User talk:Moe Epsilon/Archive 26

{| align=center style="border:5px solid #D0E7FF; ; background:#FFFFFF; -moz-border-radius:15px; padding:5px;" | width=775px valign=top |

Images
I've done a few, but I need to go out now. I'll carry on tomorrow if they're still not gone. - Papa November 1 21:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Films named cleopatra.JPG
Hi. at Image:Films named cleopatra.JPG, I disagree with the wording of your concern "This is a derivative work". I would say the image is not derivative of commercial work, it IS a copy of the commercial work, at low resolution and with a fair use argument. I've stated so on the image talk page. (I don't feel particularly strongly one way or another about use of the image, but for the record, there it is.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Stravinksy-petrushka-fanfare.png
Hi, could you explain why you think Image:Stravinsky-petrushka-fanfare.png needs to be in low resolution?

The reason I reverted it back to the original size is because the image itself was created from scratch by a user in a music notation program and declared free, with the proviso that he was unsure of the status of the music itself. He mistakenly tagged it with the "fair use of a non-free image" template (explaining your change to low-res), which I've replaced with "fair use of a copy of sheet music" and given an appropriate rationale on the talk page.

As I understand it, the "low-resolution" issue applies only to image copyrights - it would apply had he scanned a published copy of the sheet music, but since he created the image from scratch and has relinquished any rights on all such images (on his user talk page), the relevant fair-use criteria are those for copies of sheet music, which are different from those for images and make no mention of resolution because the copyright exists on the music itself and not its visual representation. I've given an explanation on the talk page as to why this extract meets the sheet music fair-use criteria, at least as regards the Polytonality article in which it appears. Thomjakobsen 23:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

AntiRussianPoster.jpg‎
Hi, I noticed that you removed this image from a user page. I think that was a right move. Moreover, I feel this image has been used inappropriately in other articles. If you have an opinion, could you please note your point of view at the image discussion page Image talk:AntiRussianPoster.jpg‎ We are trying to reach a consensus as to the use of this image and your input will be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance. --Hillock65 21:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Athens_seal.png
That Athens Seal picture that I originally uploaded, I feel can't be extremely lowered in quality or otherwise you will lose the ability to read the Dimos Athanion at the bottom. I'm surprised that I wasn't notified on my talk page, and rather saw it on my watchlist, which luckily I have it placed there. What needs to be done? El Greco (talk · contribs) 00:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Kiss of Dawn
I read the wiki rules about linking to such stuff and it never ever said anything like NO LINKING --NekoD 20:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

NFCC
Hi, this is in response to [ this message]. I wasn't aware that the policy doesn't allow fair use images on templates (though it does allow exceptions from this rule if there is a broad consensus, which could very well be the case here). Still, I don't think I've done anything that would warrant such an unfriendly note. (Moreover, I doubt that the image can only be used as "fair use" – as it is the CoA of a Hungarian county, I'm almost sure that it is in fact not protected by any copyright; I just haven't found the right source to make sure about that). Regards, KissL 10:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Rescaled Image
I noticed that you rescaled the image Image:Axis & Allies (2004) Coverart.jpg down to 200px. To comply with CVG guidlines images should be 256px if possible, im not saying that they have to be, but if one is already 256px you shouldn't scale it down to 200px. It's in the guidelines here:. Salavat 14:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

RfC on Lists and Contents pages
You've expressed interest in the past, so I thought I'd point you towards a discussion at Village pump (policy) on the Contents pages, and specifically on the namespace they belong in. Thanks. --Quiddity 17:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Too many music samples
Sorry that you had to delete all of those samples, I should have known better and read up on the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria before uplaoding all of it. Thanks, Adumbvoget 19:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: personal attacks will not be tolerated
If you reinsert your personal attacks toward me again at Articles for deletion/Jessica Darlin you will be reported and blocked. Thanks! Burntsauce 21:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for butting in, but that wasn't a personal ttack by any stretch of the imagination. Sure, it was borderline uncivil, but calling it a personal attack is going a bit too far. Regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 21:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It is very much uncivil and a personal attack, and should not be tolerated. Burntsauce 21:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but there was nothing personal in it. Your obviously don't get what WP:NPA says. Fake threats in edit summaries aren't going to work against me, I hope you understand that. — M o e   ε  22:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Gross violation
Hi I noticed you removed my list of G1. Was this because of the use of the logo or the number of times it was used. Either way I was trying to get feedback from the discussions regarding this list. If I may I would like to have it put back in which case I will replace the logo with the written name. The image does have fair use rationale stated. Libro0 05:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Accusation
I do not have anything to do with this Sherzoe edit nor do I know this person. I am not the only person in the past weeks that has reported Sherzo in the past weeks. No one ever seems to want to mediate in these situations. All anyone has asked for is to talk to him about being civil and keeping politics out of edits, plain and simple. I don't understand why I have been accused of this. I only hold one ID and that is the one I edit and talk with.Bluecord —The preceding  signed but undated.

Actually, your threat to block me was totally unwarranted as I can still edit from my computer without being logged on. Being that Sherzoe was blocked for legal threats, the usual wikipedia policy is to block the IP address of that ID as well. If I had of created this user, then my IP would have been blocked. I ask you to please refrain from blocking threats until you have the whole story. Thank you.BluecordBluecord 02:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Bluecord
I can't believe he'd do that, i mean vandalising my userpage is one thing but this is an outrage. Sherzo 14:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks for all your help Sherzo 00:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Decieving?
I am not decieving anyone, I even linked to the discussion for that guy to read for himself so that there were no misunderstandings. It was used as proof that as sources go OWW lacks the fact checking and editorial process of reliable sources, it lacks what the book I cite as a source has - making it in the eyes of Wikipedia a better source. MPJ-DK 17:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh and unless we're reading different arguments then the discussion on OWW has wrestling editors saying it is and a bunch of other editors saying it isn't a reliable source, it's unresolved but it's not like it's clear cut "reliable", nowhere near as reliable as the source I'm citing. MPJ-DK 17:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh and "what the hell have I been telling him"?? it's on his talk page, I told him that unless he had a better source he should leave it alone because it wasn't how Wikipedia worked, he blundered on and just kept readding it after I explained it a couple of times about reliable source with the only reason being basically "I like it" - so it's harsh worded, yeah but friendly and explantory didn't seem to get the job done. I don't appricate being attacked like that when all I've been trying to keep a good source in over a "so-so" source MPJ-DK 17:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all "not resort to misusing vandalism tags"? I did not use a vandalism tag at all, second of all you came here all "What the hell" and implied that I lied to the guy when I quite CLEARLY did not tell him OWW wasn’t a reliable source, just that it was less reliable than the book and gave him the link to the discussion to clue him into why that was. You said it yourself – OWW is a tertiary source, secondary sources are preferred when they can be found, the book I cite is a secondary source thus actually supporting what I’ve been saying.
 * And let me repeat myself because you seem to have read something other than what I wrote on his user page (and yours): I never said OWW was unreliable, I said that the book source because of it’s editorial and fact checking process and the "expert" standing of the author was a better source so please don’t put other words in my mouth and I’d appreciate it if you didn’t assume facts not in evidence, thank you MPJ-DK 06:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right I overstepped by using the word vandal, just like you overstepped by implying that I was lying to him or that I actually tagged him with a vandal tag not to mention the hint that such an act was a bannable offence, so faults on both sides. let's just end it there cause it gets us nowhere. MPJ-DK 19:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Great Job!
Great job finding that sockpuppet Moe!! Vlaze 23:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

User:I Own This Land
User:ElinorD beat me to it. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 23:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Please re-register
 Hello, ! You are receiving this notice because the Cleanup Taskforce has been inactive, as a result of this all active taskforce members are being asked to re-register.

For more information see: Cleanup Taskforce/Not Dead Yet

If you do not re-register here within 15 days of receiving this notice your name will be removed from the membership list (if you were unable to reply to this notice in time, you can just add you name back).

RJFJR 03:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
You've finally had your page vandalized 100 times! Woooooooooooooo!

Over 200? Stunning. BTW, while I was flipping around one time I stumbled across some page saying that Jimbo quotes don't count as policy. Do you know where this page is? I've been looking for it to use against Burntsauce, but I haven't had any luck. Cheers,  The  Hyb  rid  06:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes, that's what I was looking for. Thanks Moe :)  The  Hyb  rid  06:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Moe, check out this quote that BMG dug up:

''I think that almost any argument, on any topic, which has premises beginning with "Jimbo said..." is a pretty weak argument. Surely the merits of the proposal should be primary, not what I happen to think. -- Jimbo Wales''

I'ts like God a non-denominational deity himself/herself is on our side. Cheers,  The  Hyb  rid  22:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia: the Movie
'Ello. I recently contributed to Wikipedia: the Movie. I, then curious, went on the discussion page and saw your debate of sorts with Konstable. I agree with you. The section had no hint of a personal attack. Also, we had no proof she was a pre-teen. Thanks for being one of those Wikipedians who can lighten up! Cheers - 67.41.162.222 04:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I don't blame you. . .sadly, Wikipedia is hardly a place to lighten up. Cheers - 67.41.162.222 04:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:ANI
Want some cheese with that whine? :-P - Krakatoa  Katie  18:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: TJ Spyke
Oops, tagged the wrong person. I was doing that tagging based off Requests for checkuser/Case/TJ Spyke. I misread what JPGordan said and thought TJ was a Dereksx1 sock instead of the other way around. My mistake.  Kwsn  (Ni!)  21:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see, thanks for letting me know.  The  Hyb  rid  21:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Philippine mythology
Your reply: ''I saw your post on AN and was wondering what really needed to be done, like adding it to every article in the Philippine mythology category? — M o e   ε  01:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for the reply above which I copied from my talk page. I can do the adding or placing of the template and the necessary information to the corresponding article. But what I couldn't figure out is the "activation" of the template.  That is, I copied the "template contents" below but nothing happens after adding the information such title, image, description etc.:

""

Can you help me with this, thus "activating" the template. This is "where" I need assistance. Thank you in advance. And, by the way, I want to apply/use this template to articles (as requested) such as Tiyanak, Maria Makiling, Bathala, Manananggal, Bakunawa, Tikbalang, Kapre and others. The navigation boxes were already applied to the "main", "parent" or "umbrella articles" like Philippine mythology, Philippine folklore, Philippine mythical creatures, and Deities of Philippine Mythology. - Dragonbite 01:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. I based it on this one: Template:Infobox Forgotten Realms Countries. - Thanks for concentrating on this. - Dragonbite 03:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Adminship
I here you are not an administrstor but how?-- *PA D RE S  18:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Rickyrab/New Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense
Well, this is a personal page. While personal pages can be deleted as per MfDs, it is nonetheless bad taste to go about deleting personal pages. &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 14:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

reminder to mentor
Hola Mentors!

Im sending you this reminder because you volunteered to mentor my students in English Advanced B as they become contributing members of the Wikipedia community. We start working with Wikipedia in earnest next week. I ask you to take a look at your entry in the Mentor Table at School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors

Please update the information, esp. with what your technical and informational expertise is or, if you have decided that you no longer want to participate, please remove your information from the table. Please watch the pages associated with the project. Students will contact you via your user page and as soon as my students have user pages, I will put them on the navigation bar associated with the project.

I don’t need to remind you that your job is NOT to write their assignments for them, of course. I certainly will tell my students that… and the fact that you are volunteers that don’t have to help them… so they need to be nice. If any students misbehave (tho I don’t expect it) don’t hesistate to contact me and I will take care of it. The goal of this project is to integrate successfully into the Wikipedia community. Anyway… what I really need your help with is helping students get oriented to Wikipedia, make appropriate changes and write about appropriate topics (see School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Syllabus for assignments). I also need your technical expertise… I am only an English teacher after all! I appreciate what technology does for us but I am no technical expert!

Again, thank you for volunteering and you will hear from us again soon! Thelmadatter 19:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Thelmadatter

Comment on TJ Discussion
It appears that the discussion has gone stagnant ever since I decided to gnaw on Burntsauce. So, if the discussion gets archived without any more comments being made, what exactly will happen, if anything? Would we take this to the CSN next, ANI, RfC, where? Peace,  The  Hyb  rid  00:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

That's just what gnaws at me. There was never a real chance to let your info about why he should be unblocked sink in since Burntsauce came in and made a spectacle. It seems like we should take this somewhere and get a consensus if this discussion dies. It doesn't seem fair to TJ to just let him stay blocked because of Burntsauce without a fight. If the community wants him blocked, then fne, but I'm not too keen to give into Burntsauce like this.  The  Hyb  rid  01:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I check the AN at various intervals, so if I notice the discussion has been archived with no real decision reached, then I'll start up a discussion at the CSN. Cheers,  The  Hyb  rid  01:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Humble apologies
I just looked in the mirror.

I was lecturing a student (I'm an admin coach) on the virtues of assuming good faith and maintaining composure, and all of a sudden I felt as if I was Quiddity lecturing me! He was absolutely right -- regardless of the underlying circumstances, my approach in my communications with you was all wrong. I feel like a total moron. I'm sorry, man. Please accept my apology and my oath that it will never happen again. The Transhumanist 01:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Water under bridge
Thank you for the reply. I agree. It's better forgotten. See ya in the encyclopedia! The Transhumanist 02:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

infobox
how did u get ur infobox on ur user page. MC RIDE 02:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

can u help me with it thanks. MC RIDE 03:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

nevermind thanks anyway. MC RIDE 03:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

can u help me with it i thought i can do it but i cant thanks. MC RIDE 03:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

yeah. MC RIDE 03:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

yeah. MC RIDE 03:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

yeah and thanks. MC RIDE 04:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks one more thing how do u get ur online now thingy. MC RIDE 04:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks for everything. MC RIDE 04:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

THX
Hi. This is nothing important to Wikipedia, but... I was kinda snooping around the TJ Spyke talk page, and I saw your signature. I was curious, so I went to your talk page... and I saw that little status thing on top of the screen. It looked cool, so I decided to make one for myself (using your status basis). Basically, I just want to thank you for having that on your userpage, so that I could make one just like it. Thank you! MITB LS (t·c) 04:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, hey, one more thing I need help on (not relating to Wikipedia), but... on my mainspace, I just put up a series of "Infobox Military Conflict" templates in a collapsable design. The only problem is that what I open the box, the header and the main space do not align. You seem very crafty with Wikipedia mainspaces, so I was wondering if you could align them correctly, and also align them to the right. I don't exactly want to waste my (or your) time editing non-encyclopedic pages, but if you could do so, I'd appreciate it really much! MITB LS (t·c) 18:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There's not really a such thing as a collapable Infobox Military Conflict. It's just a mix of a IB MC and a collapable feature (that I found of The Hybrid's user page). When opened, the whole thing would look sorta like the IB MC, but it can be closed. The problem is the alignment of the header and the IB, which is crooked. I myself will try to search Wikipedia for another one just like it, and maybe I'll have some luck. Thanks though! MITB LS (t·c) 20:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, I have found something! I found this: Template:Hidden. I am going to try this, but it'll mean I'll have to create three user subpages (for each "war"). MITB LS (t·c) 20:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I tested the method I found once, but what appears in the main space is just the formula and not the product. I'll probably need to transclude it, but how do you transclude one template into another template? MITB LS (t·c) 20:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll keep trying. 20:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MITB LS (talk • contribs)


 * Not exactly. The width of the header and the width of the box should match. Anyway, I tried doing what you said before (about transcluding), but I still ogt the same results. You should probably see it (right here). i'll leave it alone for a little bit. MITB LS (t·c) 20:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * So, one week later... any luck on the little "military infobox" project? Doesn't exactly look like it, but... Anyways, you should take a look at these pages (1) (2) (3). See if you can successfully transclude one template into another without showing the code. I feel too lazy to try to complete it myself. :) MITB LS (t·c) 02:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Matt & MVP
It isn't official until Friday, so I don't think that we should list them as the WWE Tag Champs just yet.  The  Hyb  rid  05:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Sweet, I thought that it was out of character for you to insert spoilers ;). Cheers,  The  Hyb  rid  05:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL, we all do it sometimes. I'm just glad that it wasn't me this time :P. Nite,  The  Hyb  rid  05:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

TJ Spyke
It has come to my attention, that still, no admin will unblock TJ Spyke. Can we bring it up at WP:CSN, and if yes how could I go about setting it up. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks! :) -- KBW1 06:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

That's just funny
You wrote:
 * And I especially like the view that I'm in a small clique of admins despite not having adminship. — Moe ε 00:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Clearly, that's all part of the conspiracy! ;-) — DragonHawk (talk|hist) 02:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Purple Heart
While it was probably the wrong tactic to use, it is a good idea to get rid of the medal image of the Purple Heart from various userpages. As a son of a US Marine, I see too many people presented with this award now; I just didn't like the idea of Wikipedians handing this out for a minor tussle on the site while I see brave soldiers, airmen, Marines and sailors presented with the medal, even at the grave. Of course, WP should not do something because I don't like it, but I still think it was a good call by you to start the image replacing. One more thing, there are many other "purple heart" awards in the US and worldwide, so we should not have any problems anymore. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations renaming
Great job on undoing the bilateral relations renaming! Are there any ones you need to have admin-moved? Also, besides those, were there any ones where you found that the renaming was useful (or did you approach it less individually?)? Many thanks for all your efforts. Best wishes, El_C 06:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

using an album cover
is it possible to use an album cover for an article on the band to show the band at the time of release? is that fair use? Stan weller 23:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay. This would be for the Rolling Stones article and would likely be the cover of Between the Buttons and would sit alongside the commentary on that album. Stan weller 00:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Cool beans. Thanks. Stan weller —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stan weller (talk • contribs) 00:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Moe, I disagree with your interpretation of fair use here. I saw your post at Talk:Spice Girls, and I disagree that the album covers are good fair use in the band article. The image boilerplate text is quite clear: "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of such covers solely to illustrate the audio recording in question..." --John 04:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I still think you are wrong. The band article offers no critical commentary on the album cover and therefore the cover is not fair use there. I believe the fair use rationale of the image also to be inadequate for this use. I would refer you to "3a. Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article. Short rather than long video and audio excerpts are used. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary" and "8. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Non-free media files are not used if they can be replaced by text that serves a similar function" (from WP:NFCC). I propose taking this to a central discussion if you still disagree. In the meantime I am removing the images from the article. I am not particularly bothered if I am "going to have a lot of angry editors with (me)" because of following policy. Please have a think about what I am saying; you might also look around other band articles and see that they interpret policy the way I do. Incidentally, questions of the sort "Which part of (x) don't you understand?" are seldom conducive to a civil discussion. --John 14:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear oh dear. I am afraid this is an instance where policy and consensus line up behind removing over-used nonfree images. It might be interesting for you to read WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS; the fallacious argument you are using to justify misusing these images is so prevalent that we actually have a WP essay on it! --John 15:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I can see this is something you are very emotionally involved in, so I will take your advice and discuss it centrally rather than discuss it any further with you. See you around. --John 15:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Username change
Hi I was wondering what tool have you used. I want to preform similar edits for my former username. -- Cat chi? 10:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No tool, just faced paced editing and automatic edit summaries remembered by my computer. :) — M o e   ε  10:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. Would you consider the use of a tool for the task disruptive? -- Cat chi? 10:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm moving at a fairly face pace and I'm leary of trying not to be disruptive. A bot is considerably faster than me, so it probably shouldn't be used for a task like this. I'm also getting rid of my old name because of real life, not because I don't like prefer the name anymore, so that may or may not be a factor. — M o e   ε  11:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A bot edit would not register on the watchlist of peoples and would be safely ignored by people aside from those who want to explicitly see it. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything by the way. Bots would be more efficient in dealing with the task. -- Cat chi? 13:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure a bot would be approved for this work, but you're more than willing to try again (as it's my understanding that you tried once). I know you weren't trying to accuse me of anything :) — M o e   ε  13:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Right now some people has the belief is that signature alterations is something completely controversial. Their belief wont change if enough people say the contrary. Bots can only be used for non-controversial tasks and for me sig corrections are jaw-dropingly non-controversial. I was wondering your personal stance. -- Cat chi? 13:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's mostly non-controversial, the only issue with it is that it wastes time to do so, but it's my time to waste for the sake of privacy. For bots, approval for a single task like yours, is probably unneeded and would probably get shot down for bot status. You probably shouldn't get more trouble if you start it again, but I'm not making guarentees. — M o e   ε  13:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Bot people had painted a different picture during my second request for bot approval which was shot down immediately. The discussion didn't even lasted half a day. I want a 3rd request with this "consensus" that sig fixes are nothing controversial. I am pretty much unsure on how to gather this consensus. I do not want to start a poll on this. -- Cat chi? 14:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

TJ Spyke
(edit conflict) You've probably had enough of this situation, but I've been keeping an eye on the discussion at WP:AN, and noticed it's about to sink, mainly because of Burntsauce. Can I take the discussion to WP:CSN? Thanks - Davnel03 13:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've took it there, discussion here. I feel because of Burntsauce's childish comment, that basically killed the conversation. Also, I would like to know what the wider community think about TJ now, one month on. Davnel03 14:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The statement at WP:PW about civility wasn't directed at you personally, it was in general directed to both of you two as I thought it was beginning to grow into a heated debated. Apologises if it sounded like it was directed at just you. Davnel03 14:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

TJ has just been unblocked.  The  Hyb  rid  20:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Peace offering
I'm sorry but I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Edit warring? What? Please do not make such accusations without explaining what is on your mind. My peace offering wasn't "buttering you up" for anything, it was genuine. I can't imagine what I've done to make you feel this way. --Naha|(talk) 02:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm extremely confused here. The link you pasted to my talk page, shows my edit to John Morrison's article where I inserted the agreed upon addition regarding the "steriod scandal."  I didn't come up with it, MPJ did.  I initally asked you (on the project talk page, and if you didn't want to, someone else) to add it to the articles per the discussion on WP:PW talk since it appeared as though a consensus had been reached.  I then left for the day and when I came back several hours later, no one had done it yet so I went ahead and took care of it.  If you had, or currently have a problem with the statement that MPJ suggested you should have voiced your concern when the discussion was being had, additionally you are free to do so now.  Due to the fact that no one objected to the proposed statement after several hours, I felt it was ok to add it to the article.  I don't see how this is "edit warring."
 * As far as the "libel discussion" and "endless debate" discussion... that all occured much earlier today when we were having our heated conversaton/debate on the project talk page and again, since then I thought a consensus had been reached as far as what to do about the situation. Additionally, my peace offering and apology came fairly soon after that, having been several hours ago now, and it still holds true. I want to make peace. I don't like being in conflict with editors anymore than anyone else, and would much rather be able to work peacefully along side them than butt heads with them because it is not productive. But I will always do so by obeying Wikipedia policy as close as I possibly can. Again, I'm sorry if you feel my compliance with what was discussed on the WP:PW talk page was "edit warring," (as it didn't have anything to do with you). I feel as though it was upholding policy and following through with what had been proposed (not by me) and decided upon. --Naha|(talk) 02:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I posted all that over here, when the rest of the conversation was on my talk page, especially considering I hate fragmented discussions. I guess I just wanted to make sure you saw it and we could talk. At any rate, if you want to (or want me to) move it all over there to keep it all in one place, we can. Or not. Whatever :P I'm probably going to archive it all pretty soon though so we can put it behind us. P.S. Any more news yet? I just sat down at my computer for the first time today. Cheers, --Naha|(talk) 20:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Subpages
Question: Do you happen to know what the "command" is to see an entire listing of all of your subpages? I seem to have misplaced one of mine and need to locate it. Thanks, --Naha|(talk) 22:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Here ya go. Just change the namespace dropdown menu to user talk for talk sub-pages. — M o e   ε  22:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you thank you! --Naha|(talk) 22:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Yellowcard
I didn't restore the personal attacks or remove your comments. Some ip did it. Maybe you should check that kinda stuff before you go blaming people. Tim Y (talk) 22:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * When did I do that? I don't remember it at all. I went on and saw someone restored my message, deleted yours, and added their own message. Look for yourself. The person who wrote that last message is the one that did it all. 121.222.253.116 (Talk) at 02:09, 1 September 2007. Look at that revision. Tim Y  (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * OK. I know I did that but that was a while ago and only because I felt that they weren't personal attacks that I said. But a different person did the same thing after me and also added his own message. Tim Y  (talk) 22:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Links to BJAODN archives
Since you were involved in a past discussion about links to off-Wikipedia archives, I figured I would alert you to this: Wikipedia talk:Silly Things. — DragonHawk (talk|hist) 03:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Your Adminship
Why did'nt you become an administrator you've done a lot of edits I just do'nt understand-- *VA N IL LA2  21:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Changing archives
Please stop altering the contents of archives. This can change the meaning of previous discussions and is unnecessary given that the username in question is not personally identifiable. Archives should reflect as closely as possible the state of a discussion when it was discussed, and even in special cases should not be altered surreptitiously; even comments deleted because of OTRS complaints are still usually replaced with a small notice of the fact. —Centrx→talk &bull; 02:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * See Username policy. I am allowed to change my signature if I feel strongly about it. I was harrassed under this username and no longer want to be associated with it, and reverting me is borderline harrassment trying to keep associating me with the name. I've had multiple accounts changed and talk pages deleted to protect me. Whether or not it's "not personally identifiable" is unimportant, if someone was able to contact me in real life when I was using that name, even if was vaguely off from trying to locate me, it's personal enough for me to change and to remove. Take this conversation elsewhere if you think my signature being associated with me is incorrect. — M o e   ε  03:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The effective way to dissociate yourself from the old username and prevent harassment is to create a new username. Renaming your account ties your renamed account to the old name, both in the user rename logs and everywhere you signed a talk page with the old username. Then, making thousands of edits to change your signature is the noisiest way to bring attention to the username change; I am here because your sig edits are scattered across my watchlist, and they would presumably be scattered across the watchlist of whoever harassed you. If you have an actual harassment problem, this is not an effective way of solving it and is merely messing with archives. "Personal information" in the username policy is real information like a real name, where the only remedy a person has is to remove it from archives because it cannot be deleted from page histories. If the problem is someone connecting your identity, the only effective remedy is to sever the connection with the previous username. —Centrx→talk &bull; 03:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The flood of changes being made is certainly bring lots of attention to both your usernames, as they are getting all over my watchlist, you are also reinforcing that you are the former user in the edit history all over the palce now, if you want people to find you under your new name, make a redirect, if you don't leave them be. — xaosflux  Talk  04:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem with me however you want to do it, just letting you know the only reason I've been reminded of your old name lately is because of this flood of edits. Thanks, —  xaosflux  Talk  04:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

personal attack?
Your complaint is not an unfair one. I didn't address you directly. However, I assumed you were watching the page. Deletions without discussion anger me. They're one of the common occurrences around here that cause me to a little less than polite. Right off the bat, you came at the other editor with a rather threatening attitude. No explanation, no discussion, just a warning. You have to assume that editors with a stake in an article will be watching it. How do you think they'll feel when you delete their work? Do you think they'll even understand what the problem is with what you remove? I'm guessing you did that same sort of artwork removal on more than one article. How hard would it be to copy and paste some text on the talk page explaining what the issue is? Otherwise, you're forcing them to guess and wasting their time, or causing them to re-add the material you deleted, wasting your time. It seems condescending. -Freekee 04:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ric Flair
http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/article_21611.shtml

That's all I'm going to say. Mshake3 05:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:AN/I and legal threats
Given your recent deletions regarding legal threats at WP:AN/I, you might want to have a look at this. --Calton | Talk 12:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Commons
Go for it. Now from what I understand, the files aren't suppost to be renamed, as with the boogyman image, right? Mshake3 13:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I appreciate it. I tried uploading one directly to the Commons, but I got irritated when the wikilinks didn't work for the description (I think it was Shannon Moore's image). Also I do need to update the gallery with more recent images. Mshake3 14:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Gallery updated. Go nuts. At the same time, is there a how-to article for getting this done? Mshake3 14:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep. Now I'am kind of busy today, so it'll be something I'll get to later on in the week. Mshake3 14:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Your former vote on Emo (slang).
Hi, I noticed you are one of the people who voted against moving Emo(slang) to Emo(subculture). I voted the other way (although I think "social group" is equally good or better). Now, a source has turned up and I would like for you to take a moment to check it and reconsider. I am sorry if you have seen it before, as I am aware that this message (of which there are three) would otherwise be out of line or at least a waste of your time. The source is an abstract of an unpublished, peer-reviewed talk/paper given at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association 2003. It is called "Capturing the Structure of Musically-Based Youth Subcultures: The Case of ‘Emo’" and the abstract can be found here [].

I personally think this is a very good source, as I think we can trust the American Sociological Association to accept papers that use sociological terms appropriately. I believe ignoring this source because is has not been published would be wrong, as we have the abstract, which is pretty clear on the matter. Despite ones view on the source's usefulness, I think one must at least admit that emo can rightfully be called a subculture and refraining from using this knowledge on wikipedia is kind of contrary to WP:IAR. Lundse 20:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * }