOULD BE AN ARTICLE ON THIS PEPPERS GUY HE LOOKS FREAKY!"

And if we let people paste the content of deleted articles into talk pages, then what's the point of deleting them in the first place?

It's not that we were personally offended by the Peppers article. It's that we were annoyed by the page being legitimately deleted, and then re-created. And deleted. And re-created. And re-created. And re-created. By people who had no interest in the project outside of that. Okay? DS 17:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Mail
Activate your e-mail address, I'll send you the garbage versions. You decide. DS 19:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

USC Tournament Wins
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that Wikipedia articles are supposed to provide the reader information that they might be curious about. I was reading the USC article and it said that only one university had more wins than it did. Being that I am in Jordan and considering going to school in the United States, I wanted to know which school had a better athletic record than USC. I did some research and discovered that UCLA did. I know that there are probably other people who have read the USC article and have wondered the same thing. Therefore, since wikipedia is meant to provide people with information I do not see why this piece of factual information was removed from the article. We are trying to create an unbiased presentation of the information. the USC article correctly identifies that it has won things against UCLA at certain times, why can it not provide information that UCLA has done better than it at certain times? I hope that this action is not a reflection on USC since I was considering attending this school next year.
 * In case you don't see my answer on the IP's talk page, here's what I wrote: The information of who specifically has the better record (which is relative, USC has fewer teams competing that UCLA, thus there's an inherent flaw in the system) should be for an article about which collegiate teams have the most championships. Please compare this to the same reason, in the article about Jordan, a person may include where Jordan's GNP is ranked but not who's above and below since that would be extraneous and can be left for an article outlining that list. --Bobak 14:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Bobak! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego talk  01:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Broken comment from talk
Hi, don't know why it happened, but I re inserted a comment you, I assume accidental, removed or caused to be broken from Wikipedia talk:Logos See this edit. Cheers, Garion96 (talk) 23:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK
Very neat article! I had no idea of the existence of City prior to this! Thanks for the contribution -- Samir  धर्म 07:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK
Nice article and tagline. Cheers -- Samir  धर्म 08:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

link to Persian
When you want to link to the article about something Persian, please do not link to Persian, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as Persian people, Persian language, or Iran, by writing out Persian or Persian. Regards, -- Jeff3000 21:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This edit, and the comment is not brash, just informative. Also I've already fixed the link, but I'm just commenting regarding new edits.  There is a lot of work being done in disambiguation -- Jeff3000 22:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Persian people is not that great either. The Persian people article relates not just to the people of Iran, but Tajikistan, and other countries outside Iran.  More often than not, the Persian people link is used to represent the historical spread of the people in that region.  Disambiguating to Iran, however, makes it clear that the person has an Iranian heritage.  In the same way, a person who is born in Iran of American parents, would have a link to the United States.  That's how most links to countries deal with it.  The difference is that Iranian history is much longer, and more complicated. -- Jeff3000 21:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You can be insulted if you want, but you should read both the Persian people, and Iranian people, and all the talk pages. I wasn't born in Iran, but I consider myself Persian, and I still believe the best link is to Iran. Regardless it's not a big deal to me, and you can think things are brash, or insulting however you wish. -- Jeff3000 23:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Pete Carroll semi-protect request:
Since the vandalism was increasing, I decided to semi-protect the page. —   01:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Districts of Azerbaijan
I used one of your reasonings for dabbing at Talk:Administrative_divisions_of_Azerbaijan. Maybe you like to comment and show support for to move all. IMO we should have high quality and unambigous titling as soon as possible. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

The Logo Thing
I am still waiting for someone not to dismiss me but to address my copyright analysis. I do this in the course of my job and it is irritating to be just told I'm wrong and to shut up without addressing my basic points.

Does the LCMS, as copyright holder not have exclusive rights to copy and to display its images?

If so, how does Wikipedia's use qualify under the first factor, since it is not an accredited academic institution?

Isn't the image a work of art, the second factor tending to weigh against fair use?

Isn't the who image being used?

The fourth factor likely finds in favor of fair use, however the first three do not do so.

Why shouldn't I conclude that the fair use case fails or is uncertain?

Also, since wikipedia policy is to remove the logo if the copyright holder protests (WP:LOGOS) why should we not remove it when it is clear that they disapprove? Must we always beg for cease and desist letters? --CTS Wyneken (talk) 01:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Glasnost Bowl
It's amazing how little there is (was) on the Internet about Glasnost Bowl. A good write up on Glasnost Bowl can give a good understanding of Glasnost from a U.S. perspective. I'm looking forward to reading the encyclopedia entry. P.S. I put a link on Giles Pellerin. Henry998 04:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Rasputin-PD.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rasputin-PD.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. 09:19, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hinduism in Azerbaijan
For the above article and the Atashgah, do you know of any other facts & stuff we can use to expand those articles? Bakaman Bakatalk 00:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Logo-troy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo-troy.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. 18:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Littering
Thanks for littering articles with "historic, PD photo goodness". They really help! Cheers, -Will Beback 23:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

hey
bobak,

what is your problem? I was in Dr. Boyd's class when that happened. It is not fabrication. It is truth! Also, 3 USC film professor's told me about the whole deal with John Longenecker and Bernie Cantor.

Wikipedia should be about truthful info, not censorship.

Thank you.

the turtle

belated self-DYKs...
Because the admin who was doing DYKs stopped following policy, I am adding this belated (but confirmed) DYKs (I've added the one for Ming Hsieh's article creator as well):

Re:DYK for Fort Moore
I am sorry for any offense I may have caused by not by not providing you with a talk page notification of Fort Moore's selection. I have only been making the updates because I noticed the DYK template had been left idle for an extended period of time without any other admin updating it. I was unaware that people expected a talk page notification as I have never received one for any of the nominations I have made to DYK and the update instructions at Did you know/Guide do not mention such notifications. I will try to do better on any future updates that I may perform. --Allen3 talk 22:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)