User talk:Garion96/Archive 4

Unsourced HIV positive people
I see you have included Gerald Chapman (director) in this list. I sourced most of the information about his early life and the circumstances of his death from his brother's published diary which is listed under References. It is clearly stated that the cause of his death was AIDS.

Entry for Friday, 8 November, 1996

''And yesterday was the birthday of my brother Gerald, who died nine years ago of Aids. He would have been forty-seven and I still miss him terribly.'' Jud 20:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I've added a comment to the talk pages of every person on the list of unsourced HIV positive people, excluding Gerald Chapman. Do you think the above will suffice as a reference? I've not seen the book myself but I'm willing to trust Jud's word on this. Trezatium 19:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment
Could you please stop editing articles that i create or add significantly to, i know that you think you have the right to change everything to the way you want, but please have some consideration for the person who spent time editing an article and then you come up and just change everything.

That would be appreciated. thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bradles 01 (talk • contribs). 21:24, 10 January 2007

Urticaceae
I know I haven't edited the page since some days (I would have if I could, it was not my fault), but it is still inuse. It cannot be used, I don't think Urticaceae are divided in Alloideae, Youroideae, Baseoideae, Areoideae, Belongoideae, Tooideae, and Usoideae. I know I shouldn't make silly edits (this makes me a vandal), but I wanted to test if somebody would notice it until I was editing the page (I'm not a real vandal, I'm serious about botany, I wrote Ranunculaceae, Geraniaceae, Cannabaceae and others). Aelwyn 21:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I know, it was a test to see if anybody in ProjectPlants had put that page on watchlist, as I had requested. I'll finish that page as soon as I can Aelwyn 12:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Alai/oldcats
That should indeed be possible, I'll have a rummage around for the SQL I used for that, and once the two long-running jobs I currently have on the go (that are probably forcing each other to thrash) have completed... I probably won't use them to populate the "previously categorised" category, since that seemed to cause more grief than it helped any. Alai 16:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, here it is: User:Alai/prevcat-Jan07.  I've tweaked the format from last time, since a number of people seemed to think some of the old categories weren't what they were expecting.  If it would be more useful in a different format, or filtered in some particular way, do let me know.  Alai 01:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sections are a good idea, I should have thought of that. Hopefully that will help with the size.  Alai 01:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * How's this version? User:Alai/prevcat-Jan07b  It's even longer, but it has more sectioning...  Also somewhat reformatted.  Alai 03:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hrm, that's a little arcane: it was categorised in the Nov. db dump, and is definitely not in the January one (I just run a query to check). And it hasn't even been edited in the meantime, much less uncategorised, as you say. I've no idea why that would have happened, though it may be related to this discussion. Why this happens for 'ordinary' categories I have nio idea: one for the devs, perhaps. Alai 08:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Beware of redirections! :)
Hi! I was patrolling the recent changes on the copyright violations, and I came across SapgoBI. When you tag a page for deletion, don't forget to tag the redirection that led to it too :). That's why I always put a link to the pages I take care of in my edit summaries. If the page is still blue after a couple hours, I suspect there is something wrong (either a redirection, or a tag removal). I hope that helps! :) -- lucasbfr talk 16:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Person Editing The Stephanie Adams Article
The person named Sean Martin who is editing the Stephanie Adams page article has a bizarre personal vendetta agains Adams (the subject matter) via amateur blogs and (even though he does not know her personally) he should be banned from editing.

Adams is suing a friend of his named Jim Poling and as a result, he is trying to vandalize the page about her. Wikipedia is an objective online source, so people who have personal issues should not be allowed to make personal changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.203.12.73 (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

Once again, user Sean D Martin has been vandalizing the article on Stephanie Adams, due to a personal problem he has against her. You can see he has personal issues when you google him along with her name. I and a few others have corrected his wrongdoings, but ask that someone bans him from editing the article on Stephanie Adams again. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.167.230.171 (talk • contribs). 22:41, 5 February 2007

The person named Sean D Martin is me. I have not been vandalizing anything. I has no vendetta against Ms Adams despite her having (to name just one offence) sent me emails threatening me with physical harm. (Ms Adams may choose to deny it. I'll happily provide the email, as I once did for a package of materials sent to the FBI.)  All edits I have made have been to more accurately represnet information. None of tehm have insulted Ms Adams or damaged her reputation in any way. All revertions of my edits have been to something less accurate and more self-serving of Ms Adams.

I am not a friend of James Poling and has never met James Poling. I did provide an affadavit for Mr Poling in connection with the baseless lawsuit Ms Adams has filed against him. I am upfront about this. An approach the Ms Adams (who is known to post numerous anonymous messages while claiming they are not from her) seems incapable of following.

If I wanted, I could censor her and remove her comments about me. I could provide numerous examples of her doing all of what I have just claimed. But I do not have a vendetta against Ms Adams (Vice versa, in fact) and this is not the place to get into a she-said-he-said (although I can back up all that I said, which she cannot).

Drop it, Ms Adams. Stop trying to libel me on the web. Sean Martin 21:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Garion96, thanks for the clarification and help. As a new user here it is much appreciated. Not sure why this got started on your Talk either, just trying to reply to the (numerous) postings getting made about me and assumed it isn't acceptable form to just remove this whole section from your Talk.Sean Martin 23:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Clearly Sean Martin's bitter reply to the allegations against him prove that he has a direct COI (conflict of interest) with the Stephanie Adams article and should be banned from editing the subject matter. Personal threats ("Drop it, Ms Adams."), unuseful comments about a lawsuit she filed ("baseless lawsuit Ms Adams has filed") and insinuations about the person in the article ("Ms Adams who is known to post numerous anonymous messages while claiming they are not from her") which cannot be proven and are in fact false (I'm not "Ms Adams") is sheer proof. If that's not enough, he removed important information from the article, distorting it to discredit the facts, and even referred to a generic article as being "self-serving for Ms Adams". Please tell User Sean Martin to stop removing valuable facts from the Stephanie Adams article and stop causing unnecessary trouble. Wikipedia is not an amateur blog, it is a reliable source for information. 66.108.144.31 04:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The allegations against me are being made by someone anonymous ("SA" for short). They are not true and I reserve the right to refute them.  Despite what SA may claim, requesting that Ms. Adams "drop it" is not a threat, it is a request.  The lawsuit referred to is, in my opinion and that of many others (including, one could infer, Ms Adams' own attorney), baseless.  This is an opinion I have not expressed or even alluded to in the article.  Only here in the discussion area and in direct response to SA bringing the lawsuit up.  Regarding the posting of numerous anonymous messages, proof does exist in the form of traces and logs showing messages from the same computer used by Ms Adams to send emails under her own name  (among other places).
 * Any objective person who reviews the edits I've made to the Stephanie Adams article would see that they have not removed any valuable facts and, quite the contrary, have replaced unsupported information with the actual fact. Thereby helping to keep Wikipedia that reliable source of information that SA seems to want. Sean Martin 18:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The previous comment posted by Sean D Martin "Drop it, Ms Adams. Stop trying to libel me on the web." is definitely a threat and shows a conflict of interest because User Sean D Martin seems to be imagining that "Ms Adams" and "SA" is corresponding with him. This is not a personal blog to air ones fantasies of speaking to a celebrity or unjustified bitter feelings towards that celebrity. The bottom line is that Sean D Martin should be banned from editing. Mediation has already been requested by another party named Cle0patr4 and I have already signed to it. 69.203.12.73 19:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Request For Mediation (Dispute Resolution)
Being that I and several other editors have requested for Sean Martin to be banned from editing the Stephanie Adams article (Hoary seems to be causing problems too and appears to have been told by Jim Wales to refrain from editing the article as well), can you please resolve this matter for us? Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.108.144.31 (talk • contribs). 05:58, 7 February 2007


 * "several other editors"? Name them.  "I" insists upon remaining anonymous, as does anyone who has complained of my edits.  Based on IP traces and similar incidents where Ms Adams was concerned  it would not be at all suprising to find "several editors" are all one person.
 * No objective person could find fault with my edits. I have changed a few words to make the facts in the article actually agree with the information provided in the references. I have refrained from making edits and instead made Requests for Comment asking the community what the appropriate tone and info should be.  In return someone who refuses to sign any post levels personal attacks and calls for my banning.   Sean Martin 18:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary, we are all objective people and we all have faults with your edits. You are the only person not being objective because you and your associate (Jim Poling) seem to want to cause some of hate campaign against Stephanie Adams who does not even know either one of you. This is not a personal space to air one's differences on the subject matter. Besides, blatantly changing/editing other people's facts (as well as distorting the truth) contained in a few sentences is not encouraged by Wikipedia. [] That is why several people have requested Sean D Martin be blocked from editing the article. We are asking Garion96 to please help regarding this matter. 69.203.12.73 19:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Note from Garion96
Please discuss the issues you have about the article, not about each other on Talk:Stephanie Adams. If there still is no solution there, you can request mediation. Not about the banning of each other, which is why the mediation was rejected, but to come to an agreement about the article. I have the article and therefore the corresponding talk page on my watchlist. Garion96 (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Erik the Red
The trials of my patience will never cease, my deepest apologies. The entry was made by middle school student while the class was overseen by a substitute. Following a brief investigation the child that edited the entry "Erik the Red" has been dealt with. Online vandalism of any sort is seriously frowned upon, thankyou for you messages.

Regards, Psianyde

09:24 Pacific, 2 Febuary 2007 Psianyde

Barnstar
Thank you everso much! Glad to help out! -- Butseriouslyfolks 21:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, there seem to be plenty of SCV's to go around . . . -- Butseriouslyfolks 01:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

adminship
Okay, the nomination is here Requests for adminship/Garion96. I'm probably not the world's greatest nominator so if there's anything you think I should change, let me know. But otherwise, just fill out the questions honestly and accept, then transclude the nomination onto WP:RFA. --W.marsh 22:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Pointless reversions
I noticed that you reverted User: Netscott's edits on Lee J. Cobb, because he is pointless reverting an anonymous ip's edits, because he for some reason thinks that that IP address is a sockpuppet, even though there is no evidence of such, and all of the edits being made are good, non-vandalizing ones. Please review Netscott's user contributions and continue reverting his pointless reversions against good edits. I'd do it myself but my account is new and he'll probably flag me as a sockpuppet too, noting his aggressive behavior on sockpuppet accusations. Forthegood1 17:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Garion96, sorry that you've been drug into this. All of this is an ongoing problem with this banned user. There may occassionally be good edits that this user makes but in the long term this user is a big liability for the project. This user has been defiantly utilizing sockpuppets and anon-IP addresses to evade his ban and keeps popping back up. Per this section of WP:BAN I've taken to a proactive method to encourage this user's depature from the project. See this page for further details. Cheers.  18:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Archiving
I was just about to do that. Thanks. Jkelly 19:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA
I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:
 * Administrators' reading list
 * Administrators' how-to guide
 * Administrators' Noticeboard
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Three-revert rule violations

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 03:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations from me too. The Rambling Man 10:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations, and, um, thanks for the boilerplate. Jkelly 23:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations and happy mopping. S .D. ¿п?  § 00:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!


I'm glad you made it :)! Yuser31415 00:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)



The pleasure for voting for you is mine. Good luck with the mop, and thanks again for welcoming me! · A ndonic O Talk · Sign Here 00:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You're just showing off :P. Yuser31415 02:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations Garion, and good luck with the tools! - Anas Talk? 11:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Issues
Can you please email at educationalreplies@yahoo.com

It is about a user here using their account to stalk/harrass a 10 year old girl. Thank you LexiLynn 00:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Image questions
Every day there are going to be some that one needs to think about. I'll tell you how I'd handle the two you asked about. Incidentally, you might want to refer your correspondent above to the Foundation, if the matter is serious. Jkelly 01:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:Obeissante.jpg -- Google image search on keywords from the article. If you find a source, maybe it will have enough information for us to keep it.  But don't spend hours playing detective.
 * Image:PunchMuch.gif -- I'll only "repair" an unfree image if I am willing to take responsibility for the Fair use claim. Logos are often pretty straightforward.  If it is from the official website, is small resolution, and seems to be playing some role in the article other than decoration, I'd probably fix it rather than deleting.  Be conservative about this, though.

User:Megan787
Wondering why you have reverted the speedy delete tag from User:Megan787 account user page is in clear violation of WP:NOT.Again,just wondering.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for reverting vandalism to my user page! Natalie 18:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Successful RfA
Hey there Garion96, congrats on your RfA. If I had been aware of it I too would have voice my support for you. Luckily in the end it wasn't needed. ;-) Cheers. 22:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hand in cookie Jar
Strange Ip address doing some dammage, if you got my email you know the background on this.

69.106.7.122 is strangely the same as users:ISpy, no checksum needed, it's the same that matches the email headers I get here routinely. Please check Jessica Lunsford article.

InstaTornado and user: ISpy just as I told you in email. Now you can see for yourself and play match the ips.

LexiLynn 03:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Cheri DiNovo
I've asked User:Abebenjoe if it would be possible to post a written confirmation from Diane O'Reggio on the image's talk page to resolve the matter. Please be aware that if Diane O'Reggio has given him proper permission to post the image on Wikipedia, then it is not necessary for the website that the image was sourced from to explicitly include an additional reproduction permission; as the provincial secretary of the Ontario New Democratic Party, O'Reggio's personal consent to reproduction of images whose copyright is held by the party is entirely sufficient. Bearcat 02:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe we should give him a reasonable (but certainly not indefinite) period of time to post and/or provide the relevant confirmations. Say, if he hasn't provided anything in a week or so, then proceed with deletion — but in the immediate meantime, I don't really see what there is to be gained in pressing ahead with immediate deletion when he says he does already have the permissions and just hasn't posted them. He is relatively new, and doesn't fully understand the intricacies and quirks of Wikipedia processes yet; at least to me, it feels like a violation of WP:BITE to not give him a bit of leeway to get it done properly. Bearcat 03:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * True, the image has been here for a month...but I've been reviewing the discussion around this and it doesn't look like anybody actually explained the situation, or how to resolve it, to him until just over a week ago, and even that explanation seems to have been delivered to him in a slightly condescending tone (vintage Chowbok, IME) that might not have really clarified the matter as well as Abebenjoe really needed. It really looks to me like you and I were the first two people in this entire matter to actually talk to Joe about it calmly and rationally, as sad as that is. Bearcat 03:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

VegaDark's Request for Adminship
 

 Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was successful at a unanimous 52/0/0. I hope I can live up to the kind words expressed of me there, and hope to now be more of an asset to the community with access to the tools. Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me in the future. Thanks again! VegaDark 07:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Was there a earlier AfD?
Noticed this so apparently the article was not deleted nor is there any evidence of the AfD. Could you tell me what happened? Anyway I nominated the article today. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 19:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Copied reply from my page here: to keep discussion together
 * Hi, that was a long time ago I gave that editor that message. :) This article has been deleted as a copyvio (I put the copyvio tag on it, the source is now a 404) and then later recreated as a one sentence article, which again was deleted. This is the third recreation of it. Garion96 (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Could you retrieve those deletions, or some evidence thereof and mention it in the AfD? So people know it has already been deleted before. Thanks. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 20:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Correction, just the links. I of course will insert it. Would not want to influece you in anyway, sorry. Nomen Nescio <i style="color:blue; font-size:smaller;">Gnothi seauton</i> 20:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You can link to, the deletion log of the article. Garion96 (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, just included it in the AfD. Nomen Nescio <i style="color:blue; font-size:smaller;">Gnothi seauton</i> 20:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wrestling image
Hey, that one "picture" that was deleted. vdjs_04.jpg, I took that from my WrestleMania XX DVD and started editing some stuff. Thank you. Batmanrules677

You're right.... my bad. Batmanrules677

Recent Changes
Sorry for my recent reverted changes. I didnt realise that was the policy on the 'Prof' titles. I didnt like the (professor) in brackets though as it looked unprofessional and didnt even have a capital letter.

I will revert the changes back in the next day or so.

Farrell1967 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Farrell1967 (talk • contribs). 15:48, 20 February 2007

List of bisexual people
I can do that. Do we maybe want to have a wider notes field for this one? Some of them have explanations that should probably stay near the name rather than being stuffed into a footnote. <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet"> &mdash;Cel ithemis  01:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Nah, no worries. It didn't take long at all. <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet"> &mdash;Cel  ithemis 

List of Personality disorders
I have added a "" template to the article List of Personality disorders, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. NeantHumain 03:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for clarification
Hello, can you clarify this edit for me? My understanding of CSD G12 is that it applies to any image that is taken from a website with a license incompatible with Wikipedia (which appears to be the case here; the image is copyright Getty Images), and the uploader does not assert permission aside from tags (which again is the case here). I don't understand how mentioning the source means the image doesn't meet CSD G12. Can you help? --Muchness 20:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello, thank you the reply. I spend a fair amount of time tagging images, so it's important to me to get the policies clear. What I'm confused about is that the image appears to meet all the relevant parameters of CSD G12. G12 doesn't state that there must be deliberate intention to violate on the part of the uploader, it only states that the copyright violation must be blatant, i.e, able to be established beyond reasonable doubt. If the assertion is questionable, it meets G12, but if the assertion does not exist, as is the case here, it also meets G12. As you say, the image is going to be deleted anyway, so this discussion is moot. But I want to get things cleared up for future cases. And I appreciate the reply. --Muchness 20:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, I was about to revert myself when I noticed you posted a second message on my talk page. I apologize for my initial revert, it was inappropriate. --Muchness 21:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the article on Roger Arliner Young
My daughter found this article about a week ago and came back to reprint it but it was blank. Fortunately I was able to figure out how to access earlier versions. What happened to the article? Why was it blanked out? 71.85.147.60 03:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, concerning the Roger Arliner Young article. Some anon editor blanked the whole page, I reverted that. I don't mind doing that, but If you encounter a thing like that again, you can also revert it yourself. See Help:Reverting. Hope that helps, Garion96 (talk) 11:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Question on sourcing
Hola, Garion96. Question on Juan Felipe Herrera page. You (or someone) has stated that it needs sourcing. Let's say the author is a close relative and I got the info from him. How would I source it? Thank you. Huicholo 03:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

--

Hello again Garion96. I read two of those pages. It seems that a "primary source" can be used, that is if the author—JFH, himself—were to give this info to me, wouldn't he be a primary source?

Here's my question, and I hope you get what I mean in the right spirit: Sadly, I dont have as much free time as I'd like. I would love JFH to have a page, because he certainly deserves it. Can you save me some time, since you have much more knowledge of Wikipedia already in your head, and tell me what you think I should do to make the article acceptable, given I am not the author, but have a close relationship to him? Is there a way to source it that would not be toooo time consuming, knowing what you do about the specifics? If when all is said and done, the page must be removed because I cannot track down every instance of verified fact on the page, that will have to happen. I don't mind spending some time on it, of course. But I'm worried I'd need to track down a load of degrees, award citations, etc.

Text can leave nuance out of the picture, so I hope you know I mean all this with care, and not rudely, as it could read. Thank you, Huicholo 19:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining the primary sourcing. and for your help. it is greatly appreciated. Huicholo 15:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Association of Art Museum Curators
Hello, I am responding to the message concerning the Association of Art Museum Curators page which I created yesterday. I was told that the page was deleted due to copyright material copied directly from the site www.artcurators.org, but we ARE the Association of Art Museum Curators who wrote the material on the site www.artcurators.org and it is our organization indeed. Therefore, we hold the copyrights to the material and would like to post a page with our information (which yes will come directly from OUR VERY OWN SITE, www.artcurators.org). How do we apply for this page and accept the copyright laws? Please let us know, we would very much like to post our page. Also, we would like to be linked to the page on curators. How do we become a link on that page since we are the Association of Art Museum Curators? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aamc (talk • contribs) 17:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

thanks
thanks for deleting that page i had requested :)

cheers! xCentaur | <font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;">☎ 19:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Tales page
I had nothing to do with creating the original page posted for Tales of Fandom Vol. 2. I just noticed where the info was stolen from and posted the link, thinking someone else would eventually fix it. Why did you assume I made the page? Davethefish42 19:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Christian Wrestling Federation
Thanks for taking a look at the Christian Wrestling Federation article. I appreciate your help. Jdblundell 21:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:nothanks-sd
Hey, great job on expanding this template. I get so many questions after tagging copyvios about what procedure to follow and it's great to be able to easily drop that info onto user talk pages without having to link to the copyright page.

Thanks for improving this WikiGnome's working conditions! Now if I could only get a better salary. ..

--Butseriouslyfolks 05:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for removing the speedy tag, it was meant for the corresponding page in my scrath!--Niohe 00:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
My request for adminship has closed successfully (79/0/1), so it appears that I am now an administrator. Thanks very much for your vote of confidence. If there's anything I can ever do to help, please don't hesitate to let me know. <b style="color:green;">IrishGuy</b> <sup style="color:blue;">talk 02:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Mariana Todorova
Hi, sorry, still new around here. The original text can be found on:

http://www.iemeve.com/musician-info.php?nombre=marianatodorova&pagina=biography (it has a GFDL License)

The text you mentioned (http://www.musiciansgallery.com/start/strings/violins/todorova/mariana.htm) is a directory that lists some of our content.

Please tell me if there is anything else I can do.

Thanks. --Iemeve 11:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:IkeaRestaurant.jpg
Per WP:PUI, which states
 * "Images can be unlisted immediately if they are undisputably in the public domain or licensed under an indisputably free license (GFDL, CC-BY-SA, etc.)"

this image has no reason to be on that page. It is indisputably CC-BY-SA, and as the page specified, should be removed immediately (emphasis mine). --Kevin Walter 00:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I licensed this image (along with all my photos: ) under CC-BY-SA-2.5, except for Wikipedia, which I have granted unrestricted use. This would include any Wikipedia projects, such as Commons, however Commons' licensing policy states that images that are specified as "Wikipedia only" (implying that such images are permitted on Wikipedia, just not on Commons) are not permitted. --Kevin Walter 00:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Phil Gronowski, Portrait of a Sad Young Man
You deleted this page despite it being well sourced from a personal statement by the producer of the film. On the referenced page said producer listed FOUR upcoming projects. Wiki lists three of them- why not the fourth? Do we have a right to pick and choose? Please explain why you deleted a page that was NOT an attack but an explanation of the guy's films when pages for his OTHER three films are not deleted. And please do so NOW. In Haiku PhilPhague 05:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Articles to be merged since April 2006

 * And congratulations again on your RfA! --Selket Talk 22:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

George Michael
I made some comments in response to you on TALK:George Michael. Though you might be interested. Usedup 07:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

CheriDiNovo180.jpg
I finally got formal permission to use this image. Do I forward the email to you?Abebenjoe 15:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Entrusted with the Bucket!
] Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. Thanks for your vote, I've received an overwhelming 96% support and successfully took a copy of bucket-and-mop from the main office!

School graduation exam and HKCEE are both pressing in, so I might become inactive for a while. But soon after that, I look forward to working with you! --Deryck C. 03:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

WHATS WRONG WITH YOU
You deleted several of the sports facility photographs I uploaded for Towson. WHY??????????????? I cited the source and everythung, thats bogus. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thx2005 (talk • contribs). 10:33, 3 March 2007

Sweat therapy
Thanks for your help on Sweat therapy.:)Merkinsmum 17:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

STBot
I came across Milka Canic, and felt the need to report it immediately. I did NOT like the idea of a rogue bot creating pages. Perhaps I was a little too hasty, but it looked bad from where I was. J Milburn 22:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I realised that afterwards, but I guessed that all of the contribs would have been in such a vein, hence reporting it. Anyway, thanks for blocking it. J Milburn 22:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the error, can you please unblock User:STBot? ST47 Talk 23:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar
Garion, thank you very much for the Barnstar. It is the first one I've ever gotten and, frankly, I never thought I would get one. I put a copy in User:Iamunknown/Barnstar! and added a nice link to the header at my talk page. Again, thank you. --Iamunknown 06:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Images with unknown source as of 23 February 2007
Nice work! You beat me to deleting the category. :) - Aksi_great (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've been working on that backlog since yesterday. We have made a lot of progress. I started with the 15th Feb. cat yesterday and now we have only around 400 pics left before we can remove the backlog notice from there. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was only talking about images with unknown source. Clearing all image backlogs will need some more people and some more time. - Aksi_great (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Only 1 more day to go now! - Aksi_great (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)