User talk:El Temprano

Parrot photographs
I wonder if you would contribute parrot photographs to the wiki. I would be grateful if you could uploaded the following to commons (or change the licence) which we do not have any photographs - Kawall's Amazon, Lear's Macaw (we have illustration only), Caatinga Parakeet, Bald Parrot, Golden-tailed Parrotlet, Madeira Parakeet. We have the following, sometimes a poor quality photograph, and it would be good to have more of a variety - Austral Parakeet, Mountain Parakeet, Canary-winged Parakeet, Tui Parakeet, Grey-breasted Parakeet, Green Rosella, Yellow Rosella, Purple-crowned Lorikeet, Yellow-crowned Black Cockatoo (in flight), Red-bellied Macaw, Slender-billed Parakeet. If this seems to many, the ones we have not got are a priority. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 10:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC) El Temprano (talk) 10:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC) You must be joking!
 * Unfortunately, he is not. But I understand you feel that way. To clarify, I do not agree with SnowMan's interpretation of things, and I think adding the links was an net benefit. But heck, it takes sense over rules to see that. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 18:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added might not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Snowman (talk) 15:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Links to your website
I have recently become aware of the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds, as well as the motion and your comments in the discussion.

I would feel that it would be a loss to Wikipedia if the links to your site were not permitted. They add valuable resources to the articles - and the motion, with its use of an alternative text for the link, such as would be very suitable, in my humble opinion! I understand the people who think that it should not have your name in the link - this looks wrong in my opinion - but I feel that your contribution is very useful.
 * Photos and text for the Buffy-fronted Seedeater.

I hope that you will reconsider your request to have all the links to your website removed.

I should point out that I have no interest in the bird articles as such - I came across the discussion, and feel that this is an Wikipedia issue, rather than a bird article one.

I am sorry if you feel unwelcomed, or your contributions not to be valued - they clearly are, from most of the discussion at WikiProject Birds!

Regards, --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 10:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

El Temprano (talk) 13:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC) Thank you very much for that. Along with some private messages from some editors I am beginning to feel less of a criminal pariah. I also appreciate that refusing to allow links to my website smacks of a degree of arrogance though I don't think it approaches the arrogance of guys like Snowman. Let me seethe a bit longer and think about the whole issue.

Regards, Arthur Grosset
 * Arthur, in this context, we do not ask you to add the links, others will do that. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 15:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please be aware of No personal attacks, and please consider that as a helpful suggestion. Snowman (talk) 22:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If anybody is currently in violation of policies, it is not Arthur. This link to WP:NPA is wholesome inappropriate in this context. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 14:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * After considering the guidelines, I opted to leave a polite message about the policy of "no personal attacks", in case he should inadvertently end in deep water. I think that this was a helpful comment. My polite note on this page did not accuse anyone of making a personal attack. Snowman (talk) 16:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Read WP:BITE. Your continued policy and guideline trumping is a clear case of WP:BITE. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 16:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Politely informing a new user of an important wiki guideline is helpful. Snowman (talk) 17:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No, this kind of policy thumping after first chasing away a user, who came back despite of that after intervention of several people, is very counter productive, and is exactly what is not needed at this time. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 17:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Snowman, as I left the message that started this section, it's on my watchlist, so I couldn't help but notice your and Kim's messages. From where I am sitting (as a neutral observer), while the words may have been polite, the implication was not. I have not seen Arthur make any personal attacks, so to refer him to that particular guidelines would appear unnecessary. May I also be a bit rude (most unlike me, but very very occasionally - as I find with my little rascals at home - it's necessary to make a point!)and suggest that rather than you and Kim discussing this on Arthur's talk page, perhaps you could continue it on one or the other of your own talk pages?
 * Arthur, may I take this opportunity to thank you for allowing us to use your website as a possible link for articles requiring it - I am glad you reconsidered. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 17:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I am putting these comments in a collapsing box, so it doesn't have to be read by Arthur. Perhaps you could put your comments to each other in one too? As it's not my discussion, I would consider it rude for me to just do it! OK, I've had my 0.02 worth, so I'll leave this to you two. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 17:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)