User talk:Cculber007

Welcome to the Talk of Cculber007
 Wikipedians  and  guests , please fill your opinions, discussion, and others about me as Cculber007 only, placing here. If it is about pictures, articles, and other issues including Wikipedian policy in legal way (illegal ways will give you suspendion in the policy of Wikipedia that protects the rights of Wikipedians) must be in  Cculber007's Talk archive , not User talk:Cculber007 otherwise they will be  deleted . if I get  disrespectful threat or senseless messages like incorrect warnings . ' I also delete messages without reading them if they are not in comment space. I will not read messages if they are under photographes space, userboxes space, or Cculber007 profile. I read them if they are in the area of the comments about Cculber007 '.

"You cannot force anyone to respect you and you cannot tell anyone what to do, you must stick with work ethics and make yourself better in a service with fellow wikipedians." -- 13 January 2008 Cculber007 to Wikipedians of Wikipedia World.

"Deaf people are no different from hearing people, they are normal human beings without hearing." -- 06 January 2008 Cculber007 to Wikipedians of Wikipedia World.

"Education always is powerful knowledge gives you learning and understanding." -- December 1998 Cculber007

"History always repeat our past that we cannot change but we can change future." -- November 1992 Cculber007 to one of Gallaudet University professors.

Hello
Hello, Cculber007. This is llywrch (talk), & I am posting here based on a thread about you on Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents. I have been on Wikipedia for a long time. I also have been an Administrator for almost as long, & I am one of the most senior Admins on Wikipedia who is still active.

Now that I have identified myself, I want to address a few misconceptions I have found on this talk page. First, it established policy for other Wikipedians to leave messages on a user's talk page, & not some other talk page. There are many reasons why this is so, but one of the important ones that the Wikipedia software is configured to alert you when someone wants to talk to you. Telling people to post on another page defeats this, & if people follow your unusual wishes you may miss learning about important information. Getting angry at people who post here & leaving comments on their talk pages telling them not do that is not the proper response; this implies that you do not trust them, & makes it hard for them to trust you or want to work with you.

On the other hand, once you have read these messages on your talk page, you are free to respond however you wish to them -- write a message back, delete them, move them to another page -- or ignore them. This has been Wikipedia policy or custom as long as I can remember; just remember that if someone leaves you a message & you delete it, everyone will assume that you have read it & act accordingly.

Second, you have flagged a number of messages other Wikipedians have left for you as "disrespectful and immature" or "unrespectful treat". I looked over those messages, & it is my experienced opinion that they are not hostile, direspectful or immature -- although your response to them could be seen as so.

This leads me to the main point of posting here. I strongly urge you to rethink how you respond to messages from other Wikipedians. A good reason is that people respond more positively to kind or soft language than they do to suspicious or hostile words. Another good reason, which may be more important, is that you can be blocked from editting Wikipedia if you continue to respond in this way. Although this warning can be made by any Wikipedian in good standing, I am saying that here as a senior Admin; you should consider this a very serious message. The next Admin who looks at your behavior might not be as friendly as have tried to be & she or he may decide to block you without any further communication.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to either leave them on my talk page, or to email me. I would like to help you be a more constructive editor -- which I hope is your goal, since it is my goal on Wikipedia. -- llywrch (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

WP AH
Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

re: history of Oophorectomy
By all means, feel free to add any factual historical information to the articles. This is a user-written encyclopedia and you shouldn't feel afraid to add something if it improves the article.

As for why I did not add any historical originally, it wasn't anything I had researched. The original "article," so to speak, was a redirect to "castration" and therefore wouldn't have consisted of any actual research. Another user decided that it warranted its own article and various users have expanded the article subsequently. As I said, this is a community project and if you think that something is left out, please feel free to add it. -- EmperorBMA|&#35441;&#12377; 19:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Call out
WikiProject Alternate History is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active editor, please add your name back to the Active members list. You can also list yourself as a Supporter if you feel you cannot dedicate the time necessary to be an active member.

Please also see the Project talk page for more information concerning this Call Out. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yoyoma1111
I'll leave a notice on his page, and if he decides to vandalize again, I'll report him. Mokoniki | talk 16:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand that you were just trying to be helpful, but I don't think it was a good idea for you to edit his page. Even if he is close to being labeled as a troll, you should have just left his page alone. It might make him troll you even more. :( Mokoniki | talk 00:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand. Let's give him until tomorrow, and if he vandalizes another page again, I'll report him. Mokoniki | talk 00:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Gallaudet University
Alright, but we're going to have to start warning him if he vandalizes again, or Wikipedia isn't going to do anything. I watched the page and shall keep an eye out. Mokoniki | talk 20:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Not a mistake
The presence of your username on Huggle/Whitelist is not a mistake, nor is it labeling you as a vandal. It is identifying you as someone who is probably not a vandal, and thus your edits are ignored by users of Huggle. Being automatically updated every time someone exits Huggle, you were re-added a minute after you removed yourself. I don't know if it's even possible for someone to permanently remove themselves from whitelist, but no one should need to have themselves removed either unless for some reason they want Huggle patrollers watching them. Reach Out to the Truth 01:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

,

Question
Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you, is this where you want comments and questions? I don't understand where you're going with all of this, but personal attacks on editors are still not permitted. Dayewalker (talk) 22:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think this is much better! Easier to see where you'd like things. Thanks! Dayewalker (talk) 23:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Blocked
I have blocked your account indefinitely because you don't seem to be able to work with other people on this website. For reference, see the hypocrisy at, ; the nonsense at , ; the attacks at ,. Unfortunately, you are the only dolt here. If you are in a "rage moody" then you need to get off Wikipedia instead of calling someone a Fascist. And we don't play with legal threats like the one you implied on Edward's talk page. Frankly, I don't think you understand how Wikipedia even works. Because Edward doesn't have any special "position" or "authorization" like you claimed. A lack of competence seems to be the actual underlying issue behind your misperceptions, so consider that another reason for your block.

So you will be blocked until a) you agree not to pursue legal action, as it is Wikipedia's policy to block involved whilst legal action is pending; and b) you agree not to call people dolts or Fascists, or attack anyone on Wikipedia. To be unblocked, post this below:, obviously inserting your actual reason.

Sincerely,

Yet another disrespectful Fascist dolt who does not deserve his position. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Due to a continued failure of understanding both Wikipedia's policies, the spirit of collaboration, and sarcastic humor—as demonstrated by your edit here—I have now removed your ability to edit your user talk page. You may now request unblock only via the unblock mailing list, by emailing . Thank you, / ƒETCH  COMMS  /  02:40, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "Unfortunetly, you are the only dolt here." There was really no need to call him a dolt. That is only adding insult to injury. I'm sorry, but that was just uncalled for, sir. Not trying to be mean/rude here, I'm just stating what I think should be said. It could be taken the wrong way, you know. LikeLakers2 (talk) 04:04, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems my sense of humor is not appreciated. Sometimes it is best not to speak your mind, such as in matters like this—which have already been resolved. That, of course, could be taken the wrong way, too, but it's something that I've learned. It's hard to create drama when you don't say anything. Anyway, this is a discussion more suited for a different talk page (i.e., mine), and I'm already starting to ramble. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  22:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

E-Mail
I received your email, sorry, I'd rather converse on-Wiki. I see you've already been blocked, I wish things had turned out differently for you. If you decide to return (by emailing Arbcom), I hope you understand that other editors aren't out to get you, and they're not "fascist" because they disagree with you. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. Good luck in the future, whether it's here or elsewhere. Dayewalker (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Krystal111.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Krystal111.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Unblock request
Here is the request we received at unblock-en-l:

Hello, I let you know that I have been changed since it passed several months and I already apologize to few months which he will tell you this is true. I have been more educator and researcher than rather let myself as a fool who made mistakes. I have new pictures for New Echota, and many thingsw. I was a mean user because of my mother who passed away in 2010 but I am not anymore. I hope we can have solution and we work out. I will not post links when they are not referring to Wikipedia issues.

Thanks, Chris Culberson Based on your request, we've decided to let the community at large discuss your unblock request, and I will unblock your access to your talk page so that you may engage in the discussion yourself. I would suggest following the advice given in the second chance template:

--Chris (talk) 20:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have listed this discussion at WP:ANI to attract interested parties to the discussion. --Chris (talk) 23:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * If I'm reading the block log correctly, it seems Cculber007's talk page access has been restored. In this case, the following is from Fetchcomm's block notice above, indicating Cculber007 could be unblocked if "a) you agree not to pursue legal action, as it is Wikipedia's policy to block involved whilst legal action is pending; and b) you agree not to call people dolts or Fascists, or attack anyone on Wikipedia". The block log then mentions further restrictions enacted because of legal threats.


 * Cculber007, your unblock request didn't address any of these points. Blocks on Wikipedia are intended to be for the project's protection and are unlikely to be lifted if there's reason to believe a blocked editor would resume behaving in a damaging way once unblocked. Could you indicate in some way that you understand the reasons why you were blocked (preferably by outlining what you did wrong) and a commitment not to engage in any of these activities in future? TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Looking at the history of this page, I think this user needs to present some serious and detailed explanations of how he/she will modify his/her behavior on Wikipedia before we can consider lifting the block. -- Donald Albury 00:56, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

As per a followup email received from this user on unblock-en-l, another administrator on the list has declined the request outright. I concur with this decision. Among other problems, this user does not seem to grasp WP:NLT:

If I am no longer a Wikipedian, my photographs for Wikipedia which are taken by Wikipedia Commons' agreements are voided and nulled. All photographs, talk page, page, my writing in other articles must be removed otherwise it goes to a court. So as things stand, I don't see an unblock happening. --Chris (talk) 15:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I don't imagine so - nor is there any interest (or, indeed, any comment) in favor of unblocking at ANI. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 16:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * To be fair, the ANI notice specifically said not to comment there, but to instead comment here. :) But I'll agree that unblocking the editor would be a bad idea. From the message left above, this is clearly someone who is looking to cause trouble even now. --  At am a  頭 17:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Userpage
I have no specific opinion on the unblock, but the userpage has got to go per WP:FAKEARTICLE.--v/r - TP 23:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Meh, the userboxes make it pretty clear, though the infobox is a bit hinky. I've added User page to make it more obvious. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012
You have been blocked indefinitely. Closing appeal process, emails to unblock indicate that this will not be a functioning process. All further processes would be via appeal to ArbCom. You should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — billinghurst  sDrewth  07:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Let's Meow Meow! for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Let's Meow Meow! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Let's Meow Meow! until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Old Stone Fort Information Sign.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Old Stone Fort Information Sign.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Old-stone-fort-new-entrance-sign.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Old-stone-fort-new-entrance-sign.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:OldStoneFortMills.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:OldStoneFortMills.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Downtown Calhoun Georgia 2.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Downtown Calhoun Georgia 2.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Vampi for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vampi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Vampi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Little Professor (talk) 00:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ZaxbyLogoREALCHICKEN.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:ZaxbyLogoREALCHICKEN.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:27, 8 July 2015 (UTC)