User talk:Longhair/Archive8

Oakland City Center
I was wondering, what was your reason for reverting my edits to the Oakland City Center article? 71.141.237.141 05:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Oakland Lakeside Apartments District
Longhair, can you categorize this page properly? My html sucks.

p.s. sorry, typo

Virtualsoil
You can delete it. I just added the page because I saw similar pages on the List of wikis such as Encyclopedia Gamia which I used as my boilerplate. Do you want me to put a delete tag ? I've heard that author requests for delete get deleted faster Renmiri 07:03, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind... Wow, that was speedy! Renmiri 07:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Question for Longhair.
If you could tell me how to sort the picture I used on the Sam Soliman page that would be great. I saw you catagorized the page just now and figured you could give me some info so the picture doesn't get deleted. The picture if from doughouseboxing, no credit is taken, no watermarks were used, no date was provided.

Copyright.
© Copyright / All Rights reserved: Doghouse Boxing 1998-2005

Yeah wait. I lied. That notice is at the bottom of the links page and that's the only place it shows up.

Thanks for the help with everything.

Btl 07:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

About the upcoming Mr. Mystery article...
I can show you some evidence about the upcoming series but it's printed into the book. Because of copyright reasons, I can't upload it. If you can find Mr. Midnight books No. 25 or No. 26 and look at the back page, you can find it. Bruin rrss23 01:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for voting
I'd just like to take a moment to thank you, Loinghair for voting in my request for adminship regardless if you voted for or against me. Seeing some very valid concerns, I've pulled the RfA until some of the concerns can be addressed. Thanks for your comments, I'll use them to help better myself -- Tawker 02:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality and errors
Please restore the neutrality and factual error indicator on the Andrew Landeryou article. DarrenRay 07:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip
Yes, if there are serious issues with what people are reverting, ie incorrect facts and bias, the best way is to put a TotallyDisputed indicator, is that right? DarrenRay 07:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again
Will do. DarrenRay 08:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Julian Barendse
User:Theusualsuspect has removed the TotallyDisputed indicator from an article. What can I do about this? DarrenRay 08:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Gameranger
I am having some trouble with a likely vandal who keeps reverting Gameranger to the version nominated for deletion. Your change has been erased in the revert. Please feel free to restore it and keep an eye on the article for me.

Thanks,

Cedars 08:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Link
My link that has long been established in wiki keeps being removed.

http://www.pinkfloydz.com/

It is a legitimate site that has been endorsed by davidgilmour.com I think ony one of two sites listed in your index to have been OFFICIALLY endorsed. (The other being our sister site Brain Damage)

I now respectfully request that this link be left where it has been for years, after all, the site is the second busiest Floyd site on the net.

Thanks from a fellow Australian longhair

Col
 * I was going to defend keeping this link in the article just to keep the peace provided the site's proponents quit removing links to other sites, and was in the midst of previewing a comment to you along said lines, when User:Wobbs began posting and vandalizing my talk page during his linkspamming. So, more power to you in the reverts. - dharm a bum 09:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Just to note that User:Wobbs has apologized to me over the talk page problems, and I probably overreacted a bit after a couple of weeks of external link wars that left me edgy. I do think that the site is notable enough to keep, provided that no other sites are removed and civility from its proponents continues. - dharm a bum 10:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The big problem with the Floyd article is that the long fan history the band has leads to arguments among the fan site operators. This one disputed here has been around for 8 years. Should it bow to the Echoes mailing list site, which has been around for nearly 2 decades, but has little traffic these days? Pink Floyd & Co. has been around for less time, but has more traffic and newer features, does it get precedence? What about Brain Damage, which is often cited in the article for recent news?


 * While Wikipedia is not a link repository, I'm tempted to give a little more latitude on the external links. There are many link repositories of Floyd info (including one prominent one linked from here), but with the contetion amongst Floyd site operators and the number, showing a preference for one is dangerous.


 * As long as people aren't removing rival sites (which some people posting the pinkfloydz.com site in the past have done, but the registered user who most recently posted has not), I'm inclined to be lenient and allow them, as long as they're in alphabetical order and they don't remove other websites from the list. An admin recently deleted all the fansite links from the article because of these arguments, and I don't want to see it come to that, as some of them have decades of history, none that I've read contain outright false information, and they are useful for more in-depth information than the article itself contains, and I just want to keep the peace. I just don't want to see arguments between rival site operators end in the removal of resources that your average Wikipedia browser can take advantage of. - dharm a bum 11:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Bali Nine Images
Hi, sorry I still think you have missed the point with the fair use as all you did was quote the suggested guidelines which fair use says isnt sufficient. In the article it says the images were released by Indonesian Police to the media. If more than one outlet either in Australia or outside has the same image then quote them all. The image would be fair as the originator Indonesian Police released the image to all media outlets (this would also include wikipedia), the only exception is if ten had exclusive rights for which it paid. Then you would need to show the conditions of those rights including when and how they expire. You still need to acknowledge ten as your source for the image. The same will also apply to any other image sourced from the media for the article. Gnangarra 10:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Please Dont withdraw your close enough to see the finish line. All you need to show is that the image was released by the Indonesian police to all media outlets.  Then say something like Image released under fair use as originator being the Indonesian police released the image as part of video footage release to all media outs on (date),  this actual image was sourced from the Ten Network Australia hope it helps I'm not triing to cause you an problems Gnangarra 10:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok if you need any help just ask Gnangarra 11:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Bulla Dairy Foods Logo
G'day Longhair. Just for my personal interest, where did you come across the Bulla Dairy Foods logo in that format on the Bulla page? (Downjam 10:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC))

My RfA was sucessful :-)
Thank you for your nomination of my successful request for adminship. I am honoured that the nomination was supported unanimously and that the community expressed confidence that I would use the tools wisely. If you have any concerns please let me know on my talk page. (Too overwhelmed to write more than a minimal messsgae right now ...) Regards A Y  Arktos 20:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Mutant X
You said the article requires cleanup but didn't specify anything. Please do.

Thanks
I think I've got all of StarAlizee's "warnings" removed -- Tawker 10:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

New York City screen grab
Very minor point; I assume that the "New York City" screenshot you have is the C64 version (it definitely isn't the Atari version, which suggests that it must be from the C64, but I don't like presenting my assumptions as facts, so I haven't marked it as such). Fourohfour 19:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

RFA Thanks
P.S. If you are interested in The Beatles, User:Lar has asked me to tag on a little note advertising the creation of a new Beatles WikiProject that we are currently setting up. Please sign up and help.

Beatle Barkers
Hi Longhair! As startup task for the new Beatles WikiProject a group of editors have been running an audit on existing articles (WikiProject The Beatles/Article Classification). An tag has been added to an article you created, Beatle Barkers. If you have any information to add or would like to contrubute to the debate about whether it should be listed for deletion, please head on over. Cheers. --kingboyk 17:02, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Dean McVeigh wikipedia edits
I appreciate your point about self references - thanks - but I still don't like what is going on. I suppose if User:DarrenRay edits the article again the response is to put a neutrality tag on it and take it to arbitration. I need ot leave this alone, deal with my other life and write some real content.--A Y  Arktos 21:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

McVeigh article merged
Howdy. I have decided to be bold and merge the McVeigh article into MUSU, removing at least one unnecessary article in this collection. I assume those involved in the legal fight will strongly oppose as it undermines their POV platform. Why do I let myself get into these contentious edits! Garglebutt / (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm about to move the MUSU article to a more general title to facilitate merging the related articles. Garglebutt / (talk) 03:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

THanks
Thank you for the welcome. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2006BC (talk &bull; contribs) 2006-03-07 18:58:11. otherwise known as Ben Cass per MUSU liquidation. Garglebutt / (talk) 08:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Dean Mcveigh
I believe Garglebutt has broken the rule where he says you can't edit 3 times or more. Can you please have a look at it and tell me what's going on? 2006BC 08:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Abrasive welcome
Thanks, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the article but why is that only possible on a draft page. Why does Garglebutt get to impose a view? That's the part I'm not sure I understand. Does he have a higher status or something? Is that how it works? --2006BC 08:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

DarrenRay and 2006BC
I think you are assuming a little too much good faith regarding their intentions, however I appreciate you trying to cool things down. Garglebutt / (talk) 09:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't wish to intrude on a private chat, but I would really appreciate "Garglebutt" stop disparaging me about my "intentions." I haven't made any such accusations about this person and it's not my way to do so and I wish that Garglebutt could act as politely. There is disagreement yes. But there is no need to be discourteous. Unlike this person who does not appear to identify himself by name, I am willing to say who I am and defend what I am writing or in the case of McVeigh, I haven't even had the chance to write it.

Longhair, if Garglebutt is of no higher status to me as a Wikipedia person, I don't understand why rules are being inconsistently applied. Is the 3RR rule optional or do we have to comply with it? I will play by whatever rules are going --while trying to learn them -- but why would Garblebutt break a rule while threatening me not to break it? And will he/she be blocked for doing this? PS Sorry for clogging up your page with my gripes too! --2006BC 09:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The issue I face is that I have two editors who are alone in disagreeing with this article being merged solely because they have a vested interest in the liquidation of MUSU. There has been nothing but edit wars on the Dean McVeigh article as POV edits were continuously made and reverted. I and others came to the conclusion that the article was non-notable and merged it into a broader article about the history of student services at University of Melbourne. I realise that as a contributor to this article yourself that you are no longer able to be impartial in your admin function. Hopefully sanity and common sense will prevail. Garglebutt / (talk) 09:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Garglebutt, you have broken the rule you warned me not to (3RR). I'm not a naive person but I find this more than a little troubling. Please explain. When you say "you and others came to the conclusion" about deleting the article, you don't say which others which in the circumstances you probably should consider doing. All I want is an explanation and for the rules relating to reverting to apply to you as they seem to apply to everyone else. 2006BC 09:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I remove material that is really nasty about my friend Darren Ray. I don't why people are like this. This slander effects real people. I don't accept that people who are secretive about their identitys can say anything they want about others without proof or reasons. AChan 12:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Lies they are. I am not interested in politics at all and it is wicked that lies supported by a liquidator who spends millions to make a political point gets told as a a big scandal. I have looked at many of the papers to give comment to Darren as an accountant. I have never seen anything like this where one Liquidators spend $2.6 million to get almost nothing and to run lawsuits that cost even more that will also make nothing. I know Darren is one thing, but the five binders of documents I have read tell me that McVeigh's statements must be balanced with other side. I will do that and remove slander. Plus I am interested in many articles too. AChan 12:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Could you please unprotect the Landeryou article? No one seems to have raised any serious issues with the revised version, and I doubt anyone will at this stage. DarrenRay 13:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

And being even-handed no doubt you'll protect the revised version this time? It may well be true that I have a pitchfork under my bed and I artfully cover up horns on my head (hair gel is so helpful) but I really am unhappy about a situation where that those so keen to edit and revert articles like Landeryou's essentially in order to vilify the guy won't actually discuss them. You know that until tonight the Vice-Chancellor of the University didn't have an article at all. But Landeryou did. There are people here with undisclosed agendas and I think I'm right to be concerned about it. DarrenRay 13:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the nonsense overwhelmed my common sense for a moment (but it did feel good). I'm taking a backseat on this for a while and let others bang their head against the wall. Garglebutt / (talk) 22:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reminding me to keep WP:COOL. Admin William M. Connolley suggested I walk away and I'll try to keep a low profile on these articles and let other established editors explore solutions. Garglebutt / (talk) 22:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Request for arbitration
Be advised that I am in the process of filing a Request for Arbitration in relation to the edit war between DarrenRay, 2006BC and others. You are being named as an involved party. Garglebutt / (talk) 08:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Paularizzuto and Ambi
Longhair, can you please look at this User:Paularizzuto. The account hasn't been used since it was started back in January but it was started a couple of weeks after User:StephenBengHo took exception to us AFDing the Rizzuto attack article. And it copies Ambi's user page. Thanks. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 11:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Tis okay now...Mark Gallagher blocked the account. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 01:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Please Suggest
Longhair, I don't have any answer what is asked by User:Avriette. Please suggest me how to answer him. . Thanks, Shyam  ( T / C ) 07:59, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Errrr.
Yeah, ya think? You and friday and the crew have got to check in this major problem. Someone keeps writing stupid stuff on the article about pipropellant rocket engines. You told ROCKER to quit vandalising stuff but now someone else has been doing it for weeks.

P.S. can you send me a whole lot of stuff about rockets on my user talk? I am doing this report for school and it's killing me.

P.S.S. Let's be friends.

P.S.S.S. How's the council going? Send me info on that too!

P.S.S.S.S. Am I bothering you too much?

User Talk: JSTRUBS

Sarah Jayne Vercoe
Hi again! Just seeking your help as an independent editor, if possible, please, on an article we have collaborated on before. Another editor has tagged this article for possible deletion if notability criteria are not met. I have looked under the Notability_(people) guidelines, and find there the criterion: "Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events". However, I believe that I should not remove the tag myself, as the main author of the article, and wonder if you would be prepared to do so and make a note on the article's talk page as to the justification. The editor concerned has placed a note on the talk page where he refers to Vercoe as a 'low grade' offender - coming from the UK, he would have no idea of the notoriety of Vercoe in the Australian context, and this could be referred to in any note you might care to make on the subject. In addition, this editor seems to delete a lot of articles, according to his user log, but most seem to be the work of one contributor and often spurious in content. I'm not sure why he has chosen to target this one. Please let me know what you think. --SilverWings 08:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I see that the same editor has similarly tagged my article on Cindy Leanne Howell. In the case of both articles, I have gone to some trouble in the concluding paragraph to establish their notability.  Would you mind please having a look at this one too?  Many thanks!  --SilverWings 08:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * My article on Heidi Choat has now been tagged for deletion. I would appreciate, if you are willing, your involvement on the deletion discussion page for the article. --SilverWings 23:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Ixfd64
I have filed an RFC concerning an administrator's reversal of several blocks without discussion. This may be of particular interest to you as a one of the blocks was set by you. Regards. — Mar. 12, '06 [15:11] 

Appalachia edits
Why did you remove my edits to the Appalachia article? I corrected a grammatical error and expanded upon one of the points regarding humor about pronounciation of the word. It seems like you just summarily reverted it. If I did something wrong, I'd like to know what. Could you please reply here? I'm not sure how else I'd see the response.

kobi farhi.jpg
Hello longhair, I have recently uploaded an image of orphaned land's main vocalist, Kobi Farhi. Yet the image was taken down due to non-clarity about it's copyrights.

My questio is, If I get a prmisson by writing from Kobi Farhi himself to publish the picture in Wikipedia, Can I do it?

Thank you, Ariel Karlinsky AKA AnoreX AnoreX 00:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

hi Sahanx 07:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia. I will look forward to your help when I need it. -- Andy123  (talk) 19:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image Tagging Image:Bees bearding.JPG
I took the picture and tagged it accordingly. What else am I supposed to do? Shoefly 22:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Allo
Got the time to have a quick butchers at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Australian_conceptions_of_race_and_ethnicity ? Could do with some attention and I'd be interested to see what you made of it. PhilipPage 23:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Moorabool-3.jpg
An image that you uploaded, Image:Moorabool-3.jpg, has been listed at Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 21:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

WkiProject of Geelong
I have done some work on the Searoad ferry, so I don't think it is a stub any more. Maybe you can remove it from the WikiProject Geelong page to expand if you believe it necessary. I have also joined the project. --themit 05:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:NIDG night.jpg]]
Just so you know the uploader put "do not use outside of Wikipedia" which I think excludes GFDL, I've tagged it as no license in the meantime. -- Tawker 07:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

RfC - Category:Disbarred attorneys should be linked to Category:Criminals via a see also reference
Hi I posted an RfC at Requests for comment/Society, law, and sex as to whether the Category:Disbarred attorneys should be linked to Category:Criminals via a see also reference. One user and I did not agree and he suggested that we take it to RfC. The RfC has not engendered any further discussion. I was wondering if you would take a look at the issue at Category talk:Criminals? Many thanks--A Y Arktos\talk 01:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:NguyenTuongVan mugshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:NguyenTuongVan mugshot.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 11:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

7 ways that slaves in the South Resisted Slavery
Just a note about WP:PROD: if anyone removes a PROD tag, then the article has to go to AfD. So the tag, once removed should not be replaced. This given, I've unprotected the page and removed both tags. I figured I'd leave it to you to construct the AfD so that you can write a compelling nomination. (If a PROD tag was non-removable it would impossible to contest the deletion of anything tagged with one.) -Splash talk 02:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Splash was right. Now we've got to move the ball forward by nominating for AfD. Would you like to do the honours? -Will Beback 11:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

My (HereToHelp’s) RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I’m proud to inform you that it passed with 75 support to 1 oppose to 2 neutral. I promise to make some great edits in the future (with edit summaries!) and use these powers to do all that I can to help. After all, that’s what I’m here for! (You didn’t think I could send a thank you note without a bad joke, could I?) --HereToHelp 13:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Expired Arbitration/Personal Attack
Hi. I've recently had a problem with User:Xtra. He originally had (for over 1 year now) a section on his talk page entitled "My successful Arbitration." and a link to his case against me. That case expired over a month ago, yet he still kept the link available on his talk page until tonight. Pleas to remove them were ignored, and even other admins queried whether it was necessary and appropriate (the WP:NPO rules state "not to rub it in." Finally tonight, after an WP:PAIN, he chamged the title of the secion to "Other" (after pressure from admins who called it "gloating") yet still links to the outdated case. Linking to that case does absolutley nothing other than to gloat, harass and attack me -- over a year after an expired case was resolved! It serves no purporse other than to gloat. Changing the name, yet maintaining a link to the case case is an continuous harassment against me. If he feels the link is important for reference it could be included in a sub-page, not in the open where its sole purpose is to attack me. Can he please move it to a sub page? Thanks for any help. PSYCH 13:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC).

Re; Kirsty Gallacer.
Hi,

as you're a mod, you're the person to ask. I have re-submitted a link to the page for Kirsty Gallacher. Unfortunately, it seems like a bit of editing ping-pong has started. The link thst was removed was a link for British Television Presenters, this was then replaced by a Scottish Presenters link added.

That's cool, she is Scottish, however adding a British link is also valid as Scotland it part of Britain (sadly). The whole thing has a 'professional Scot' vibe to it. The fact is a British link is valid as well as a link for Scottich presenters, I'd thought look for clarification from a mod, rather than get involved in childish editing and re-editing. Maybe you could take a look when you get a spare moment. Thanks.

Matthew.

P.S. don't let the fact that she's lived in England for all but four years of her life and doesn't have a Scottish accent sway you. ;)

Matthew Allen 12:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on my userpage
IP 61.213.147.188 has vandalised my user page! How innapropriate! Block him!Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian):-(

Situation of administrator abuse
Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here  Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 06:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Bowie High School
Thanks for pointing out for Bowie High School, but should it have *Category:Schools in the United States? That would put a lot of disambig pages into that cat, wouldn't it?--Rayc 05:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal of images
I have uploaded several images that I own copyright to with the proper copyright tag. But all the images I uploaded were removed. Here is a list of the images:

Image Tagging Image:Europride02 001.jpg Image Tagging Image:Berlin01 090.jpg Image Tagging Image:Amsterdam03 103.jpg

The first time I uploaded I was unaware of the copyright restrictions so the second time I uploaded the files I made sure they were tagged properly. Would you please assist me in re submitting these images?

Category:Retired Australian Rules footballers
Hi mate, just letting you know about this category deletion nomination: Categories_for_deletion, which stipulates that categories should be called "Australian rules football" with no capitalised "R" - eg "Australian rules football coaches", "Australian rules footballers" instead of "Australian Rules footballers" etc. May I also ask the rationale behind the category you've created? I think we should discuss it on WP:AFL before implementing it, personally.  R o  gerthat  Talk  12:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, yeah you're right - usually in the introduction you'd put "so and so is a former Australian rules footballer in the AFL". Not really sure the category would work, as the majority of players to have played the game are retired. Kind of like the "Living people" cat. You could try bringing up maybe a "current players" cat, and have a vote for it.  R o  gerthat  Talk  07:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Melbourne
Hey Longhair! I see you nominated Melbourne as a GA. I just wanted you to know I have added a few objections on the talk page rather than fail it. Dunno if you wanna follow up on them? My impression is that most reviewers tend to pass or fail but I think it's better to give the editors of the page a chance to correct some small points. Regards SeanMack 07:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

How did you see my edit?
How did you see my edit?

Thanks for the welcome!

How do I upload a picture and keep it coprighted to me?

How do I get an edit that I made previous to becoming a member appear under my contributions?

I love Wikipedia, but as you can probably tell I am fairly new to being a member here.

Thankyou,

Aljian 11:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Possible Vandal
I believe User:84.50.234.55 may be a possible vandal - he made a meaningless change on the Google logo article (check the 'recent changes' there), and replaced a perfectly fine word with gibberish. Could you please revert his changes on Google logo and place a vandalism warning on his talk page, please? Thanks!

–- kungming·  2  (Talk) 22:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Pauldenyer female.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pauldenyer female.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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. feydey 04:52, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Please help
Hey Longhair, someone from 205.202.240.2 has vandalized my user page by deleting everthing, I reverted it to the previous, undeleted version. Is their anything I can do to stop this person?Tempest12 13:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks Longhair Tempest12 19:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)