User talk:KoshVorlon/Archive 3

{| width="95%" align="center" cellspacing="3" style="border: 4px solid blue; background-color: #D9F4FF; margin-b: 3px;"
 * align=left|

Archive List
Archive 1 Archive 2

Re:AfD
Actually, the second AfD notification was done simply so that the article remains in the category Articles for speedy deletion, to tell the admins that it still needs to be deleted. (Blanked is not the same as deleted.) Otherwise, the article just floats in cyberspace. Since there is no discussion page for speedy deletions, the deletion of the db-tag means that the article itself is no longer marked for deletion.

It is just a matter of keeping things current, that's all. I'm just doing follow-up on my tags... see which ones are removed and why. --Blanchardb 18:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:VC1
Template:VC1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. slakr \ talk / 21:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

David Vitter RFC
Could you please leave your comments at a Davit Vitter RFC? Thanks. &#8756; Therefore | talk 15:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks and civility policies
While you are citing policy to your fellow editors, you might want to try and avoid violating WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL in the process as you seem to have done here & here. It's usually not the best way to get your point across.--Isotope23 talk 20:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied on my talkpage.--Isotope23 talk 22:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fred Phelps and "Attack sites"
KoshVorlon, you are incorrectly citing this arbitration case. Attack sites in this context is a site which attacks a Wikipedian specifically. Obviously I cannot provide examples. Please note the distinction here; removing those links per the Arbitration rememdy is incorrect and an invalid application of the rememdy. If you have some other reason for removing the links, please state that in your edit summary rather than incorrectly applying the remedy. Please ask if you have further questions. --Deskana (talk) 19:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid your interpretation of the ruling is incorrect. If you read the MONGO case (more specifically the evidence subpage, it becomes clear what the meaning of "attack site" in that context is. The ruling of the committee was relating to sites like "Encyclopedia Dramatica" that contain pages which directly attack specific Wikipedians. Attack sites in that context does not include sites like Fred Phelps' sites. If there is some other valid reason for removal, you should use that. If you still do not wish to take my word for it, you should feel free to request clarification from the Arbitration Committee, but they will likely again say what I already have. --Deskana (talk) 18:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

WFD
Re your note on my talk page, I've now left a comment here. By the way, you can link to a talk page like this: Talk:World Federation of the Deaf. Also, you might want to have a look at the Kurzweil Music Systems article. :) ntennis 05:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Username
I suspect Anti Bs squad is a sock puppet of a banned user. 2, I dont think people would like it if I got a username 'Piss' and told people it means "Paris is so Special". It means what the first meaning coming to mind, i.e. bull shit. Besides its a sock puppet any way. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 15:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont suspect I am a sock uppet of a BANNED user (i just thought id chek out your page since u left a comment on my username). I only ever made one account for wikipedia, and Ive admitted to having made it, If I was a sockpuppet I would be using my account to edit the same articles I am editing with this accout (I think anyway). You can chek the IPs on the other accouunts, Im pretty sure any of them that meet my moderate left-wing profile dont share my IP.R.G.P.A (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Your warning on User:Mikegodwin's page
Hi KoshVorlon,

I just wanted to stop with some questions and comments about your edit to Mike Godwin's user page.
 * When warning users, you should put the template name in curly braces to enter the template namespace, substitute the template, and place it at the bottom of their talk page rather than at the top of their user page.
 * You should take a look at WP:SPAM to get a better understanding of what qualifies as advertising and is thus deserving of uw-ad1.
 * You should give Don't template the regulars a read.
 * Out of my own curiousity, was there something specific that prompted you to add the warning? The content of his page has not substantially changed from the first version, and the edit history shows tweaks by both an ArbCom member and a bureaucrat, neither of whom noted any problems.  Nor have any issues been raised by any editors who have posted on his talk page, a number of whom are administrators.  (Admittedly, there is one mention of his user page being a resume, but that is linked to a suggestion to add to and expand it.)  I ask because I suspect you may not have a complete understanding of how warnings work, and I'd be more than happy to fill in any gaps.

I'm posting here not so I can point out what you did wrong this time but to point out what you can do right next time. You're a good-faith editor with some solid contributions, and I'm glad you're taking the initiative. Everything is a learning experience, and if there's anything I can do to help make that easier just let me know. -- jonny - m t  02:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Jonny,

I appreciate your note, and in retrospect, yeah, I messed up on the template (my bad!) To answer your second question - his userpage has his resume on it, which is prohibited by WP:NOT#WEBSPACE. I checked his history before I templated to see if anyone else had given a similar note to him. No one had. Thanks again for your note KoshVorlon  ".. We are ALL Kosh..."  12:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Friendly advice
When trying to convince someone of something, it will likely help to refrain from making fun of their name at the same time. MilesAgain (talk) 18:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Signature
Please change your signature, it goes against WP:SIG because it's far too long.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  02:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome...

Hello, KoshVorlon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help How to write a great article Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there.


 * Elipongo,

Ma shlomcha ! Thanks for responding to my request for feedback. Man, you did a lot of work in the article, thank you!. The only thing I was curious about was the removal of the double apostophe I placed on either side of my quotes (italics). I used them as a way of visually seperating a quote from the rest of the article. Is this not correct? Also, I will go through the article and footnote for easier referencing. Toda raba !! KoshVorlon  ".. We are ALL Kosh..."  21:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I replied at User talk:Jerry
JERRY talk contribs 19:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pio.gif)
 (This is me being a complete ASS !  What can I say, I'm an equal opportunity offender )

Thanks for uploading Image:Pio.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Linux User
A tag has been placed on Template:Linux User requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This template isn't being used anywhere; see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Linux_User. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

your recent image revertions
That is a non-free image that is not allowed in userspace. it violates our non-free image policy WP:NFC repeated violation of this policy will lead to a block. βcommand 20:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's the thing. You repeatedly refer to it as a screenshot of a website. Unless you can prove that it's not copyrighted, I'm afraid I don't think we can keep it, without an appropriate rationale, nor can it be used in userspace. Also, while I have you, I'd like to ask you to look over our policies on edit-warring. Endlessly reverting a page, to your previous version isn't going to help things, and, can become quite disruptive. If you need help writing a fair-use rationale, or, anything else, feel free to ask me, I'll do my best to help you out. SQL Query me!  14:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand your concerns (and, image use on Wikipedia is surprisingly complicated! :, however, if you look at our image use policy, you'll see that it states:


 * Also, from Special:Upload,


 * I believe that this image may fit the first two points, from that warning. Of course, that's not a policy page, but, a notice / instructions that you should have seen / reviewed before you uploaded the image. It's still OK to have the image, we just have to fix it. It's also OK (I believe), if the image isn't available online anymore, we just have to link to where you originally got it, and, assume that it's copyrighted, in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
 * Now, as far as 3RR goes, I think we both know that User:Betacommand and User:BetacommandBot weren't vandalizing. They were simply trying to protect the project by enforcing the policies referenced above, among others, by marking a possible copyright violation for review (NOTE: We admins aren't robots. We actually look over the circumstances surrounding each image, prior to deleting, and, try to save them where possible... well, at least, I usually do.) Anyhow, I'm sorry about the long-winded post on your userpage, and, I hope this helps clear things up. If you have further questions, or need anything, please feel free to let me know. (Also, you can probably find more help regarding image copyright here, or, get further outside input regarding this specific issue there) Thanks! SQL Query me!  14:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * C'mon, I understand you are frustrated, but, is this type of personal attack really necessary? SQL Query me!  15:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You've received adequate warning and information to bring the image into compliance with our policies. The image has now been deleted. If you reupload the image without providing a source and appropriate licensing information, you risk being blocked. You've violated 3RR and, apparently, NPA. Because the image policy can be confusing, I'm letting it slide for now. But refrain from such behavior in the future, please. Regards,  Lara  ❤  Love  15:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Lara -  YOU  completely ignored the fact that this image is NOT COPYRIGHTED and therefore not a violation to begin with. This block is  AGAINST POLICY   AND  the image deletion is also against policy so don't dare quote policy to me when you violate it yourself ! 15:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * KoshVorlon - YOU completely ignored the words of Betacommand (a resident images expert) and two admins, AND you tagged the image as copyrighted and refused to provide your source, which is AGAINST POLICY, and you violated 3RR, which is also against policy. You were also warned about your behavior and you chose to ignore those warnings. The image was rightfully deleted and should remain deleted. If you chose to upload it again, I suggest you provide a source and appropriately license it, otherwise, it will be redeleted and you will be reblocked. HOPEFULLY you have found clarity now.  Lara  ❤  Love  20:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * "The image was rightfully deleted and should remain deleted." Well, no, actually it wasn't. The image was deleted four days before it should have been, completely out of process. There was no urgent reason to delete the image, and KoshVorlon's response, though completely inappropriate, should have been expected. The block just rubs salt in the wounds. Merely protecting the image so that nobody could revert further, while KoshVorlon continued the discussion with SQL and Betacommnd, would have been much more beneficial. Clearly KoshVorlon doesn't understand the policy issues at hand, and a block does nothing to fix that problem. - auburn pilot   talk  20:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you, AuburnPilot! KoshVorlon -- We are all Kosh --


 * The block gives him time to read policy since, apparently, having it clearly explained to him is not enough. He can take this time to look through our image tags and licenses and chose those appropriate for the image. This way, when he clicks the appropriate link to re-upload the image, he won't have any further issues, because I'm sure that the second time around, he'll provide a source as he's been repeatedly asked to. This also gives him time to read up on what vandalism really is, why personal attacks and 3RR violations are inappropriate, and hopefully he'll have time to reflect on how to act more civil on others user pages as well as on images pages.  Lara  ❤  Love  20:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * (EC) Auburnpilot, respectfully, I disagree. Do we all get a couple freebee attacks, when our images are deleted? I tried to warn them repeatedly about edit warring, and, about civility/NPA. While I can understand being a little upset, making demands, attacks, and threats like that, I can't imagine where else they thought this would end up. I'd thought about protecting the image as well, but, the clock was ticking on deletion, even tho the user had refused to provide a rationale, it probably wouldn't have been appropriate to protect it at that time. If the concern is an image with no proof of being a free-use image missing its rationale, and, the only person with the information required to put together a rationale is refusing to provide one, I kinda don't see the point in waiting the extra four days anyhow. Sorry if this is a bit blunt, I'm hurrying up, trying to get ready for work. SQL Query me!  21:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I suppose we're just approaching it from different perspectives. The clock may have been ticking, as you say, but there were four days left on that ticking clock. I've dealt with KoshVorlon previous over image issues, and while it took a bit more work to get my point across, in the end, KoshVorlon figured out the correct approach. The image should not have been deleted. Period. It was done out of process, policy, and common sense. LaraLove should have expected it to inflame the situation, and the block doesn't help. I have no intentions of reversing the block, or taking it any further than this page, but even if it requires more time, educating a user is always better than apply a block. - auburn pilot   talk  21:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You've dealt with this user before, and it took a bit more work for you to get your point across. Obviously, there is a bigger issue. There shouldn't have to be a big to-do about every image he uploads because he doesn't want to listen to what others are telling him. This isn't a difficult thing to figure out. Where'd you get the image? Post the link. That's it. As far as common sense goes, protecting the page fails common sense. No one can fix the image other than KoshVorlon. So if I protect the page, he can't fix it, it gets deleted. He refused to correct the issues. We all have better things to do. If he isn't going to fix it, no one else can, it serves no purpose to remain on wiki. He tagged it as copyrighted, and there's no reason for us to leave a copy-vio on-wiki once it's been stated it's not going to be fixed. Protected or not, it was a bust. Considering his behavior, I suppose I could have undeleted and blocked him until the tag expired, but that seemed unnecessary considering I could just leave it deleted, block him for his behavior and when he's ready to edit constructively, he can reupload it appropriately.  Lara  ❤  Love  05:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Y'know, I agree with you Lara. It's not complicated - except when you make it out to be that way.  The image is not copyrighted - that means it can be used anywhere.

End of story. This image is not "non-free" as it was mistakenly tagged, it was not suitable for deletion, as you said earlier. Btw - WP:FUR is listed as a guideline and not policy. I suggest you check that. I'm aware of policy in regard to images and I am fully aware if I upload a copyrighted image with no permission, it gets deleted. If I try to bring that same image back and say it's mine, it gets deleted. If I create it, it's ok, if it's GFDL it's okay, if its not copyrighted it's ok. (Note this is kind of a simple way to word it, but I think you get the point that I understand the policy). Undelete Pio.gif and stop being stubborn about it. The image is not copyrighted and I did actually give a link to both the image and the website which proves no copyright exists for the image (although, it's not stated in the guideline WP:FUR that any such proof is necessary -despite the request of betacommand and yourelf ). This isn't difficult, don't make it that way. We don't need no stinkin FUR!!
 * WP:NFCC is policy. Images are by default non-free, unless proven otherwise. the page you linked as your source had copyright 2008 you failed to prove the image was released under a free license. βcommand 20:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You must both be thinking of a different image, as there was no source provided for Pio.gif. It was simply stated to be "Screenshot for use on my template". Then, of course, it was tagged with Non-free web screenshot.  Lara  ❤  Love  20:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Beta - I'm not interested in arguing this anymore. You have a belief that the images aren't free. I have a belief that they are non-copyrighted. I say, let's agree to disagree AND in addition I will not bring that image back.  Despite the fact that I acted like a real asshole (without cause) on your page, I'm actually not as bad as I seemed.  You're getting hammered right now with two RFC's.  I wrote on both, but I'm, at this point, ready to go back and withdraw my

comment on them, solely because my comments were very biased and not a fair estimation of the situation. As much as it pains me to say this, most of the problems people have had with "Betacommand" bot have been user errors, which has been borne out by the admins at large.  I think you and I disagree on what makes that image copyrighted and most likely, we'll never agree. I can do my part in not running through this excerise again by not bringing any image into wikipedia that I didn't create. (Hey, if it's mine, it's definetly not going to run afoul of the rules!). How about it? Truce ? Kosh
 * Kosh, this was never personal. The issue was that you said and labeled it as a non-free screenshot, and that by default images are non-free. If you could have proven the image was free I would have supported you and would have fixed the issues with the image. Just because a website does not give specific statements about copyright does not mean that they release what they publish. I hope this helps. βcommand 03:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

, thanks for your message, SmackBot does not generally add tags, but merely dates those that are already there. Regards, P.S. what is the meaning of your sig? It looks like activism of some sort... Rich Farmbrough, 22:00 6 March 2008 (GMT).

Articles for deletion/List of hooligan firms
Hi. If you are able to Close the above discussion as Delete, why have you not deleted the List?

Because you don't have the tools. So kindly wait for an admin to come along who does. I have restored the discussion, and would appreciate you leave it that way until the proper person deals with it. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 23:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Not bitey at all, my friend. Just using logic regarding the ability to delete. I am currently waiting for a reply from an admin over this, so I'll leave you to try to close the AfD against clear Keep consensus. Whatever you or I think, I'm sure the outcome will be correct. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 23:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Could you explain your comment in your latest edit summary at Articles for deletion/List of hooligan firms regarding Sock Activity? I've seen no sockpuppets active during the discussion - could you point out where this has been happening? Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 00:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of hooligan firms
Please stop trying to close this. You can't close it as delete because (a) you're the nominator and (b) you can't actually delete it, not being an administrator. See NAC, among other things. Of course, you can close it as "nomination withdrawn" if you like, which would save everyone's time at this point. Otherwise, leave it for an uninvolved person. Iain99Balderdash and piffle 00:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ian, Wikipedia:NAC is an essay, not a policy (Yes I did read it :) )  :) Kosh Sez  We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 01:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, but it's a good and sensible one. If you prefer, here's a guideline which says the same thing. Iain99Balderdash and piffle 08:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop closing the AFD against a clear community consensus. Continuing to do so will be viewed as vandalism and may result in your account being blocked, which really isn't a good thing. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm slightly curious as to why you would list something at AFD when you consider the consensus of the community to be meaningless? Anyway, please stop acting against the community consensus.  Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But why raise it at AFD and not just speedy delete template it? You clearly don't believe that the community disagrees with your assessment.  Are you just trying to waste a lot of our time?  And I didn't suggest you could delete it yourself, you're getting me confused with someone else I guess.  The Rambling Man (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The following is not an essay and is quite clear as to why you should not be closing taken from the Deletion process linked above -


 * Deletion discussions must be decided in accordance with consensus and taking account of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If you are not familiar with deletion policy or the workings of deletion discussions, it is best that you only close discussions with unambiguous results.
 * Non-administrators should not close even unanimous "delete" decisions, as they lack the account feature to delete pages (that feature is only turned on for admins).
 * Close calls and controversial or ambiguous decisions should be left to an administrator.
 * Closing discussions in which you have offered an opinion or for a page that you have edited heavily presents a conflict of interest and should be avoided. The sole exception is if you are closing your own withdrawn nomination as a speedy keep and all other viewpoints expressed were for keep as well." Whether you accept it or not your attemptto close the AFD is against the above. ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 14:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So what did you hope to achieve with the AFD? Everyone says keep, you say delete because, in your opinion (and that's really important that bit) you believe the article is an example of what should WP:NOT be included.  Everyone else believes that the article is not an example of what should WP:NOT be included.  Consensus has been achieved, and that consensus is that your interpretation of what should WP:NOT be included is, in this single case, incorrect. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm confused, if we disallow lists, why do we have so many featured lists? You raised the AFD to make a point.  Read the text, " the deletion process proceeds based on Wikipedia community consensus" - not on your single decision that this is "just a list" which fails to meet policy.  You're the only editor who believes that this article does violate policy.  You do not have the consensus, the article will be kept.  Simple as that.  And, while we're here, consensus can overrule policy, that's how policies evolve and improve.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You didn't respond to my points above, interestingly. Lists are definitely allowed.  The consensus says this list does not violate policy.  Policies can be modified by consensus.  Sorry to read you think that I'm somehow "stooping to this level" (whatever that level may be).  Do you still really believe the entire community is wrong and you're right in this case?  If I hadn't been involved I would have WP:SNOW kept this by now.  It'll happen in the next day or so.  And then perhaps we can all go back to doing what we should be doing, expanding the Wikipedia.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Your sig
Hi. Please will you tone down your signature. I assume it's a political comment about the fur trade, but there's no need to be inflammatory (or "shout") while making your point. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I wasn't so bothered about the bold, as the length of it, the two exclamation marks and the "stinkin'" which is undoubtedly inflammatory. --Dweller (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And the fact that I didn't understand it might also persuade you it needs a rethink ;-) Sorry for being dense. --Dweller (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:KKaiser.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KKaiser.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media 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 this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. One Night In Hackney 303  11:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a fair use image of a living person, therefore it's replaceable by a free one. One Night In Hackney  303  13:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * clearly has a copyright notice on the page. Kindly stay off my talk page, and place all future comments on the article's talk page. One Night In Hackney  303  13:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

You cannot learn Wikipedia by rote, it is not a set of rules but rather a system of ideas.
This is a total repeat of the last time I interacted with you, you seem to think that just throwing around policy links is a substitute for reasoned argument or consensus, even if you have failed to read and understand the policy link you are referring to. From WP:NOTBLOG, which you cite again and again as if it made everything clear:

"Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they should be used primarily to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. Limited biographical information is allowed, but user pages should not function as personal webpages or be repositories for large amounts of material that is irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, or amusement, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration. Humorous pages that refer to Wikipedia in some way may be created in an appropriate namespace, however."

I don't see that Rich was using the page to work on his resume or post vast amounts of material not related to Wikipedia.

I would again remind you that it is a good idea to read things thoroughly before deciding they support your position and simply pointing to them again and again as if that is all that need be said. You don't seem to have noticed that these discussions tend not to end the way you think they will. That should be an indication to you that you were/are incorrect/out of step with consensus on these issues. Despite whatever obscure point you were trying to make with those useless links on my talk page, consensus is in fact the primary decision making model on Wikipedia. How do I know that? I actually read the page WP:CONSENSUS and that is the very first thing that it says. WP:IAR also allows us to ignore policies if following them is not determined to benefit the project. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Warning
There will be only this one warning. If you mess with the policy once more, you will be blocked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Mainspace work
Hello there. I just stopped by to ask if you'd like to do some mainspace work. Consider creating a few articles from Requested articles/Images. I'd be more than happy to work with you. Non-controversial mainspaces are much more fun than back pages any day.

Let me know. It's a nice path -- a good way to leave troubles behind. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the invite. I usually don't work with images as I don't understand them well.  I usually stick to reverting vandalism.  (Been at bit busy at work (I contribute at work )  so I haven't had a chance to do that much... but I will shortly.

Thanks ! KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 14:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Suggested changes
Kosh, I'm considering going to the significant trouble of creating an RFC/U about you in the next few days. In the interests of saving me, and you, and the larger community some time and ill will, I wonder if you'd be willing to voluntarily agree to do the following:


 * Stop censoring/hatting/archiving/altering comments by anyone (anywhere except your own talk page, where you can remove but not alter them)
 * Limit yourself to WP:0RR
 * Avoid starting deletion discussions of any kind (although I wouldn't say you can't participate in those started by others)
 * Discontinue a discussion if 3 users in good standing have told you that you should drop it, and no one has supported your position
 * None of this is intended to prevent you from warning, reporting, and/or reverting vandals as often as necessary. I've never seen any significant errors in your anti-vandalism work, and you do enough of it that it is a significant benefit to the encyclopedia.

If I do start an RFC/U, I'll be justifying these restrictions with a significant number of examples, but at this early stage, I'm hoping it will suffice to remind you that your edits in these areas are very, very often undone, and that you ultimately prevail in very, very few of them. You may think you're right and everyone else is wrong, but surely you can see that if that's the case, you should stop doing it anyway, right?

Let me know your thoughts. I could be wrong, of course, but I really suspect the result of an RFC/U would be something along these lines anyway, possibly more severe, and definitely more painful for everyone involved. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds fair to me. I agree to your conditions. Regarding point #2, I understand you mean that to be with no exceptions, however, how about exemption BLP and obvious vandalism ?     KoshVorlon . We are all Kosh ...  20:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Like I said in my last bullet point, obvious vandalism would be exempt; you do a great job of recognizing obvious vandalism (and 0RR and anti-vandalism work are 100% incompatible anyway!). Regarding BLP, my concern is that your interpretation of BLP doesn't seem to match a lot of other people's. I could try to find examples if needed.  That said, if the BLP violation is egregious and in article space, then revert it once and I wouldn't complain.  But if an established editor does something you think violates BLP, please ask an admin to look at it, rather than remove it yourself.  Would that work? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * NO need to find examples..... I accept 0RR on BLP as well.    KoshVorlon . We are all Kosh ...  20:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks, I wasn't looking forward to an RFC/U. I suppose a virtual handshake is in order. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem, I've placed the restrictions on top so mizabot won't archive them. KoshVorlon . We are all Kosh ...  20:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If you see comments that really need altering, or deletion discussions that really need starting, let me know and I'll take a look, and act if I think it's wise, and explain why if I don't think it's wise. No guarantees I'll agree, and (depending on my mood) I probably won't be open to a long discussion about it, but at least there's an out if you really think you see something wrong. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok... no problem (and no problem on correcting the typo's either  KoshVorlon . We are all Kosh ...  21:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

WT:AC/N
Your post there had different indents due to the line break you had there - I'd fix it for you, but I wrote a reply to you, so I'm just letting you know (so you can fix it for readability). - Penwhale &#124; dance in the air and follow his steps 17:19, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * OK.... I fixed it. Thanks!   KoshVorlon . We are all Kosh ...  17:33, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism to Roald Dahl.
From CN3777: I have received a message concerning vandalism to the Roald Dahl article. However, I have not made any edits to this article. Please can you check my contributions to verify this?

When I look up my IP address using the various websites available it is the same as the one that has committed the vandalism. However, when I look up my IP address on my computer, for example, using the ipconfig. method, it is completely different. Any thoughts how this can be?

I have been editing for some years now and always try to edit responsibly according to Wiki guidelines. Naturally, I do not want vandalism to be wrongly attributed to me. Also, your message/warning does need to reach the actual culprit. I would appreiciate your advice in this matter.CN3777 (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Why was my edit considered a test?
My intention was just to link to the appropriate wiki page for the disease. Is that incorrect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennyedits (talk • contribs) 14:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Bleo.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Bleo.jpg

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 01:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sarnak (comics), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jack Russell, Tom Sullivan and The Committee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Bob Brozman
Not sure what you were correcting in this edit. My previous edit just removed the space in front of the reference!--ukexpat (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve Sarnak (comics)
Hi, I'm Chris troutman. KoshVorlon, thanks for creating Sarnak (comics)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. I would recommend you use the external links at Sarnak (comics) as references for that article. I'm not sure this character is notable (he only appeared twice and not since 1973) so this article might be deleted.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 00:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Nigger pool
The article is not an attack on anyone, so G10 is not appropriate. If you want the redirect deleted, please send to it WP:RFD. Also, please do familiarise yourself with WP:CSD to avoid making similar mistakes in the future: had you tagged a redirect created by a newbie with G10, considering how the G10 uw talk page notice is worded you'd have seriously bitten him. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

IPL 2013
Hi, I saw that you removed all the flags from that article according to this. But isn't that only for infoboxes and not for the whole article? The tournament consists of international players although it's a domestic competition (which is exception). Tolly 4  bolly  21:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:KoshVorlon/vector.js
User:KoshVorlon/vector.js, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:KoshVorlon/vector.js and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:KoshVorlon/vector.js during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 19:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:KoshVorlon/testform.js
User:KoshVorlon/testform.js, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:KoshVorlon/testform.js and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:KoshVorlon/testform.js during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 19:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Star Trek Into Darkness
Hey, thanks for supporting my addition of a "Themes" category for STID. I happened to notice your revision and comment while looking for something else in the View History for that page. I'm still a fairly new contributor and I am happy to be corrected; I am happier to be encouraged! I think you'll enjoy the interview with Pegg, Cho and Eve at the Bob Rivers Show; you can follow my link to it, but here it is again: http://www.bobrivers.com/#v12539c4. I'll be laughing at the "Away Team" joke for a while. All best to you, mate. Abyssopelagic 13:04, 17 May 2013 (UTC)  Abyssopelagic

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)