User talk:Kurykh/Archive 6

Soapboxing?
User:Tobias Conradi HalfShadow 20:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Page protection
Hi. I notice you recently protected a number of discussion archives in your userspace. I can't find any history of vandalism or other unconstructive editing to these pages. Discussion archives are not routinely protected in this way, and while semi-protection to deter casual vandals is probably acceptable, I fail to see that full protection is necessary. I understand that the pages are intended to remain in their current state, but virtually all of the other 20,000 discussion archives we have seem to be managing this pretty well without protection. There are a few archives (mostly of more controversial pages) which have attracted the odd bit of vandalism, reverting or in extreme cases semi-protecting has always sufficed. I recommend that you review the protection policy, which applies as much to your userspace as anywhere else on the wiki, consider removing the protection, and semi-protect the pages if and only if they are the target of repeated unconstructive edits by multiple users – Gurch 11:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 6

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your closure of CN discussion
Please don't forget to reblock placing the discussion link in the block log. Best regards, Navou   banter  01:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Inetpup is Unsuspended and is Back !!
I'm back and I'll try to be good.--Inetpup 02:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Buses WikiProject
I notice that you have edited lists of bus routes recently. You might be interested in helping with the new WikiProject buses, especially the proposed Bus route list guide. We are also working out when a bus route should have its own article and other issues. --NE2 15:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Your userpage
Seems to be under attack by vandals. I have added your userpage to my watchlist in the meantime. MrMacMan Talk  19:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

uh.... excuse my childish brother he has been editing so user pages I seen and I deeply apologize to the hard-worked people he has ruin peoples user page and my so sorry. Arnon Chaffin 19:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Ararat arev template question
The template you placed on his page saying "It has been established that this blocked user is the puppet master of one or more abusive or block / ban-evading sock puppets. " how many sockpuppet accounts does it take to have one of those put on a users page? I ask because 3 times now I have turned in a guy who has 5 going on 6 (current open case) [] if this one goes thorough and it looks just like his others. Thats 5 times he has made accounts to avoid a block. I was just curious if that template has a set number to get and if its for admins only. Thanks for your time. --Xiahou 01:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks, also is it just an admin template or can any editor place them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xiahou (talk • contribs) 01:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Ok, the one I am making ref. to is. So I will place it on that one. Thanks. --Xiahou 01:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreements
I'm pretty sure we've never agreed before, if so, my bad; KP Botany 20:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Reconsider block?
Hi, Physicq210: Would you reconsider your indefblock of User:Joseph The Greatest!(I share my name with no man)? This user's name is under 50 characters, which I don't think fits the criteria of 'extremely lengthy' in the username policy. Thank you in advance for considering it. Anchoress 03:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Kd lvr/Vandalism Request...Sorry
My apologizes on the request. I didn't know that there was a standing request for it to be moved to another board. I will move it to the WP:ANI board. Again, please accept my apologizes. - SVRTVDude (VT) 01:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 7

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 19:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

What are you doing...
... blocking socks? You should be studying! ;) – Rianaऋ 05:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ugh, sounds nasty. You deserve a break. Good luck with it all :) – Rianaऋ 05:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, I've had enough of this whack-a-mole bullshit. This is the seventh one today.  What can we do with this?    <- That's him, User:71.156.37.204.  Can we contact his ISP now that we know it?  It says it's from a DSL line so, in theory, SBC should be able to figure out who it was.  Also, that IP needs to be indef blocked.  User:Jiang only blocked it for an hour for some reason.   --Dynaflow   babble  06:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Who is R. Sieger? What is this controversy about? Wouldn't it have better to explain why R. Sieger is edits are biased? What are his edits?VK35 16:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

arbitration
Hey, so you commented somewhat extensively on the AN/I thread regarding User:Miskin. It's been brought to WP:RFAR, should you wish to comment there. ⇒   SWAT Jester    Denny Crane.  11:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 8

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 19:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Your picture
I really like the picture on your user page. A.Z. 06:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Where is Seattle?
Do you know what has happened to the article on the city of Seattle. I can't find it anywhere? -- Patleahy 03:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, it has been fixed. If you are curious what this is about see: User talk:WJBscribe -- Patleahy 03:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Irish neutrality during World War II
The article Irish neutrality during World War II has been nominated for deletion. Please add your opinion to the discussion on AfD. --sony-youth pléigh 22:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Pbnation
Hello. You deleted the article Pbnation a little while ago. The page was being vandalised by multiple users who I suspect are sockpuppets. I was starting to prepare to submit a case to Suspected sock puppets, but can no longer do so as I can no longer access the page's edit history in order to provide diffs as evidence. Would you please briefly review the page's history yourself and block as necessary? The sockpuppetry seemed rather obvious ... multiple accounts simultaneously vandalsing the same page, including at least one (DK Radar) created less than 1 hour ago ... so starting a case at WP:SSP is probably unnecessary.

I had copied the article's edit history into Notepad and so can post that below. The only person on that list whom I don't suspect to be a sockpuppet is User:P4k. I was also unable to check the edits made by two of the IPs. I would appreciate your assistance in this matter. Thank you, Black Falcon (Talk) 06:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * (cur) (last) 06:04, May 28, 2007 68.53.126.18 (Talk) (1,326 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:52, May 28, 2007 70.189.149.234 (Talk) (790 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:47, May 28, 2007 70.189.149.234 (Talk) (639 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:46, May 28, 2007 70.189.149.234 (Talk) (580 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:45, May 28, 2007 DK Radar (Talk | contribs) (579 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:43, May 28, 2007 68.6.232.115 (Talk) (399 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:41, May 28, 2007 68.6.232.115 (Talk) (397 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:41, May 28, 2007 70.189.149.234 (Talk) (325 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:40, May 28, 2007 Jonleflar (Talk | contribs) m (310 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:39, May 28, 2007 DK Radar (Talk | contribs) (298 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:38, May 28, 2007 68.6.232.115 (Talk) (57 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:37, May 28, 2007 71.79.125.17 (Talk) (91 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:34, May 28, 2007 Pizzamannation (Talk | contribs) (80 bytes)
 * (cur) (last) 05:33, May 28, 2007 P4k (Talk | contribs) (15 bytes) (db)
 * (cur) (last) 05:33, May 28, 2007 Pizzamannation (Talk | contribs) (54 bytes) (←Created page with 'Pbnation is the best ST OSST PBNATION Write something!')

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Nkras Block
I that that you may be the one responsible for banning Nkras. May I know why? I found the arguments he was involved in on Conservative Judaism's talk page stimulating and very precise, and I feel that, perhaps, he has been banned as a result of merely opposing the concensus; then again, I am not thoroughly informed of whatever else he might have done. Would you be able to comment, or perhaps direct me to where I'd be able to find a way to communicate with this user being that he has been blocked, banned and all but squashed out of Wikipedia existance? DRosenbach (Talk 12:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you re: User:71.112.115.55
I am writing to express deepest thanks for helping in this situation. I turned to ArbCom because I was getting desperate, in a "It's him or me" kind of way (I didn't raise that because I didn't want to seem like I was trying to force things to go my way). I have been absolutely puzzled by this trolling; not because of the trolling, per se, but because of its longevity and absolute obsession with me. I suppose it's always unnerving when a person exhibits unstable behavior directed at a person, but this has been odd behavior directed at me since March. Scribe has been a great help, and he has a lot of gratitude from me. But I was feeling the short blocks were not getting the IP to change their behavior, but focus it to WP:GAME policies and guidelines in more and more clever ways. As User:Thatcher131 pointed to a problem I was already encountering when trying to deal with each new IP manifestation of this User, that when I reported it to an admin, "Unfortunately, many admins who watch there will be unaware that this is an ongoing problem, and will react by suggesting that this is a content dispute that should be addressed by talking about it, or that it is not serious enough vandalism to block without first going through the warning levels." Exactly. What I needed I received, which was an unequivocal statement that this User is now banned, and a diff to show that regardless of what this User attempts to do, no matter the clever manner or gaming of policies and guidelines that make their trolling and vandalization not apparent, I can point to a conclusive judgment on them. This happened to day, when an admin e-mailed me about my reverting the IP's comments on my FA candidacy for Tompkins Square Park Police Riot (what the IP used as an example of my vandalizing on their talk page). This well-meaning admin wrote in an e-mail that my removal of this IP criticizing me and my "lies" as "Consider the act that the IP points to as vandalism by you. I hate to say it, but it looks like .... vandalism by you." I kept coming across this, and it was very frustrating, which is why I took so much time to reconstruct their relentless behavior in one location. So, I want to say thank you, thank you, thank you, for your help and understanding. This unbalanced behavior has been odd to witness, and to have myself be the focal point of it. It was also becoming too time-consuming and too frustrating when I have a lot of other things I want to contribute and work on with the website. I am also flattered by the admin suggestion; unfortunately, I don't think I have the best temperment for such a position (I don't know how you guys do it) and I relish focusing on using my creativity to improve the site. But I also have an artistic temperment. That said, Wikipedia's guidelines of behavior have not only improved my editing and relating on this website, but also in my own life. I find myself telling other people to "assume good faith" often ("Don't assume he didn't call you because he is playing games with you, assume good faith--maybe he's just really busy, or maybe someone died...you never know.") That's Wikipedia. Dave --David Shankbone 04:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

== After you enforced the block of EdwinCasadoBaez  ==

He came back under another IP address 69.120.74.120 and 69.119.127.181. Less than 2 hours later.  . He has admitted to this and basically refuses to abide by the block. He is even going forth with page archiving for EdwinCasadoBaez' page. YoSoyGuapo 07:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Commons
Hmmm, we meet again; thanks for your...eh...lecture last night. But what brings me here is some pictures I uploaded, eg "Image:IMGKillaloe 2093w.jpg" - they have migrated to Wikicommons! How is that done? How did you discover it? I asked way back could I move my pics to Commons but was told they would have to be uploaded again. (Which at my upload speed would be a total pain). Obviously you know of another way....could you explain how it is done? I have some orphans need saving. (Sarah777 01:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC))

Normal set
I have placed normal set on AfD. The problem is not whether it's "worthwhile", but whether it's standard terminology. I don't believe it is. --Trovatore 03:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Traubel
Why on earth did you delete the article on Horace Traubel? He was a noted journalist. He did edit The Conservator. He did publish Walt Whitman's articles From WorldCat, just as a start:

Conserving Walt Whitman's fame : selections from Horace Traubel's Conservator, 1890-1919 by Gary Schmidgall; Horace Traubel Language: English Type:  Book Publisher: Iowa City : University of Iowa Press, ©2006. ISBN: 087745972X 9780877459729 | OCLC: 61229838 | Cite this Item Subjects: Whitman, Walt, | Poets, American -- 19th century -- Biography.

The conservator. by Horace Traubel Language: English Type:  Serial Publication : Periodical : Monthly Publisher: Philadelphia : H.L. Traubel, [1890-1919] | Other Editions ... OCLC: 1697211 | Cite this Item Subjects: Social problems -- Periodicals. .	Complete index to the Conservator : published by Horace Traubel, from March 1890 to June 1919 by Horace Traubel; Henry Scholey Saunders Language: English Type:  Book :  Microform Publisher: Toronto : [s.n.], 1920.

I will of course restore it tomorrow, if you don't get to it first, but perhaps there was some problem with the article that I am not aware of, though I cannot imagine what. DGG 08:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sfmuni logo.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sfmuni logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Codelyoko193
You probably don't remember me, or remember what you taught me, but you get my Thanks "Barnstar" by teaching me that vandalising is a terrible, terrible thing by banning me long ago. Codelyoko193 20:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 9

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 16:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The short of the long
The short of the long is that I'm a pretty bold editor and people don't like that. I familiarize myself with the consensus of the community (that is WP:EL and things of that nature) and then act on those understandings. The other editors, and even some admins, have a serious problem with that. I'm aggressive in my edits and I remove bunk content without remorse and swiftly. I have been attacked from all sides numerous times and respond when I have a chance on the talk pages of the appropriate articles. I am not a "nice person" when attacked; although, I do apologize if I go to far (which is once by my count). Happy to talk ad nausseum (spelling?) about this, but wanted to be short. //Tecmobowl

HHO and Brown's gas deletions

 * My thanks for seeing through the BS that Omegatron was throwing out on this one and deleting those articles as they deserved. One question:  Can you please re-salt them?  They had been salted before, but Omegatrom go that removed in a deletion review.  Given that the articles have been deleted again, re-salting seems to me like a very prudent thing to do. --EMS | Talk 03:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Lack of consensus for deletion defaults to keep. Please restore these articles.  Ignore EMS's claims lies about my motives.  My motives are clear from my edit history. — Omegatron 12:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * edit conflicy


 * If Omegatron prepares an article in his userspace, then asks for outside input, as to whether the policy violations which resulted in four deletions have been resolved, we can review the need for recreation. Untill such time we should not be gaming the system and accept the fact that four deletions should be interpreted as "the community does not accept policy violations, therefore do not recreate simply to satisfy some obsessive need to have these article no matter what." Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 14:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Man with two legs 19:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/HHO gas (4th nomination): I fail to see how the closure can possibly reflect the consensus of the discussion. (see also WP:AN) I'd like to avoid having to give the merry-go-round yet another turn in form of another review, so, can I "courteously invite you to take a second look" at your decision? Femto 14:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Why have you deleted two articles:
 * 1) without consensus, or even a majority
 * 2) without any attempt to explain your actions
 * 3) against the opinions of a number of contributors whose edit history shows them to be serious and knowledgable?

I believe that you improperly conflated the separate results for HHO gas and Brown's Gas, which were improperly AFDed together in the first place. Brown's Gas is well known, scientific background and in industrial use, as many mentioned in the AFD. HHO is pseudoscience. Viewed separately, there was clearly a keep on Brown's gas, and I have restored it. Georgewilliamherbert 19:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * To me this is an unfortunate thing to do. The AfD clearly stated both articles violated WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:SPAM. The rationale behind undeleting an article that has no RS to substantiate or debunk the claims is beyond my comprehension. Given the current emotions among certain proponents it is now more or less impossible to delete yet again. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 21:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of references; they disagree about the outlandish claims, and the HHO stuff is clearly unsupported. My action is, as all admin actions are, subject to review, including DRV.  I won't wheel-war over it if a consensus of admins feel that I goofed.  Georgewilliamherbert 21:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Given the current emotions among certain proponents - Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 21:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Who, precisely, do you think is a proponent? There is only one proponent in the deletion discussion that I am aware of, and he voted the same as you in the last nomination.  Most of the people voting keep explicitly stated that they don't believe in this stuff. — Omegatron 01:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Explanation?
Sorry for my brief message this morning, but I couldn't write more at the time. Can you please explain why you deleted these articles? Also, as I'm sure you've noticed, EMS and Gnothi seauton have stated that I am a proponent of this "technology"; a fraudster, and that I'm trying to get these articles kept for publicity reasons. This couldn't be farther from the truth, as pointed out by everyone who knows me outside this debate. A cursory look through my contributions to Wikipedia and to this article will convince you otherwise. I think the defamation and interpersonal/editorial disputes are heading towards an RfC, at the least... — Omegatron 01:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) I count 19 keep votes vs 15 delete votes.  Do you count differently?  It's a little outlandish to claim that this constitutes a rough consensus for deletion, don't you think?  A deletion in spite of consensus to keep should only be done in special cases (copyright violations, meatpuppets, etc.)
 * 2) Even if the votes were reversed, and there was a slight majority for deletion, Wikipedia is not a majoritarian democracy, and this would still not constitute a rough consensus for deletion.  In the case of no consensus, as I'm sure you're aware, the default action is to keep:
 * 3) * "These processes are not decided through a head count, so people are encouraged to explain their opinion and refer to policy. The discussion lasts at least five days; afterwards, pages are deleted if there is consensus to do so. If there is no consensus, the page is kept and is again subject to normal editing, merging or redirecting as appropriate." — Deletion policy
 * 4) * "The result of the debate was No Consensus, article kept." — Afd no consensus
 * 5) * "When in doubt, don't delete." — Deletion guidelines for administrators
 * 6) Several of the delete votes were solely for HHO gas, not Brown's gas.  The articles are quite different.
 * 7) You stated that "AfD is not a merry-go-round", and "repeated recreation of this article without heeding policy ... can and will be construed as disruption".  Were you unaware that the previous deletion review explicitly stated that the articles could be recreated?
 * 8) You stated that 'This is essentially some "special" type of oxyhydrogen (whatever that means)'.  If you aren't sure what that means, are you sure you should be jumping to conclusions about its place in our project?  Do you think that 19 editors are incompetent to decide from our policies whether these topics deserve treatment in their own articles?  The people who promote these gases claim that they are similar to oxyhydrogen, but contain other anomalous compounds and properties, which is why these unique claims are separated from the other article.  If the articles are to be merged or renamed, that discussion takes place on the articles' talk pages, not on AfD.
 * 9) You mentioned "badgering commenters whose opinions you don't agree with".  What was this a reference to?  Who are you threatening with a block, and for which actions?

James De la Vega
Cant believe you deleted james de la vega's wiki page. thats an insult to nyc.

What originial research?
In the SFO article, I didn't do any original research. I just told it like it was. Explain you position!! --Inetpup 05:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

HHO gas DRV
An editor has asked for a deletion review of HHO gas. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Femto 11:58, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've closed the above, given that we already had eleven deletion debates and two reviews on the subject. FYI.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  13:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

209.20.176.80 message
I got a message from you indicating that you had reverted some edits originating at this IP address from the article on San Francisco. I haven't ever visited that page, let alone edited it. The IP address in question is the address of my proxy server, and there are several computers behind it. They all belong to members of my immediate family. These edits seem to have been made by a friend of my 14-year-old son. My son has also made some edits (not to the SF article), but I have told him that he must get an account if he intends to make any further edits. I have also told him that his friends may not make edits from this system. I hope that that will be sufficient to curb the nuisance; we'll see. My apologies for any inconvenience or disruption. MaxwellPerkins 06:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

"Decide" article
I notice you deleted the article "Decide", for being "Non-notable". Decide is a program to create awareness about democracy and deliberation, and is being used by several museums and organizations worldwide. If you Google "Decide" you will get the project's website, playdecide.org as the first result on the page, or in the top list. It is a laudable initiative, supported by the European Commission, and it's a shame that its definition has been deleted from Wikipedia. Can you please re-instate the article? Thank you!Andinams 07:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use Orphans Image:Kolejfromair.jpg + others
Per the above image, I had tagged it as orphaned fair use and did not change the GFDL-self tag as I figured the Google logo and copyright notice in the bottom centre was obiviously this image was only usable under fair use. I guess it was not so and as such I have had to re-tag the image for deletion again. Thanks.--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 11:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The same argument with Image:Logo vertical.jpg given that the logo is listed as the offical logo of the enterprise. Again I thought it was obvious.--User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 11:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion by CSD I8
05:23, May 22, 2007 Kurykh (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Image:Moscow-flag.png" (CSD I8)

YOu delete the image because it was supposedly joved to Commons, but you didn't pay attention that its name was changed. This created a host of red links in wikipedia. In the future in such case you have to update wikipedia links to the new name from Commons. `'юзырь:mikka 19:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

HHO gas redux
Some concern about actions by administrator User:Omegatron. Given this and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive92#When%20can%20AfDs%20be%20closed%20against%20consensus? this], I'm a little worried by these actions and especially  (salted page), which was followed by this slightly surreal exchange. Also, looking at this diff, I'm starting to lose some of my AGF. I considered taking this to WP:ANI, but thought it best to alert previously involved admins first. I'd be interested in your thoughts. Thanks,  Eliminator JR Talk  01:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Quick image question re: Image:NRT6 2001.jpg
Hi there. I need a quick opinion from an admin. User:Hornetman16 tagged the above image for speedy deletion as "Breaks Florida's Laws" -- it's a photo of a group of nudist bikers, one of whom is about 3. As it had previously passed an IfD, I removed the speedy tag and. I let Hornetman16 know, and he disagrees with my action as he feels this image could lead to prosecution; I feel it's an innocent photo, or at least not so offensive as to require immediate action. I offered to get an admin's opinion, so I'm asking you. Restore speedy or IfD? Please reply at User talk:Hornetman16. Cheers, Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your quick response! Cheers! Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I thought he and I were having a reasonable discussion, I didn't realise that he was going to be vehemently inflexible... Thanks again. Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Walking away is never a bad thing. It's 1:50 am here, and I'm about to head to bed, too. Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Full House
You live in California?--   Hornetman16   06:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I do. It's before midnight as of this post. — Kurykh  06:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * San Fransico?--   Hornetman16   06:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC) P.S.: I'll reply tomorrow since it's 3 in the morning here!
 * Precisely. — Kurykh  07:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)