User talk:Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats

Hi
Hey i noticed you made an account. Be aware, stop using your ip adress! If you use an ip adress and a user account its called sock pupperty here on wiki. Your computer will be blocked instantly. Dont use the ip adress again. Yours. Realist2 (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * meow 72.0.180.2 (talk) 22:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Meow to you too, although what is this cat fetish lol. Realist2 (talk) 22:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Obama POV
Some of this people are amazing. Thanks for this edit. He made this comment on the talk page, and still thinks he is the NPOV advocate of the century.  Grsz  11  04:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Meow,
 * I'm not sure why that sentence is even in there. He's tried adding it before but people took it out for obvious reasons. --Ubiq (talk) 04:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * scratch scratch,
 * i guess the loonies come out on saturdays. you're exactly right that the more rope we give him, the faster he hangs himself. with talk posts like that it won't be long...


 * ps- not against the nominating petition thing, as long as we keep it neutral and make clear these were "messy" petitions in the first place to put it delicately. 72.0.180.2 (talk) 04:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Obama section hierarchy
Hi there. I made this change, reverting one of your recent edits. Do you feel strongly about it, one way or the other? --HailFire (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

npov-section tag at Jesse Jackson
Probably both tags are appropriate. My reasons for the npov-section tag are on my talk page in reply to another query, feel free to peruse. Thanks, --Clubjuggle T / C 21:26, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Update tag to Faina article
Why did you add the update tag to the Hijacking section of the Faina article? What's new other than the pirates lowering the ransom (again) to $3m? Switzpaw (talk) 22:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The ship has been held since late September. As far as anyone knows, the pirates, the crew held hostage, the cargo, and the surrounding warships are in the same place.  The only thing that's changed is back-and-forth between the pirates and the operating company to negotiate the ransom demand.  Switzpaw (talk) 02:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: isn't editing other people's pages a little "uncool"?
First of all, I'm going to assume that your comments on my web page were sincere. If you were just playing me, no hard feelings.

Okay, I suggest that you try viewing this from the angle of someone who does not know everything that you know. Here's what this would reveal:


 * Your user page was indeed created for the purpose of editing when a username is needed.
 * Prior to the edit that I reverted, the only IPs listed on it were
 * 72.0.180.2
 * 66.220.110.83
 * 72.0.189.206
 * 72.0.187.239


 * The edit I reverted was from none of the above.
 * The edit I reverted introduced profanity for the first time in the history of the page.

You should also know that:
 * Most vandals are operating as anonymous IPs
 * Most profanity introduced into user pages (or articles, for that matter) are from such anon IP editors

So under these circumstances, it was first of all quite reasonable for me to believe that this edit was not yours, but that of a vandal, because the addition of the new IP address 67.204.145.88 was done by anon IP editor 67.204.145.88. And given the fact that you had never identified 67.204.145.88 as one of your IPs while editing under your username, it was actually impossible for me to know it was you, and given the introduction of profanity for the first time, it extremely likely that it was a vandal.

Frankly, the only person to blame for this happening is you. If you want people to know that an edit to your userpage is legit, then you should do it under your username, period. No one on this planet could have known that was your edit, and it is rather ridiculous for you to expect them to have guessed it. After all, if a vandal had done that edit, how would it have looked any different?

But the most important message I have for you is this: Get over it. What on earth was the big deal? So someone made an "error" in editing your user page. Revert it and go on your business. If you want to be taken seriously, you should probably a) start editing with a username all the time, and b) learn not to sweat the small stuff.

Geez. Un sch ool 01:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Colch2.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Colch2.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 15:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Images in 2010 Haiti earthquake
Thank you for loading and adding images to this article. They are high quality images and complement the article nicely.

However, I have had to revert some of your adjustments. Please read WP:MOSIMAGES for the Manual of Style on how to place images in an article. Please note that text cannot be sandwiched between images.

Please make sure all the images you have added to the article have source and author information. If this information is incomplete, they made be removed.

I'm sure you know this article is changing rapidly and it takes quite some effort to maintain its quality. Please help us do this. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

thanx for the advice. please realize the reason I keep doing that edit, is because the pics look just as ugly when they are stacked on top of each other... so I will "stagger" them per MOS but please realize that is something you can do just as easily as me, instead of insisting on a revert to an ugly layout over and over. Thanks again. Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats (talk) 04:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The MOS rules are clear: text should not be sandwiched between images. Either they should be stacked to the right, taken out of the article, or dropped to a gallery at the bottom of the article under the See also section. In my opinion, there is not enough text to warrant this many photographs, although it is very clear that there will be enough text soon. Please do not revert me when I ensure the article complies with the Manual of Style. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


 * At WP:MOSIMAGES, the 3rd point from the top says Avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other. I was hoping you could assist with the maintenance of the article within the Manual of Style. I am asking you once more to do this, please. I've been working on this article for two days and it is a very difficult article to maintain because of how rapidly it changes and the subject matter. Please be considerate of the efforts to maintain its quality. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
You have repeatedly been warned to stop your vandalism of articles on Wikipedia when you came here using other IPs. Please stop. You are welcome to contribute real edits to Wikipedia but all vandalism done by you will be reverted and you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia if you continue. You are welcome to continue editing Wikipedia, so long as these edits are constructive. Please see Wikipedia's Blocking policy and what constitutes vandalism; such actions are not tolerated on Wikipedia, and are not taken lightly.

If you feel you have received this message in error, it may be because you are using a shared IP address. Repeated vandalism from this address may cause you to be included in any future sanctions such as temporary blocks or bans. To avoid confusion in the future, we invite you to create a free user account of your own. iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:iBen. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:14, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:iBen. Thank you. iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

2010 Haiti earthquake image uploads
Thanks for being proactive in searching out and uploading images that document the earthquake. I was wondering if you would please consider a couple things moving forward.

1) I've noticed that you're naming your uploads a certain way, which is creating the experience for me of being confusing because they're very vague - the file names could be more specific as to location and time, for instance. E.g., something like File:Haitiferry.jpg could also be named "Haitians fill ferry in Port-au-Prince 2010-01-16.jpg".  I'm asking you to consider being more specific, descriptive, and not bunching words together not just for me, but for other editors who may be working with these images.

2) I don't know if you're aware of Wikimedia Commons, but am curious as to whether or not you might think about creating an account there and directly uploading images to there so they can be accessed globally by other editors not just for use in the English Wikipedia, but for other languages. Your uploads fall within the public domain license and are thus perfect for being hosted on Commons.  This would also eliminate the step of migrating them to Commons when they are uploaded here first.

Thanks. -- Broken Sphere Msg me 00:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have been naming them with the idea that people would be using them going forward and not just for the quake. Some of them are pretty general shots of disasters or planes etc... so they were named to make (some) sense for all time. And I did try and put most of the descriptions you ask for, in the infobox but not the name. I will try and add like a day (sat) or something like that to distinct them more, but to put a full caption in the title like that I'm not sure I will do...


 * I don't always upload tons of pics so I don't have a commons acct and I don't think I would use one mostly... I am just doing this now because no one else is and the US govt is putting out a lot of good pics. It would be a lot nicer if my wp acct worked on commons, that is annoying and I have tried uploading there with fancy-cats but i get fed up when it doesn't work. Anyways i only upload PD images either from myself or ones I find, so I generally trust other users are smart enough to make them global if they want.


 * I have two requests for you because I have noticed alot of my pics getting doubled up by commons pics. Please start transferring to commons in such a way that the original authorship chain is preserved. Another user has figured out how to do this, on the eq page, while still showing my acct with the original upload. The way you transfer these pics to commons does not do that. I don't care if you change the title however. Thanx


 * also please consider not adding the ranks to all the author fields... we already acknowledge they are military pics, and as far as the author field is concerned I think that is more a statement about who the artist is and not the hierarchy... you must have noticed NONE of my uploads include rank info. This WP is already getting in trouble for favoring the US too much in reporting... and I think this is a good way to start fixing that however subtley. I am going now to change some pic caps anyways Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats (talk) 01:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for responding. Other people have also been uploading related photos and media, myself included, so I wouldn't feel like I'm the only one or that if I stopped, nothing will get uploaded. ;)
 * Have you tried creating a separate Commons account? If you've still had issues with it though I'm not demanding that you do so.
 * For migrations, I'm not sure what you mean, but I think there is a Commons utility that does say who the original uploader was, regardless of what language wiki they uploaded the migrated photo to in the first place.
 * As to the ranks, I feel that this fully credits and respects the author because they were active duty personnel when they took the photo. You are welcome to leave this out if you wish.  While I do understand that it may feel that there is an American bias on this Wikipedia, my experience is that this is conveyed more in language vs. images and that leaving the ranks out of military generated images may not help that much in this regard because people can still see from other info that it is from a US military source.  Because of our requirements that images be free license, it just works out that the US government and by extension the military are great sources because of American copyright laws.  Too bad it's not the same with other national governments, but we do the best we can.   Broken Sphere Msg me 01:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The reason none of these 4 images have your upload info is that they were uploaded directly to Commons by other users (3 by myself, 1 by a bot). My understanding is that there is a preference and emphasis on using Commons-hosted images vs. those with free licenses that are uploaded here; after migration Wikipedia-hosted images are then deleted.  What happened I'm presuming is that you uploaded the same images here, they were tagged as already being on Commons under other names, and were then deleted from here locally.  So these 4 weren't migrated to Commons, which is why you don't see info on there that you were the original uploader.   Broken Sphere Msg me 00:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi there, Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats and Brokensphere. I've been using Commonshelper (here), which works quite well and transfers over the 'Original Upload Log' section too. To Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats, I agree with BrokenSphere; getting a Commons account is easy and helpful and saves time (ie, little issues like this one). Go to Special:Preferences and click 'Manage Your Global Account'. Don't worry if you don't use it often, or at all. I have a Simple English Wikipedia account that I've used once. It won't go away and it won't bother anyone. Anyway, keep up the good image-uploading work! Bob Amnertiopsis ∴ChatMe! 03:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC) PS: "Fancy-cats-are-happy-cats" is the greatest name of all time :).


 * Deletions won't show up in your contribs. Since you said this is something that you're proud of, the only thing I can say if you want to see your image uploads still show up on a contrib list would be to start using Commons for your free license uploads.  Uploading them here and having them migrated to Commons is not helping you out in this regard and as you've experienced, is also creating more work for you in trying to figure out what the migrations turned into.


 * In terms of the 4 uploads that you pointed out, these were all originally uploaded to Commons and weren't migrated over from here. This is why you don't see any information re. migration from Wikipedia because this never happened.  What probably happened was that you uploaded them here, they were uploaded them to Commons, then your uploads here were deleted locally because duplicates existed on Commons.  So there's really nothing to fix, I'm afraid.  -- Broken Sphere Msg me 23:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * "so its reasonable to think that you had seen some of my uploads because they were on en/wp for up to 24 hrs (in one case) before you did a duplicate upload on commons."
 * I respectfully disagree because this is pure coincidence. I have uploaded dozens of other images related to the earthquake on my own, REGARDLESS of what was uploaded HERE BY YOU.  I tend to assume that free license images are uploaded to Commons vs. here first, so I was and continue to base all my uploads on Commons by what I see THERE, and NOT HERE.  If they are duplicates of local uploads here, then so be it.  That happens.  You are welcome to think what you want, but your last message implies that you are operating under the very ill-founded and mistaken belief that I am attempting to circumvent you or do you wrong in some way.  What I have been attempting to do, thank you very much, is to help document the earthquake in my own way by taking the time to select and upload images using public domain sources that for some reason or another appealed to me.  I DO NOT appreciate this assumption of bad faith.  I have much better things to do with my precious time than to go around and try to in some way interfere with the work of a another editor who I presume is also attempting to contribute in their own way to documenting this historic event.  I have nothing to gain by such actions and much better ways to waste my time.  You are more than welcome to pursue what other means you see fit, but you are making unfounded assumptions and taking this a little too personally in my opinion.  I'm asking you to please be civil, accept what happened with this group of 4 images as history, get over it, and move on.  I believe that you and I have much better things to do than continue to belabor this issue back and forth for any longer and I consider the matter closed.  Thank you.   Broken Sphere Msg me 07:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
iBendiscuss/contribs Replied here? 00:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Please stop introducing jokes into articles. Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, and contributions of this type are considered vandalism. Continuing to add jokes and other disruptive content into articles may lead to your being blocked from editing. iBentalk/contribs 00:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

File:DTWchart01-09.pdf listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DTWchart01-09.pdf, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Babiehops.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Babiehops.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Ccc itt 2010.jpg
Did you forget to add a license tag for this image when uploading.?

Wikipedia takes copyrights seriously, so images need to have an appropriate license tag

You may wish to read Image_copyright_tags/All and Image_copyright_tags which will assist you :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikinews link @ 2011 Tokohu earthquake and tsunami
I have reverted your removal of the link to a Wikinews article on the article; the matter treated in the article is not discussed anywhere in the article, and that article contains a lot of information that Wikipedia lacks, has images, it is more than worthy to have it there. Please don't remove it again, or at the very least, discuss it on the article's talk page. Thank you. Diego Grez (talk) 19:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Meow09090909.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Meow09090909.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

obviously not PD-text --rtc (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. rtc (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding this, I've removed the PD-text tag and added a dated WP:CSD tag instead, giving you seven days to apply a proper license tag before deletion. If the image is not available under a proper license (which I am lead to believe by PD-text), then please note that non-free content is not allowed on user pages, and unused non-free content is deleted.  Cheers.  lifebaka++ 18:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Oldgerm.JPG
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Oldgerm.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. Kelly hi! 20:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Oldgerm.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Oldgerm.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 orphaned, meaning that it 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. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Meow09090909.jpg
The picture of the cool cat can be found many places on the Internet for example here: http://www.bordom.net/item/click_image/48908 and unless you are the original artist that made the file you may not upload it to Wikipedia. --MGA73 (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2011 (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) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AGPanda.png
Thanks for uploading File:AGPanda.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Essexvermont.JPG


The file File:Essexvermont.JPG has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "orphaned image, no encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:
 * File:KRDM airport staff meet Sen. Barack Obama.jpg
 * File:Lcchoc.JPG
 * File:RdmTermExt.JPG
 * File:Vtroute127.JPG
 * File:Wildmouse cve 2009.JPG

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)