User talk:Boborok

Dear Boborok,

Please stop vandalizing pages. Thank you.


 * Umm, Above comment from User:68.64.56.200

Dear Boborok,

Yes, but it is damn rude to deface a site that is not fully owned by you (it is owned by everyone).


 * Above comment from User:68.64.56.200


 * I didn't vandalize and never defaced any site, check your wiktionary. Also, sign your comments next time by typing four tilde characters. --Boborok 10:24, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * OK let me clarify then, what I am seeing you do is be an annoyance to the other people on the April 1st page. Someone else has to go change it back and you are not really being funny. Sorry. 68.64.56.200 10:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
Hi,

If you're going to put NPOV on an article, as you did at Droit de seigneur, you need to explain why you inserted the tag on the talk page (as the template itself says). I've removed the tag for the moment, since there's no reason given for its inclusion and I don't see anything that I consider to be NPOV in there. Feel free to add it again if you wish, but please drop a note on the talk page when you do so.

Thanks!

Hbackman 03:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, your edit made it clear what you thought was POV about the article, but evidently I'm not the only one who doesn't understand how/why it's POV, since another editor reverted. Could you please explain your reasoning on the talk page for the article so that we can talk this over and come to a consensus? Thanks. Hbackman 04:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Here it is Talk:Droit de seigneur --Boborok 05:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. :) Hbackman 06:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You asked why I reverted your edit at Droit de seigneur; I've posted the explanation at its Talk page. President Lethe 06:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Weasely
Hi,

If you're going to put on an article, as you did at Daniel Brandt, you need to explain why you inserted the tag on the talk page (as the template itself says). I've removed the tag for the moment, since there's no reason given for its inclusion and I removed anything that I consider to be weasely in there. Feel free to add it again if you wish, but please drop a note on the talk page when you do so.

Thanks! Jokestress 08:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Wikipedia 2: The Rise of the Latrines
Anti-Wikipedia 2: The Rise of the Latrines has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt the subject might not be notable enough for an article. Please review What Wikipedia is not and Notability for the relevant concerns. An example of notability guidelines can be found at Notability (websites). If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 17:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

User subpages
If you want to delete your user subpages, there's no need to take them to prod. Use db-owner instead. enochlau (talk) 07:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Toph3r: UNIX
Why are you completely unaware of what forms a 'Unix-like' system? Stop defacing the Zeus Webserver article. Just because you are not technically competent enough to understand the correct terms, doesn't justify your abuse of this article.--Toph3r 19:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Read this http://www.unix.org/what_is_unix.html . Editing an article on Wikipedia is the most natural thing a Wikipedia Editor can do. It is not defacing. If you continue this harassment I will get you banned from Wikipedia for inappropriate ad hominem attacks. (Boborok 21:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC))


 * Unlucky with your irresponsible AFD's. Well, i'm still here - and you're still defacing articles. --Toph3r 16:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by defacing articles? (Boborok 21:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC))


 * Read your talk page - i'm not the only one complaining about your interference. --Toph3r


 * Do I know you from somewhere or why are you keeping an eye on me? (Boborok 17:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC))


 * That's like the pot calling the kettle black. You saw I made an edit to play.com and you instantly added an AFD tag within it.  Why else would you have been at this page if you hadn't looked at my previous edits?


 * Is it a crime to look at others' "contributions" pages now? I'm fine with you looking at my contrib pages but why add "I'm still here" style messages to my talk-page? (Boborok 21:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC))


 * BTW Toph3r, Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. (Boborok 17:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC))


 * You can quote wiki policy until the cows come home -- the fact of the matter is that you are a serial disruptor to the Wiki society and your talk page *and* edits confirm this. You purposefully, and deliberatelly, listed articles I frequently edit for deletion as a direct result of your being unable to enforce the (defacements) 'edits' you performed.

--Toph3r 17:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * "Deliberatelly" eh? You also spelt Hurd as "Herd" first when you tried to tell me what is UNIX. Shows how much you know about it. If it's uncomfortable for you to write English I also know Russian though it's unlikely we have the same native language... (Boborok 21:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC))


 * Picking up on a persons typo's really doesn't do you any favours. Please note: Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you.  --Toph3r 22:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Headsup
Just thought I'd give you a heads up that the WP:NOT shortuct does not refer to the notability policy. Shortcuts for the notability policy are WP:N and WP:NOTABILITY. WP:NOT is for a different policy, detailing what Wikipedia specifically is not. Cheers. --Hetar 17:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks and sorry (Boborok 17:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC))

Image Tagging Image:Female-ejaculation-98754985778634194873295879587436034.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Female-ejaculation-98754985778634194873295879587436034.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will 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.

By the way, to clarify, you provided a source; however, the source information is incorrect or the site is no longer available. Also, can you please point me to where the rights to this image have been released? Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Missing image Image:Firstworld.png
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Firstworld.png, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Firstworld.png is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Firstworld.png, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Firstworld.png itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 14:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate Image:Black-gmail-opera-948759832748237568732648761532987587465.png
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Black-gmail-opera-948759832748237568732648761532987587465.png, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Black-gmail-opera-948759832748237568732648761532987587465.png is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Black-gmail-opera-948759832748237568732648761532987587465.png, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 01:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Opera Black Gmail.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Opera Black Gmail.png. I noticed 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 even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 04:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)