User talk:Morven/archive4

Archives: 1 2 3

Archived again. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject query
Hi there, I am doing some clean up on the list of proposed WikiProjects. I noticed that WikiProject Cameras has been listed for more than 60 days. Unless you object, I would like to remove it from the list since it is unlikely to receive further feedback. Thanks! -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 00:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

"Giano" arbitration and pending proposal
There are four votes to close the so-called "Giano" arbitration but there is also a pending proposal presented by an arbitrator (to modify the proposed ban on User:John Reid) that has not been voted on by several of the participating arbitrators, including yourself. There is also extensive related discussion on the talk page setting forth the views of several editors (including me) on the matter. You may want to give this your attention. Newyorkbrad 12:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I am sorry to burden your page with a return to this topic, but as of now, of the six arbitrators sitting in this case, two have withdrawn their support for the proposed ban following the alternative proposal, while two other have reaffirmed their support for the ban. That leaves you as one of the two swing votes and I urge that you indicate your position one way or the other before a clerk closes the case and the existing vote for the ban takes effect. I won't argue here how I think you should vote although my thoughts are set forth at length on the talk page there if they are of interest. Regards, Newyorkbrad 18:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your follow-up. I know this was a judgment call and appreciate your willingness to consider the matter afresh. I also hope that some of the workshop or talkpage discussion might have been of help to you in resolving a very complicated situation. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:1997 Ford Thunderbird.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1997 Ford Thunderbird.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. Also Image:20050822 hiRes EOS5D.jpg

Gundagai checkuser
Many thanks for the advice. We'll definitely ahve to treat the users as different people. Just seemed so strange to pick up on the topic with first edits and in a way that attacked one of the admins who was otherwise uninvolved. Regards--Golden Wattle talk 10:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Not saying they can't be the same person, but checkuser does not help. My belief is that it's more likely that they're someone who has been pointed in the direction of the conflict by the prolific anon, but hopefully is more amenable to reason. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 16:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Image talk:Z-6352.jpg
You may want to put log an opinion here as the issue could ultimately affect a great number of rail-related articles, many of which you have contributed to.--Lord Kinbote 01:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Israel PoV
What is needed to convince you to accept the RfA? I have recently posted additional links that I think show a biased editing history in other articles. Carbonate 09:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Urgent motion in Hkelkar case
As one of the ArbCom partaking in this case, your input/co-operation into this temporary injunction would be greatly appreciated. I wouldn't have sent you a message, but given the nature of what has occured, and the potential to stall this ArbCom case, everyone involved needs a speedy resolution or else I suspect the case will break down. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 00:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hkelkar has been unblocked; BhaiSaab admitted to attempting to contact him in real life. There may be other important issues here but I have removed the motion for emergency unblock as moot. Thatcher131 01:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

MRS-1
I have a few MRS 1 photos, both Alco's and EMD, the EMD is the same USAX 1811. I have shot two Alco's both on Eastern Shore Railroad. I will add these Alco shots to the article to show the difference.Billy Rules 16:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I added the Alco MRS1 on ESHR, the other shots of 1811 that I have are all on the same side of the locomotive, I don't have anything better than what is there already.Billy Rules 17:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello I am User:SuperDeng and have been indef blocked by an admin
To make a long story short

The admin who has a personal grudge against me, had made up some very nice stories about me and has continuously blocked for me 6 months. And a few months ago one of blocks ended and I made a grand total of 0 edits, but then a new char whos ip was not possbile to check appeared started makeing similar edits to mine so he was accussed of beeing a sockpuppet and I got blocked again. Now this can not be a sock puppet since I Superdeng did not do any edits and even if we were the same person then that dosent matter since superdeng was makeing zero edits the new account was created one week after my block was lifted. Bahh this is not a short story it is long. Anyway all I want is a fair trial on the arb com board where I have a chans of defending myself and not where everyone of the imaginasions of the admin is percieved as fact.

So what ever policy i violated has been served in full after 6 months.

Re: Alco RSD-15
Indeed, I try to get to IRM at least once a year since it's only a couple hours from my home. I'll have to search through my photos to see what I can find. As you can see from Image:IC 201 20050716 IL Union.jpg, that loco (it's the GBW loco behind IC 201) is in a relatively easy to see location from the museum's main concourse. I don't remember seeing it on another track, so I don't think I've got any good side shots of it, but I'm sure I took a photo of it at some point. Slambo (Speak) 23:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There's one: Image:GBW 2407 at IRM.jpg. I've added it to the RSD-15 article.  I'll keep looking to see if I've got a better image somewhere around here.  Slambo (Speak)  00:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

NaOrthoVanadate
Something funny going on with the redirect that you just added to this page - when I access the page it still shows me the old (now deleted) text, and doesn't redirect to the new page ...Mammal4 16:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok - seems to be working now - very strange :) Mammal4 16:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Photography Projects' names
Hi, since you're a participant in the WP Project history of Photography, I thought uou might be interested in this discussion regarding the names of the WP Projects History of Photography and Photography. What do you think of Girolamo Savonarola's proposition? Pinkville 00:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Religion of Peace article
You speedily deleted the article Religion of Peace as "Recreation of deleted page". As far as I can remember, it isn't a recreation, and after the first deletion, it survived a second nomination (albeit with a no consensus). Thanks, Andjam 02:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

1968 Marquis image
Hi. I found your image of a '68 Mercury Marquis and put it in the Marquis article, but it looks like it will need to be cropped a bit. Mind if I do that? --Sable232 18:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Post Deletion
Hi, you deleted a post I was working on for DJ ANdre Michael. You stated that the post was spam and questioned the relevency. A very popular DJ with a major released album and another about to be released.

It is against Wiki policy (see here for details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28music%29 ) and the spirit of the Wiki to delete without discussion first. Please play fair. Supersean

Thank You for your Back Pat to Me re: Starwood links
Confusing, n'est pas? In the end, I think most of these links will be taken off the performers' pages. I started out being easy and just deleting the external links. By the end of my tour through the pages though, I was judging almost every instance of the internal link to Starwood/ACE as extraneous and gratuitous. I'm going to take another run through and see what I think now. Oh, I'm judging them on an individual basis but I have much less sympathy since I discovered User:Rosencomet's financial stake in the googlebombing. See my comments, currently near the bottom of Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival for what I found. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 06:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Masts for deletion
Hello. As the closing admin, I'm notifying the most active contributors to Articles for deletion/University of North Carolina Tower Chapel Hill, which has now been closed, in case they want to take any action about it. Best, Sandstein 11:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your Vote
Matthew, I am hoping you will reread the evidence and reconsider your vote to this arbitration, particularly as pertains to my editing. I have been only trying to maintain a neutral POV in an article that was under attack. I have assertively strove to maintain NPOV, rather than aggressively pushed a POV. My edits show that if you will look at them (your feedback is welcomed). Kindly review the evidence and your decision in the matter. --DrL 19:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

'Another question:' You voted to ban an editor (Asmodeus) from editing an article that he has not edited since July. He has only edited it a couple of times and never violated policy. Can you elaborate on the reason for your vote or perhaps review your endorsement of this faulty proposal? --DrL 17:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Again, Your Vote
Hello, Matthew. Please read my most recent edits to the ScienceApologist RfAr Workshop page [1,2,3, 4], and particularly this one right here. I hate to seem impertinent, but may I ask who you people think you are, that you can define the class of articles relating to the work of Christopher Michael Langan to include Crank (person)? Do you really think that this is appropriate? And if not, then why are you voting on proposals without understanding exactly what they say? For that matter, why are you ignoring over five months of background on this case, including a long history of vicious personal attacks made against me and DrL? Regardless of any opinion to the contrary, we've tried very hard to address our problems within the bounds of WP, at the expense of vast amounts of our own time, and I'm still trying very hard to avoid reaching some extremely unpleasant conclusions here. But in view of the above observations, it appears to me that your decisions may contain substantial elements of personal bias and antipathy. In light of the facts to which I'm now calling your attention, can you do or say something to lay my misgivings to rest? Thanks in advance for your considered response. Asmodeus 17:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Religion of Peace talk page
Can you please restore the talk page for Religion of Peace? Thanks, Andjam 21:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Your comments at Suspected sock puppets/Hanuman Das
Thank-you for your comments at Suspected sock puppets/Hanuman Das. I do not know if I did the right thing or not by reporting the editor in this case. However, I acted according to my understanding of the situation. In my opinion, this situation could easily have escalated if the user had not received a sharp rebuke to his comment that he intended to use socks to make a WP:Point. I am certainly open to suggestions regarding possibly better courses of action. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 19:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Morven
-- Mattisse --

Regarding your comment here, I was hoping for a second opinion on whether a block is warranted here. While technically no "new" abuse of sockpuppets occurred, I feel that Mattisse brought up that article in order to create a disruption. She knows that parties involved in the disputes are monitoring other participants' talk pages, and she knows that posting that link would draw more negative attention to the Starwood articles. I don't know if she actually forget she wrote it, or if she thought no one would notice, but I personally have seen enough of editors' time wasted on the entire matter. --Ars Scriptor 22:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

RFCU
There's a supplemental request at Requests for checkuser/Case/Skinny McGee, which I've deferred to you since you ran the original check. Mackensen (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. Mackensen (talk) 13:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Morven
A comment was sent thanking me for experimenting on the page and now it's gone. It said my test worked and congratulated me on the correcting the page. I don't know where it went. I wanted the old comment removed because the last supporting comment is now gone. Can you help me out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scotcra1 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Hi Morv
forgot to leave my sig on the first hi morv. scotcra1(talk) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scotcra1 (talk • contribs) 08:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Morv
Well, I just thought there was some way to delete old comments. I'm not used to not being able to delete something in what seems like an inbox. It seems as though the comment has no long lasting effect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scotcra1 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Thanks Morv
Thanks Morv. I'm just glad that what I've corrected is proper and good now. Thanks for your courtesy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scotcra1 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Sorcery101 Deletion
Hello, I'm the creator of that article you deleted and I understand your reasoning behind it. However, it was deleted 6 months ago and there is more infomation on Sorcery 101 now, plus some reveiws from outside sources (which I linked since I know verifiablity was a problem with the last article.) Could you undelete it simplely to see if the imporved version survives an afd? TheAmazingTick

Image:Halal & Loving It.jpg
Morven, you recently deleted this image stating "noncommercial license". While it initially had a noncommercial license, the proper tag was in place before deletion. Would you please un-delete this? Thanks, Auburn Pilot talk 00:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for all your hard work in the terrible mess. This is the closest thing I could find to a plate of cookies.NinaEliza 06:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:PaulManta.jpg
Hy Morven, you recently deleted "PaulManta.jpg" and "GabrielRaksi.jpg" why, please tell me because i don't understand, those are MY PICTURES, and perfectly legal.my mail address is alex_manta@iancului.ro thank you

Discussion on my talk page - self sourcing
Hi Morvn, I'd like to continue our conversation on my talk page. User talk:Alan.ca. Thanks. Alan.ca 11:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

A wave from what feels like long ago :)
Hi Matthew, good to see you're still around! I spotted your name on a random stroll and thought I'd say hello. I'm mostly about on LiveLournal nowadays: I'm 'mhw' there. Kay Dekker 19:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Apology
I apology to you as I accidently did something to your talk page and didn't mean to do so. I'm sorry. If you can, please disregard it. Thank you. Sincerely, Mattisse 02:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to be clear...these are thge reasons I am to be desysopped?--MONGO 22:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Biggs
I wanted to get your opinion on the situation with this article. The subject is editing her own article and I don't know how to deal with this obvious conflict of interest. Alan.ca 12:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Seabhcan motion to close
Before moving to close, I think it would be good for the project if you reviewed Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Seabhcan/Proposed decision. There is considerable dissent that the decision to desysop MONGO and Seabhcan is the right direction to go. I'm not asking you to change your votes on that RfAr, but rather to consider that this matter is under ongoing, rapid fire discussion. There's been nearly a hundred edits to that talk page in the last 48 hours alone, and that is just one fora where this is being debated among many. Respectfully submitted, --Durin 20:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The desysopping of MONGO
Thank you for voting oppose to the motion to close. Even if the final decision goes counter to my hopes, I am hoping that further consideration by the members of the ArbCom will at least cause you to reword your propseal, as of right now, those of us sitting on the outside are feeling that we can't do anything right no matter what we do. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Seabhcan
Please be aware that there is active, ongoing work on proposed decisions regarding this case at Requests for arbitration/Seabhcan/Workshop. Closing may be premature. Please review that page. Thank you. --Durin 13:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for re-evaluating, even if you still don't agree. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Very Well Done
- Well, the scum over at ED (Encyclopedia Dramatica) are certainly lapping up the ArbCom decision to desysop MONGO. Hope your very happy with the situation you've helped create over there, and which I do hope you and the other members of ArbCom will be happy to clean up on your own when it spills over to Wikipedia. If it wasn't impossible, I'd take the ArbCom to Arbitration since you may have made one of the most damaging decisions on Wikipedia and are in danger of causing more damage to the site than MONGO ever could. Kind Regards - Heligoland  | Talk |  Contribs 02:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I would advise all Wikipedia contributors to utterly ignore Encyclopedia Dramatica and the trolls therein. I do not plan on making Arbitration decisions based on whether they will please or annoy denizens of that place.  I do not believe that MONGO should have the administrator flag at this point; I will be open to reconsider this in the future. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 14:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Automobiles Notification
Hi Morven, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.

To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting   where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add   to your userpage.

If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086Talk 04:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Proslrc-front.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proslrc-front.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. —Angr 16:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the Airport Arbitration
Hello, I was not sure where to file this response, so I'm putting it here. You wrote in your refusal of this mediation Questions of appropriate style are outside the arbitration committee's remit and should be settled in the normal way - by talking and reaching a rough consensus. - which is something I agree with. However, the issue as I see it is that a fairly strong consensus is clear, Huaiwei is simply obstructing it. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me  &bull; Neutrality Project  &bull; Request CheckUser  ) 23:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Penn_Station1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Penn_Station1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you deal with this?
This sounds rather serious. Would you be able to take a look at it and decide what needs doing? I've posted to the talk pages of some of the arbitrators and one of the clerks as well, but not any further. Thanks. Carcharoth 23:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

USS Alabama
Love the 1904 photo you added to USS Alabama (BB-8)! Kudos to you, sir! --Kralizec! (talk) 15:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! It can be a lot of fun trawling through the LoC archives looking for useful images. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Civility
I completely despair of this place and I despair of anybody here recognizing incivility when they see it. I cannot believe that people go on discussing what's to be done with a contributor who says "go away" to people who accost him on his page, while the same people ignore the continued intrusion, intrusion, intrusion upon my privacy in their midst --this after I have asked to be left alone, and asked for the subject to not be canvassed anymore. In fact it seems to go on because, rather than despite, my request for a little respect. I will ask no more, as apparently the editor in question is stimulated by it. And how about this lot, from a Giano-blocking admin? That was indeed before my plea for privacy, but can't some judgment be expected? Bishonen | talk 18:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
 * If you think I have been uncivil, the least you could do is tell me. I would appreciate an assumption of good faith on your part, really.  I was not prying into the issue of your relationship with Giano.  In fact, I believe I said I don't give a toss about it.  I simply find your rationale for not getting involved confusing and asked for clarification.  If you do not wish to clarify, then simply say so.  Cheers, ✎  Peter M Dodge  (  Talk to Me  &bull;  Neutrality Project  ) 18:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Some judgment can indeed be expected. Once you have asked to be left out of something, it is incivil  for your name to be dragged back in again and again and again.  It's not your duty to do it.


 * I am not informed about everything about this whole affair - I freely admit that. I am aware that there is a lot of incivility going round, and a lot of prolonging things and causing needless pain.  My time's limited enough reading up on all the current arbcom cases without looking through everything else that's going wrong on Wikipedia, alas - for one thing, the place is now large enough that it's almost impossible for one person to keep up on everything.


 * That being said, I am always open to suggestions and discussion as to how I can help, as an arbitrator, admin and editor, to keep us all doing what we are all (I hope) here to do and love to do- build the encyclopedia - rather than the nastiness and personal animosity and bitterness that's building up. I'm a content editor and contributor first and foremost and I'm not here for the drama or the power or the social.  I don't go on IRC as a rule, I don't search out the gossip and the dramatic stuff and the politics.  If I - doing the arbitrator job - ever start to forget the point of why I'm here, tell me.  In email if you must, on here if you'd rather.


 * I'm tired and still up at 10:30am after being up all new year's night, so I'm going to bed. Goodnight to you all. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 18:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Peter, oh, really how many times would you like me to tell you? Morven, i did not mean to reproach yu for your own post, just to tell you about what you were not seeing (no wonder of course, people don't generally read a whole page before they post) higher up. Bishonen | talk 18:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
 * In my defense, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, and only caught the seemingly obvious the second time around. I've withdrawn my comments for what it's worth.  Cheers, ✎  Peter M Dodge  (  Talk to Me  &bull;  Neutrality Project  ) 19:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

UPRR Profile Book
I spent several years as a locomotive shop manager with UPRR and in the "broken locomotive" business. Yes, I have an original copy of the 1979 Loco Dept profile book. It is sitting in front of me as I type. There is not a single notice of copyright within the entire book (which was printed for shop superintendents / general foremen for ready reference).

--Sunktanka (talk) 05:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for confirming this. I hope you can understand my caution - there are many 2nd and 3rd generation copies of these things floating around and only an original can be proven to have contained no copyright claim. My thanks for including this useful information. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 07:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Not a problem. The copy I have was issued to a good friend of mine while he was serving his machinist apprenticeship at the UPRR Salt Lake City Diesel Shop in 1979.  He gifted it to me in 1998 after learning of my fondness for antiquated railroad (specifically locomotive) paraphenalia.  I have a plethora of loco technical and mechanical info from the 70s and early 80s that I salvaged from a locomotive shop I worked at just prior to its closure and subsequent demolition.  (Sunktanka) (T:C) 08:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

RFAR comment
Respective of your comment on RFAR, I sent a message to arbcom-L, but I have no way of knowing if it was recieved or if the list is down (I don't get acknowledgements and I don't get copies, obviously). Thatcher131 20:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Thatcher131 20:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Star Tiger/Ariel page merge
Both should be merged together. I have succesfully placed Star Ariel within the new page, but was unable to do the same with Star Tiger. What I did was "cut and paste" the Tiger info to the new page, and recommend both old pages be deleted. Carajou 21:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The change was prompted by a complete overhaul of the Bermuda Triangle page; the incidents listed with that page have links to their own pages. Although I do not believe in the Triangle myself, the whole still needed some professional attention as requested by some of the Wikipedia staff, and as a result I have done three other pages related to it; Star Tiger/Ariel is the fourth. Carajou 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support
Thank you for your support at Unused highway. The page now looks ungodly awful with all the sources, but it's what the pharaoh ordered :)  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 05:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Supra Picture
Hey man. Do you think you would be able to get me some pictures of some more modified Supras (both MKIII and MKIV)? I am currently unable to access anything that would allow me to find some. I am a huge member on supraforums.com and would like some pictures to use as backgrounds/wallpapers. I am not a big fan of "riced out cars". So not too modified.

If you could get me a few that would be awesome. I would really appreciate it.

Thanks, PulsHrd 21:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)Tiptonprisoner

Stole Beer from a Golfer
Not a problem, just tidying up after a report of problems with page moves around the recent arbcom case, can't say I put a great deal of thought into removal of the redirect since it was merely a biproduct of the moves. However like any admin action, I'm pretty open to review and corrective action, and for the trivial (as I would say this is) I'm not overly concerned if they just happen without notifying me. Thanks. --pgk 21:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

RfArb regarding
I have completely revised my statement in regards to this RfArb I started regarding administrator User:Lucky 6.9. In particular, given a couple days to reflect on others' comments, I make a substantially different point, completely unrelated to furthering accusations toward the administrator. I would appreciate if you'd take a quick glance. Link --Reswobslc 04:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University
Dear ArbComm Member of Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University;

This note is to bring to your attention two issues which are creating upheaval in the article located here and placed on probation under the premise of "Any user may request review by members of the Arbitration Committee.". This request is based on enforcement or remedies stated in the arbitration process and failure to follow up on it.

1) An article-banned user orchestrated a come back through proxy IPs from Japan and then through an account "Some people" which has been blocked twice. The problem with this is that this user had modified the entire article in less than 12 hours on January 28 2007. This user partner, TalkAbout; acted in synchrony with 244 on that night and made some changes as well using "Some people" new version. User Andries had a minor edit of that version as well.

Request to investigate user Some people  Analysis of situation  Suspicion of sockpuppet account  Blocks to user Some people for "a reincarnation of the editor who formerly posted from the IP address 195.82.106.244"( As admin Thatcher put it) 

2) The only admin we've dealing with is Thatcher131. I would like to bring to your attention what I consider to be "lack of neutrality" and fairness from his/her part. Even though, user "Some people" was blocked by Thatcher131 under a strong suspicion of him being user 244 (banned by the ArbComm for a year) Thatcher131 supported the new version of the page which are the versions of a banned user. A request for enforcement of arbitration has been submitted long time ago before user 195.82.106.244 (aka 244) made several changes through his sockpuppet account "Some people" but the request is still sitting there.

User "Some people" transformed the article with over 30 + entries on 22:41 28 Jan 2007 and then User TalkAbout added some content and at that point, that was considered the new "good version" of the article.

I would like to request the following: 1) the article to be reverted to a state before "Some people" took over. 2) To change the "admin in charge", Thatcher131 to someone who is not emotionally involved in this issue (Thatcher131 was the clerk in the arbitration case and helped user 195.82.106.244 to file the case and presented some evidence against me but not against 244)and that could enforce normal wikipedia procedures are taking place. I appreciate your time and prompt consideration on this.

Truly Yours, avyakt7 21:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied on User talk:Fred Bauder . Thatcher131 22:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied on same user Talk page Thank you. avyakt7 21:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:1979 Ford LTD IIS.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:1979 Ford LTD IIS.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 19:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Durova/Community enforced mediation
I've based a proposal on the mediation from the Piotrus-Ghirla case. Would appreciate your comments on its talk page. Respectfully, Durova Charge! 20:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

RfArb "Pakistani Nationalism"
Hi, I noticed that the title of Rama's arrow's Request for Arbitration had been changed to "Pakistani Nationalism." I think the new title unfairly tilts the balance in favor of the initiator, Rama's arrow. I am not sure if everyone knows that the RfArb was initiated by Rama's arrow at 16:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC), a full 16 minutes after (and therefore likely in reaction to) an incident at WP:ANI, against Rama's arrow (|See See here:"Admin abusing his privileges") filed at 16:43, 12 February 2007, by the other editors (Pakistani) now involved in this RfArb. As a neutral editor who has battled both sides in this dispute at different times and occasions, my own view is that nationalism exists on both sides of the Pakistan-India border and both sides are equally prolific in edit-wars on Wikipedia. In my perspective, Rama's arrow has been selectively aggressive towards Pakistani editors and, correspondingly, selectively benign towards Indian editors. I think the way that this RfArb is framed, Rama's arrow comes out looking as a concerned, but, perhaps, neutral administrator and his "interlocutors" as somewhat rabid nationalists. Regards, Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  20:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Notability RFAr
You said you may "reconsider if the parties take steps towards resolving this on their own before a case opens". Would this mediation help?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  10:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have placed my acceptance on hold while mediation appears to be continuing. Thanks, Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 21:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Revoking remedy by the Kosovo arbcom (Oct 2006)
Hi, on 21 October 2006 the Kosovo arbcom found that I had been given 96 hours probation for edit warring on the Srebrenica massacre article and based on this (presumably) gave me one years probation and revert parole. I have raised some questions regarding this remedy (see below), and Fred Bauder has now initiated a motion to revoke these remedies. As you are an active member of the arbitration committee I respectfully ask you to consider my case. The questions I raised regarding the decision of the Kosovo arbcom were: Dmcdevit, the administrator on the Kosovo arbitration committee who initiated the remedies against me has chosen to vote against revoking these. I have, in turn, replied to his argumentation here. Sincere regards Osli73 00:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * why did the Kosovo arbcom consider my misconduct on the Srebrenica massacre article? Nowehere is the Srebrenica massacre article names as a 'related article'. Nowhere is the reasoning for linking the two articles given.
 * it seems a rather harsh remedy to give me one years probation and revert parole for a 'crime' which I had already served time for (so to say).
 * is it possible to appeal the Kosovo arbcom's decision?

using diffs
FYI regarding the diffs I am required to use as evidence,I'd just like to mention that I have used diffs for most of the evidence I have posted. Other evidence which I am posting or will post not using diffs are for the reason that the specific peice of evidence is from an archieved page and a history cannot be checked since it's archived.

I hope that's okay with you guys.Regards.--Nadirali نادرالی

I never posted that comment on Hkelkar's talkpage
FYI I am extremely upset at the false "evidence" RA is posting against me.I never posted that comment in Urdu on Hkelkar's talkpage.Please check the history of that page.

And another thing that I "attacked" muhajirs is so wrong.I AM PART Muhajir from my father's side.My father is Muhajir born in India of Azeri ancestry from his mother's side. Many Muhajirs despise this Muhajir nationalistic belif that cooked up by the MQM that Muhajirs are the only "educated" people in Pakistan.Does that mean they become anti-Muhajir?No.

I'm sorry but it cannot allowed as evidence.Those are simply unproven assersions which RA usually posts.--Nadirali نادرالی


 * Yes, I am in error about that Urdu comment on user talk:Hkelkar. The comment was actually made by and tagged unsigned by user:Bakasuprman. I should have double-checked this - I apologize. As for the anti-Muhajir comments, the diffs are perfectly clear and Nadirali is responsible for it.  Rama's arrow  22:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

How can you accuse me of attacking Muhajirs when I AM a Muhajir from my father's side.My father is a Muhajir of Azerbaijani ancestry from his mother's side.Therefor he is of Azerbaijani descent born in what is today india. I still stand by my claims that I dislike their mentality of being too conservitive.I once had a Greek tutor who would repeatidly attack his people because he felt they were too arrogant.Does that make him an "anti-Greek".

If you think my comments were attacking Muhajirs,then atleast you can call me a "self-hating Muhajir" rather than an "anti-Muhajir" which is quite ridiculous and somewhat quite laughable :-)--Nadirali نادرالی

Image:Superbird_Fin.jpg
Hi, maybe you remember uploading an image of the character Road Runner (meep meep) as printed on the Plymouth Superbirds tail fin. It got deleted on commons, as a violation of their copyright policy. I would like to use it on the german language wikipedia, which would be perfectly ok as we have different rules on freedom of panorama. I've seen, that you have an account on the de-Wikipedia, so do you have a copy of that image and would you please upload it there under the name above? Or how could we get this done? --h-stt !?  10:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot ... --h-stt !?  22:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 23:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

Thank you much.
 young  american (ahoy hoy) 19:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Caltrain.jpg
An image that you uploaded from stock.xchng or altered, Image:Caltrain.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. OrphanBot 03:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC) 03:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom status
I just noticed (sorry about the delay) that you have put yourself back on active status for ArbCom purposes. At your convenience, could you please clarify whether that applies to all cases, or only cases filed after the date you went back active. Obviously, you can vote in whatever cases you want to, but we had taken you out of consideration in calculating the majority in some pending cases, and if appropriate I want to go back and adjust accordingly. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 03:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not having heard otherwise, I've moved you to active on everything pending (except where you're recused). If you'd prefer different, please advise. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

InShaneee evidence
Hi. You and Mackensen state on the RFAr/InShaneee evidence talkpage that "no evidence has been brought forward of a blocking pattern", but only of two separate incidents (the block of A Link to the Past, the block of Worldtraveller). I've given evidence of a pattern of blocking threats, which can IMO be as serious, and tend as much to subduing adversaries in content conflicts, as actual blocks. Please see the top of my evidence section. Right now I don't know if there would be any point in adding more examples of the same thing, since neither of you has replied to my question about it. I know there are more diffs out there, but it's very time-consuming to track down this kind of evidence, and if arbitrators aren't interested in it in any case, I guess I won't bother. Bishonen | talk 08:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Highway probation motions
With regard to the requests from two users for a lifting of their probation imposed in the Highways RfAr, as I read it you have indicated that you would support their requests. The other arbitrators have not commented. To advance the ball on this, you might want to bring the matter to the attention of the other arbitrators on the mailing list (perhaps you have already done so) and/or make a formal motion(s) in the motions area on the RfAr page. Normally the clerks delete/archive requests in this portion of the page after a reasonable time, but I can't tell what the status of these is or is going to be, hence this request for some indication how, or if, this will move forward. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 00:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In regards to this, could you please make these separate motions? That way the failure of one user does not bring down the other. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Your Flickr photos
I left this message for you on your Commons talk page, but haven't heard from you, so I'm doing it again here. Are you changing all your Flickr licenses to All rights reserved now? I had uploaded one of the Santa Clara depot to Commons under the assumption that they were licensed CC-BY-SA. I'm wondering if this was deliberate on your part or did you just accidentally set the default licensing on Flickr and hadn't noticed? Please let me know. Thanks.  howcheng  {chat} 16:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Anthroposophy
Since you have participated decision making about anthroposophy, I have to ask you to read through my comments in Talk:Anthroposophy, please. I'm sorry that I was at first unaware what an arbitration is. Erdanion 14:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

disc. on free use in portals
there is currently a proposed amendment to include fair use images in the portal space at Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals2. I have decided to contact you because you expressed interest in this topic in the past. Please know that I am contacting all editors who partipated in discussions regarding this at WT:FUC. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 22:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Another Highways request
Please see Requests for arbitration. This is a third editor who was placed on probation in Requests for arbitration/Highways who is now seeking the lifting of his probation based on the motion that passed last week. I thought you might want to take the lead on this as you did last time. If you make a motion I will set it up for voting. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support.
Dear Morven,

Thank you very much for your kind words and supportive comments on my recent RfA. I've been shot down again, so it won't be happening this time. I hope, though, that I can hear from you again next time around - and there definitely will be a next time.

Best wishes,

-- Hex [t/c] 21:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

PutVote
Hi, I just saw you'd deleted my page on PutVote, an Indian Social bookmarking site. I had just placed a hangon tag on it, hoping to add content later tonight. I believe PutVote will add value to those looking for information about social bookmarking, Indian blogs and community projects. Oh well... --Chandrachoodan Gopalakrishnan
 * Thank you! I am working on it, offline. Will expand on it, add news sources and then create the page with it. --Chandrachoodan Gopalakrishnan

Thanks
Thank you for the kind words, I put a lot of work into that post. :) I'm looking forward to seeing how it all turns out! --Elonka 23:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Help with sockpupettry
Hi Morven, I need your help. REDVERS, one of the Administrators that is working with the Fellowship of Friends page, left me the following message:


 * Hi, Mario. On the talk page of Fellowship of Friends, I offered Wikipedia's best way for how to resolve these disputes (basically WP:RS); sadly, this was basically ignored and very obvious sockpuppetry was resorted to instead, by people who held the high ground in the dispute.

I wrote to REDVERS but he didn't reply to me. Do you know how can I find out who the sock pupeteers are based on this and this? Thanks a lot! Mario Fantoni 18:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you use oversight on a vandalised article...
Fixed. (I'm going to oversight your question too, since it contained the info). Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 16:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's great, and thanks for oversighting the question too. Thanks for the advice about the email list -- I'll do that in future - sorry if I was a bother to ask you directly. Thanks once again. --J. Atkins (talk) 17:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Erm... Amusing claim on Walton Monarchist RfA:
Erm, I don't recall ever saying that 1) I didn't count contribs to Commons (I say that the user "has none...") or 2) Require he upload unfree images with a free liscence. As I stated before, the user & I had a long discussion about why I would oppose/support, & one of my issues was the lack of uploaded material to both Wikipedia & commons. I would never ever suggest that anyone should wrongly upload a picture with a wrong tag - that is illegal & I'm both confused & amused you've extracted that from my oppose up there... All I wanted was for the user to know how to upload & how to liscence properly - I've amde this request before & some ahve uploaded book covers or building photos etc. The user mentioned the only reason he hasn't uplaoded was because he didn't want to take photos of the boring stuff he has in his surroundings. Hoepfully this clears up your misconception, even if it is amusing. Thanks, Spawn Man 11:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No problemo matey potatey! My problem with no image uploads is that how can you be sure how the user will react? Sort of like how do you know a dog won't bite you when you try to take away its food unless you put it through a test first before putting it in front of your children. I like to know that a user will make all the right desicions before I promote them - even if it requires making a somewhat smaller demand being made. It's really quite simple for him to complete as well. In regards to the commons thing - yes, I'm counting both uploads to both sites. However, the only reason I requested that he upload one on Wikipedia was for the simple accessibilty of tracking his edits & uploads, where as you'd need to find out his acc & uploads on Commons which is much harder - I didn't mean that uploading to Commons was bad, just harder to track for the purposes of my request... Anwyay, thanks for the replies. :) Spawn Man 11:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Canon AF35M rear.jpg
Would you be able to forward the e-mail granting permission to ? --Iamunknown 04:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Rail gauge
I have added a number of links. That should take care of any concerns. Peter Horn 15:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC) (Copy and paste Peter Horn 15:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

TeckWiz's RFA
Hey Morven. Thanks for supporting my unsuccessful RFA this week under my old name, TeckWiz. I'm now known simply as User:R. Thanks for defending me on the Alfred Brown incident. I hope to keep helping and improving Wikipedia alongside you. -- TeckWiz is now R Parlate Contribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 21:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Caribbean Coast
Hi,

I found the page: Caribbean Coast, was deleted. Concerning the copyright issue, I would like to rebuild the page with my own information. In fact, the latest version of Caribbean Coast before deletion, had most content from my own. I would be grateful if you could return the source of the deleted page and I will rebuild what i wrote.

I am not sure what Ohconfucius mean about the copyrighted content, at least he/she did not particiaate in the discussion or to post his/her own edition. At last, Jimfbleak need to prove what is the violation, instead of listen to Mr somebody to delete that page. I would respect Jimfbleak power, but i would disagree Jimfbleak abuse of power without evidence.

Thanks

senatorto

My RfA


Hello, thank you for supporting my RfA! I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0. Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir William Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet
Hi, I left a messege about your comment on the AfD. There is a issue with the sources used here and further on the AfD. Can you please revisit. regards--Vintagekits 00:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Morven, I am not trying to have an argument with you I have trying to discuss the merits of the case. Please WP:AGF with me. regards--Vintagekits 00:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Bostonian Queen
Hi. I'm the person who reverted this editor's single edit, which was of questionable good-faithiness, possibly vandalism; which is why he/she is on my watchlist. I'm just curious -- why was he/she instantly blocked indefinitely, with no notice or discussion? I'm sure you have a good reason; but you should probably give it publically. Cheers, Doops | talk 00:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice. Wow, you're right, created in August— it takes serious commitment to wait that long (and remember your password the while). Well, good to know that even if I or somebody else hadn't noticed the vandalism in the page itself, you would have been led to it by the vandal's pattern and M.O.. Doops | talk 02:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Metra
Thanks for paying attention. I think this category is well within ChicagoWikiProject. We can place low importance ratings on things not important to us in general. You may want to familiarize yourself with the priority ratings at WP:CHIASSESS. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Canon AF35M rear.jpg 2
I have nominated Image:Canon AF35M rear.jpg for deletion, you may wish to reply at. --Iamunknown 21:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:Good work!
Thanks for your kind words! I love those tiny obscure trains. I hope someone fluent in European languages will bring tramway articles there. Kzaral 00:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Glutamate Carboxypeptidase II
Why did you delete the image from this site claiming copyright was not allowed with Wiki? The Protein Database is an open source database which specifically allowed for the use of their images given citation of site and original authors. Do you have different information regarding this site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.17.234 (talk • contribs)


 * The image description page claimed "Only non-commercial or educational use of this file is permitted." This license is incompatible with Wikipedia's license.  If that license is actually incorrect and the licensing terms only require attribution, then the file should be reuploaded with the correct info (which appears to already have been done). Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 19:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)