User talk:Murderbike/Archive 2

Dear Murderbike
Dear Murderbike, this is just a tiny little utterly short line to let you know that I have seen your kind message and read the article you'r concerned about; it's just I'm a little busy right now, but I swear you'll get a proper reply in a few hours, promise, cross my heart ;) Love,  P h a e d r i e l  - 13:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Margita Bangová article
I am new to the Countering Systemic Bias group & just saw your poat re: the Margita Bangová article. Unfortunately, the discussion was closed and a decision to keep was made before I had a chance to make a comment about this horrendous article. I just looked at the articles 18 references which are relied on heavily throughout the article. Of the 18, only 4 are legitimate, and one of those four does not even discuss material from the article it cites. Of the remaining 14 references, 6 claim to be linked to articles from the Toronto Sun, but are not. 1 reference is accessible for a fee of $12. 3 are linked to opinion/editorial works. 2 claim to be linked to the Toronto Sun, but are actually linked to a blog site. The final 2 are links to foreign, untranslated text, presumably Chezc. Are there any next steps? I'm going to post a version of my post to you on the CSB talk page and see what happens. Perhaps, if the article can not be deleted, then maybe we can edit the article so that it is at least encyclopedic. A quick view of the talk page indicates to me that the article has been hijacked by editors with a definate POV who are bent on disrupting the editorial environment to further their own agends. I do not want to take on this project alone. Can I count on you to help out? --Chicaneo 16:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh ... BTW ... I'm a female who supports masculism. Go figure. --Chicaneo 16:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 16:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I added the FUR, and removed the tag. Thanks for the heads up! Murderbike 17:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Elfman photo
I appreciate the heads up, and I need help I'll let you know. DaronMalakian47 14:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I knew it would get ugly....
Margita Bangová article --Chicaneo 21:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Communist quotes
There are misguided people on all sides. In democracies, however, they have more difficult implementing their ideas.

Lenin: "Send to Penza To Comrades Kuraev, Send to Penza To Comrades Kuraev, Bosh, Minkin and other Penza communists Comrades! The revolt by the five kulak volost's must be suppressed without mercy. The interest of the entire revolution demands this, because we have now before us our final decisive battle "with the kulaks." We need to set an example. 1) You need to hang (hang without fail, so that the public sees) at least 100 notorious kulaks, the rich, and the bloodsuckers. 2) Publish their names. 3) Take away all of their grain. 4) Execute the hostages - in accordance with yesterday's telegram. This needs to be accomplished in such a way, that people for hundreds of miles around will see, tremble, know and scream out: let's choke and strangle those blood-sucking kulaks. Telegraph us acknowledging receipt and execution of this. Yours, Lenin P.S. Use your toughest people for this." Order sent to Penza, August 11, 1918

Mao: "(Comrade Lin Piao interrupts: “Ch’in-shih-huang burned the books and buried the scholars alive”.) What did he amount to? He only buried alive 460 scholars, while we buried 46,000. In our suppression of the counter-revolutionaries, did we not kill some counter-revolutionary intellectuals? I once debated with the democratic people: You accuse us of acting like Ch’in-shih-huang, but you are wrong; we surpass him 100 times. You berate us for imitating Ch’in-shih-huang in enforcing dictatorship. We admit them all. What is regrettable is that you did not say enough. We have had to say it for you. (Laughter)" Speeches At The Second Session Of The Eighth Party Congress, The First Speech May 8, 1958,

Mao "Not very many people were killed in the two World Wars, 10 million in the first and 20 million in the second, but we had 40 million killed in one war. So, how destructive were the big swords! We have no experience in atomic war. So, how many will be killed cannot be known. The best outcome may be that only half of the population is left and the second best may be only one-third. When 900 million are left out of 2.9 billion, several five-year plans can be developed for the total elimination of capitalism and for permanent peace. It is not a bad thing". (Mao's Second Speech to the Party Congress, May 17, 1958)"Ultramarine 19:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The Blast
Howdy - It's categorized under Anarchist publications, so imho the anarchism stub isn't strictly necessary. I tend to use as few stub tags as possible, so opted for mag-stub as the most relevant to the subject of the article. Feel free to change it back if you like. Cheers! Her Pegship  (tis herself) 22:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Jay Finkelman, Ph.D.
Jay Finkelman, Ph.D. was a copyvio, bit more serious then a bio. Q T C 23:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello!
Thanks for your advice on "Washita" - I hope my adds to the article can be protected against vandalism, especially from HanzoHattori who hasn't any source but who is attacking historical material for murky ideological purposes. ThanksCusterwest 13:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Washita River
Thanks for joining in in trying to deal with the rampant POV-pushing on this article -- which in my view appears to be a problem of both the major discussants currently holding forth on the article's talk page. I'm currently writing a fairly long post pointing out the ways in which sources are being cherrypicked by both sides to push POVs, & how the article could hopefully be improved to include the full spectrum of views without any one particular POV dominating (which is now the case in the article as written, with Custerwest's POV dominating). Hope you will stay tuned. --Yksin 19:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I just replied to your comment on the systemic bias page; that'll give you more of the history of this problem. --Yksin 19:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Update. I've just added my very lengthy analysis of the warring POV-pushing styles in the article, which will likely be ignored by both of them, as that seems both their styles, except maybe for them to move their argument over to my talk page -- again -- for awhile; but on the other hand, maybe it'll help too. I've also replied to a couple of your concerns about citation in the Jerome Greene section.  Most of the citations & referencing as you found it when you came to the article this morning is the result of my cleanups from the night before (amongst other things, Custerwest is very messy in how s/he does citation), & follow standard academic ways of doing things that I've done for years.  This is a style that is based on a complete reference list or bibliography, with in-line cites taking the form of "Authorlastname, publicationdate, p. #."  The publication date helps specify which source it is if a particular author has more than one reference in the reference list. But I guess I can live with it if you change them all to "Authorname, Shortened-title, p. #," which also seems common on Wikipedia.
 * I never use cite templates. They're unwieldy to use, hard to read around when editing an article, & leave numerous possibilities of various types of sources out. Nor are they required, & as I recall some policy or 'nother recommends seeking consensus before putting them into use on an article that has previously been free of them. But then, I've been compiling bibliographies & doing cites for years & years & years now, so it's part of second-nature for me how to do a proper bibliographic reference or inline citation....
 * Now I'm off to my vacation. Good luck, & thanks for taking part.  I'll be checking in on this article periodically over the next week... just can't be here in depth. --Yksin 22:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Washita
Don't engage so much in correcting the Custerwest, it's all wrong by the principle. Mine version is here: and this is according to the official American military history (right now, I can add some more, still using only the current official line of the U.S. army and government, particularly the website of the Washita Battlefield National Memorial Site).

I stopped reverting, and I don't even touch this now, from the reason I said already. ALL of this has to go, reverted to the modern and neutral account. But if you want, you an revert. --HanzoHattori 19:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you'd revert, I'd go and correct this version, as I learned much more on the battle in the meantime. I don't want to revert again myself, because... I don't know. Maybe I shouldn't. --HanzoHattori 19:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Battle of the Washita
"it's all wrong by the principle" Sources? Books ? Quotes ? I don't know why the "neutrality" tag is put on the page because HanzoHattori, despite his arrogance and his constant attacks, didn't have any historical material against what I put on the page. My sources are serious, I put pages, footnotes, comments by historians. HanzoHattori put nothing serious or even acceptable by historians. Murderbike, by the way, how can I use the edit box? Thanks. Custerwest 20:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I told you more than once. For example, here: And really, learn how to use the question marks. I don't know where are you from (France?), but in most places it' used just like a dot or comma. --HanzoHattori 20:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, don't use my talk page to insult each other, use the articles talk page, and be civil about it, please. Murderbike 20:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

http://www.friendslittlebighorn.com/Washita-book-review.htm : Jerome Greene's book was written to help the Washita Battlefield National Historic Site writing the story of the Washita. My sources has also been reviewed by Historian Mary Davis of the Washita Battlefield National Historic Site for a book written last year. I mean, this "neutrality" tag is denying the National Park Service researchs (which is OWNING the battlefield!) for HHT's anger. I don't see any reliable source (except websites) to deny the National Park Service researchs. I think it's really strange that good historians should be "tagged" with neutrality bans because of people who cannot accept the facts and the sources which told them... Custerwest 20:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

You are just doing "nananana-I cant hear you", right? I am quoting the websites of the Washita Battlefield all the time. Yes, they are "OWNING the battlefield!" etc. Of course they are


 * http://www.nps.gov/archive/waba/home.htm old website
 * http://www.nps.gov/waba/ new website

And I provided these links numerous times, and kept saying "Washita Battlefield" (here I said it 6 times already). So, you can stop playing stupid now, because I know you just try another tactics. Stupid tactics. I'm only moderately amused. Actually, I'm tired. "Good historians" are not tagged with "bans"(?), the Wikipedia article by Custerwest is.

Sorry for this Murderbike. I'm unwatching your talk page now.--HanzoHattori 21:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

3RR report
Your 3RR report on WP:AN/3RR is still not in the proper format and is in a form that is not likely to result in a review by an admin. Please redo your submission and use the template found here--Bobblehead (rants) 00:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, they've answered the question you asked me. I've also reported him to WP:AIV for making yet another personal attack on our other good friend. Even though that will likely result in a block, I think going for 3RR is also worth it. --Yksin 00:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * oh geez, see this -- our friend deleted me report for vandalism & replaced it with one of his own. I replace mine & added a diff to show where s/he did that. --Yksin 00:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey see this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#The_continuing_saga_of_Custerwest. You might be able to get some help there. --MichaelLinnear 01:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the above was started by me.  says s/he is investigating, including investigating your 3RR report. I notice Custerwest put in "executed" for the manner of Clara Blinn & her son's deaths again.  But gee, I gotta get packed now. --Yksin 01:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * He got a 24-hour block. That's something anyway. --Yksin 01:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * On submitting a 3RR request, you should link to a minimum of 4 reverts (It's 3RR, meaning there are three reverts before the electric fence technically kicks in). CusterWest did far more than 4 reverts, so I'm sure the admin didn't have a problem with blocking on just 3 links, not to mention the whole removal of your 3rr submittal and edit warring.  Also, you want to link to the differences of the violator's edits, not the end result of their edits. You should technically warn before you report someone for 3RR and then if they revert again, then you should run them up.


 * On a side note, generally avoid the whole "vandal" tag. Additionally this was a content dispute, not a vandalism spree and you should try and frame it in that context. Calling someone a vandal tends to kick things up a notch and makes compromise a little more difficult. But realistically, CusterWest was going way overboard on the tendentious editing, so even if the 3RR was not reason enough to block, the edit warring sure as heck was. Here's hoping the guy takes the 24 hours to cool down and return with some productive editing. --Bobblehead (rants) 03:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

One can only shake one's head....
See this. "These men" ha... I'm female, thanks. hahahhaahhaaaaaahaha --Yksin 01:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Custerwest
Sorry I was around to help, I'm on GMT+1 so I was tucked up asleep when you needed some admin intervention. Looks like things have cooled down a bit, but when his block finishes, if you need some help, give me a shout. All the best. The Rambling Man 10:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm actually very fond of my sleep! But by all means, check out if I'm recently contributing and let me know if you need any kind of admin assistance.  Good luck!  The Rambling Man 18:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Murderbike
 For your hard work and your endless dedication, you've more than earned this! Keep it up! ;) Dear Murderbike, I'm truly, utterly sorry for the belated reply. All I can say is, I'm terribly backlogged, and time is at a premium for me these days! :( Sometimes I wish days had 48 hours instead of 24... Anyway, at last I made it to you talk page, and I've wanted to visit you in person for many days now. I see that we have a mutual friend, The Ungovernable Force - and just like I you, I sorely miss him... but I know he must be enjoying real life, and has my deepest congratulations for overcoming his wiki-addiction, something I'll never be able to! :) I wanted to tell you that I've read and reviewed your new article, Yavapai people, looks excellent to me. I'm very, very impressed to the point that I'll add it as July's article to Portal:Indigenous peoples of North America. Congratulations on a job well done! :) I also wish to apologize for not being around when you requested my help with that user. Like I said, these last days have been somewhat difficult to me. Nevertheless, please do tell me if more problem with the article in questions arise; if necessary, I can protect it until the dispute has been solved. Please, do let me know if any actions at all are needed, k? I won't say goodbye for now without gifting you a small token of my admiration to you, to seal our newfound friendship. It's well-deserved! I'll see you later, dear Murderbike! ;) Hugs,  P h a e d r i e l  - 17:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Plant authorities
Yes, go here, click on "Plant Names" on the right hand side, enter the full name of the plant in the Quick Search menu, and, when you get to a page that has the name listed as a link, click on the link to find the authority. This also shows you that it is a plant of the American tropics. You can find the author abbreviations on Wikipedia at List of botanists by author abbreviation, and should link to the author by full name in the taxobox, even if red-linked. Be sure to copy names from IPNI without spaces after periods for abbreviated first names and the like as you will see done on the List of bot.by author abbreviations. Sometimes the search page will return you a list of 5 or so links, in which case you have to look at them all and see which are basionyms, which are synonyms, which have been replaced, which are subspecies, you then have to do a literature search--you might try posting on WikiProject Plants first to see if someone else already knows, also post there when there are multiple names or a statement about synonymy that you don't understand. There are other ways to get authorities, but this is generally the first choice and quickest. Let me know if you have any more questions. KP Botany 22:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

More on Washita
Now it's time for me to come down on you a bit. Twice today you removed wholesale chunks of text along with references, without discussion. Just as the other's behaviour isn't acceptable, neither is that. It's fine to remove unreferenced text, but removing referenced material, that's a different story entirely. I've stated repeatedly, take it to the talk page first! Even if it takes several days or a week to hash it out, it's better to do it that way. Wikipedia is not in a hurry. It's always regrettable when an article has to get locked up, but I'm glad that someone stepped in and did it while I was away this morning...maybe this will give all of you time to calm down and discuss changes, point by point.  AK Radecki Speaketh  00:16, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yavapai people
Hi Murderbike. You are off to such a great start on the article Yavapai people that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 18:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Start class
I removed the stub template on the bottom of the page and switched the old infobox to the newer one, but I have upgraded the article to start class. Good job and keep improving it. The movie poster needs a fair use rationale, and a WP:Film member recently created a template that you can just include on the image page. It provides enough rationale for using the image on the page. It can be found here. Good job again, and keep up the good work! --Nehrams2020 06:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * To get it up to B class, you will need a lot more sources and expand all of the current sections. I'd recommend adding information about the DVD release and what kind of special features it has (if any). Maybe add its score from RottenTomatoes or any other critic's response to the film. If possible, include box office revenue. In the See Also section, a novel from which the film is based on is mentioned. Can you add a section that compares the differences between the book and the film with outside mention as well? The more sections that you add and the more sources you include, the higher the quality of the article, and the more likely that the article will reach B class. Keep working at it if you want it to continue to increase in quality. --Nehrams2020 21:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Battle of Washita River
Okay, I'll stay in it. It helps a lot to know that another sane person is planning to stick with it; "sane" is not the word I'd use for either CW or HH. I discovered some things of interest while going through the edit histories last night; if you're email is activated through Wikipedia, it would be good to share some info & strategies for fixing this article w/ you. I reckon maybe we can talk at better length after our respective vacations are over. Regards. --Yksin 02:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Update. Back from vacation by three or four days. Been doing scads of research, including acquiring books through Amazon or the library, just put an interlibrary loan request on three other items. See also the article Talk:Battle of Washita River for some stuff. See also this for some of what I'm doing. Based on my examination of sources, I can verify again what CW's methodology is: cherrypick sources, & sometimes outright mischaracterize them, to push his anti-Indian POV.

All reliable sources I've checked (& I've checked a lot) agree that the raids on the Solomon & Saline rivers & other places occurred, & that at least some of the men involved were of Black Kettle's camp; but all reliable sources also agree that neither Black Kettle nor Little Rock were guilty of anything more than being able to control those of their camp who participated. There looks to be one source CW counts on that supposedly proves otherwise ("Black Kettle’s Last Raid" by Hill P. Wilson); the Kansas Historical society characterizes this piece as a "Biased account of one aspect of Plain's conflict leading up to Washita campaign of 1868 by Fort Hays post trader." I've got it on an ILL request.

Rather than presenting only "the side I like" ("the Indians are all bad guys & Custer is a hero" -- CW; "Custer is evil, the Indians are all good, & only Official Sources That I Approve Should Be Used" --HH), I'm taking the tack that all items of controversy need simply to be neutrally acknowledged & described -- which is, after all, the WikiWay, isn't it?

Currently working on the Indian casualty discrepancies: there is enough controversy & so many varying estimates that this demands actual textual discussion, rather than just brief & inadequate, not to mention inaccurate, summaries in the infobox. (E.g., there is no such thing as an "official National Park Service count" -- while Jerome Greene works for NPS, his book is his book, not the NPS's... duh. Nor does Greene call some of those listed in his aggregate list of known casualties "warchiefs." Rather, it's only a list of names; & Greene furthermore points out that some of the names might be alternative names for the same people. Etc. etc. Hoig's use of "headmen and warchiefs" in his book, citing the translator Dick Curtis, seems to come from a sloppy way of citing the newspaper report by Keim that appeared in the New York Herald, in which Keim wrote "The decisive character of the victory and the severe blow sustained by the Cheyennes may be judged from the number of 'big' chiefs, war chiefs and headmen killed in the 'Battle of the Washita.' I learned from the squaws, by means of Mr. Curtis, the interpreter, that the following were killed..." and then he goes on to name 13 Cheyenne men, two Sioux men, and one Arapaho man -- but the only ones identified as "chiefs" were Black Kettle ("chief of the band") and Little Rock ("second chief"). The characterization of the others as "war chiefs and headmen" seems to be just Keim's journalistic enthusiasm. His dispatch is found in the Hardorff book, which is searchable online.

If you can, please look through that & other books that I've posted on the talk page as being searchable online, even if you can't get hold of hard copies of them. Going to sources is the only way that CW's POV can be fought, because he misuses sources -- & we don't. It would be good to hear another reasonable voice on the talk page besides mine. Note the interesting new anon Swiss IP who showed up yesterday -- & my answer to him.

Hope all's well you're end. --Yksin 21:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Another update. CW finally made a reappearance; so has HanzoHattori. But interestingly, & for me very encouragingly, it seems it might be possible for he & I to work together after all.  Or at least I'm hoping so.  I wrote him on his talk page to say that gee, if he & Biophys & you & Michael Linnear & I could all agree to work together, & he could trust that even if I'm going into far more detail than he considers strictly necessary that I'm doing it "for a good cause," we could restore the article to a real balance, instead of having it languish in CW-ness as it currently is doing.
 * I see you haven't made any edits since the 11th, so perhaps you're traveling again? or working? Ah, please come back. We need your participation to consense that anti-Indian POV away. --Yksin 11:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Thetruckspromo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Thetruckspromo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Theblastcover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Theblastcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yavapai Map
Hi! sorry for being so slow to respond.. I'm in france this summer doing research, and I don't have the necessary software here to do any maps, alas. But if you still need a map, send me a reference to sources (or email me a digital photo or somesuch), and I'll see what I can do when I'm back in the States. take care! Citynoise 10:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Theblastcover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Theblastcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Theblastcover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Theblastcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

A hello
Sorry I haven't been responding to your recent requests. I've been busy with other things and have had trouble keeping up with my own wiki-problems. Hope that everything is going well on your end. Owen 19:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Good to see a friendly face...
... I've felt rather lonely lately! If you're up for sharing email addresses, please email me by going to my userpage & hitting the "E-mail this user" link. Got a couple of private items it'd be good to discuss there. --Yksin 01:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It's a link about five down from the "search" box to the left of the screen whenever you're on anyone's userpage. I'd just email you direct, but you don't seem to have your account set up to permit WP editors to email you that way. Ah -- the exact link is . Be sure to include your email address; on my honor I will share it with no one (of course I ask the same in return). --Yksin 02:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: Help
I'd be glad to put in my two bits toward trying to correct the article. --Aaron Walden 07:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks wrt Rivers
Hey thanks for the kudos on WA rivers. I'd been working semi-randomly on rivers far from my WA home (rivers in SC, ID, CA, MT, and who knows where else). Then I was on Columbia River tributaries. When I finally got around to taking a look at the rivers closer to Seattle and the Puget Sound area I was surprised to find many of the pages here woefully lacking. So it's been fun to write about rivers I've actually been to many times. ..my short to-do list may be empty... perhaps I'll try the Sequim Bay you have on your list... or get sidetracked as usual (any ideas?). Anyway, cheers -- we seem to share at least similar interests in WA geography and American Indian history stuff. Pfly 07:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Help
I'll try to take a look at it, but I've been really busy recently, and I don't know how much help I'll be able to provide. Thanks for the heads up, though.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Yavapai
Hello Murderbike! You shoud talk to Zeljko regarding the photos, as he is the one who uploaded them on Croatian wikipedia in the first place. I was just adding interwiki ;) All 3 photos have their licence description set to Public Domain, so I don't think there should be any problems. Cheers. --Ivan Štambuk 19:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think he does. I'll announce him your interest. --Ivan Štambuk 09:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikidramas
Thanks. See my progress thus far on the first one. The second one should go faster, I hope. --Yksin 23:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Plenty went on with the talk page just now. I've also placed warnings on both their talk pages against making personal attacks. There are a couple of nontopical discussions on the talk page that I'm also asking for consensus on to delete, as they are nontopical, & both seem to have been created by User:Felix c mainly as a means of mounting personal attacks on CW. --Yksin 20:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I see you're about. I am hoping, very strongly, to complete the user conduct RfCs tonight or early tomorrow, so will you be around to sign off on them? See email too, got a couple questions. Hey, it was thrilling today to discover a policy that absolutely prohibits linking to sites like CW's blog because it's so godawful full of copyright violations. Wikipedia not only prohibits copyvios in Wikipedia itself, but also from linking to sites that are full of copyvios. --Yksin 01:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * They're done. Please certify ASAP by following links at the top of each page to "1.6 Users certifying the basis for this dispute". Requests for comment/Custerwest, Requests for comment/HanzoHattori. Please add stuff if I've missed anything. I'm completedly burnt out now... but I wanted it done so I pushed through. Time for bed now. --Yksin 10:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Evil Spartan has certified the one for HH, but I don't think it's a valid certification as The Evil Spartan was not part of our disputes at Battle of Washita River. I am waiting anxiously at the edge of my seat hoping you'll get online & certify... I don't want these RfCs to get lost as Evil Spartan's prior RfC on HH was lost (about the same time I got involved in all of this). --Yksin 18:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Bless you! This was the big thing that needed to be done, now I can breathe. I hope you can get nice free wireless internet connectivity soon. Meanwhile, I will post at various places about the existence of these two RfCs: informing both Custerwest & HanzoHattori, all the admins who've had involvement (Maxim (formerly Evilclown93), WJBscribe, Akradecki, & Phaedriel), at WikiProject Indigenous & WikiProject Systemic whateveritis, etc., and other users who have been involved with this article.  I will also work on the article RfC, which doesn't require certification & will be a lot easier & less time-consuming to prepare, & will just be on the article talk page.  --Yksin 19:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, if you want to post at the projects, I'll take care of the people. I just now informed HanzoHattori. Feel kinda bad about him... because I actually like him... but man... all that incivility... & from what The Evil Spartan says, he's got a long long history of it.  He also just got 3RR warned for edit warring at The Holocaust, which just went under full protection. --Yksin 20:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, here we go: article RfC at Talk:Battle of Washita River. --Yksin 02:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks!
...--09:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Naratriptan
Nice catch. It was a copyright violation. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 03:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Cirsium arizonicum
Nice job on the article, by the way, and an important and widespread Western plant to have an article on. The thistles are taxonomically demanding, though, and the names will be difficult. KP Botany 03:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if anyone would notice
Hey, yeah, I'm back. I didn't have internet access for a while, but have recently gotten a new computer (a laptop). I'm transfering to Humboldt State University in a week and just got my computer for that. I don't plan on being a major editor because I plan on having a life, but I'll pop in from time to time. Hope things are going well. Oh, and does your band have any free downloads around online? I'm getting a ipod in a week too (I'm finally giving in to the trend) so I'm trying to find good legal downloads online (don't want the RIAA suing me, total fuckers). I got a bunch of Defiance, Ohio, Ryan Harvey, Emcee Lynx and Iskra last night. If your band (or any other band you know of) has a lot of free legal downloads, I would appreciate the tip. Well, off to go do something....I wish I knew what.  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read? 00:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm getting a page can't be found error on the myspace downloads. And since I'm not the best with computers and just recently started downloading music (like a couple days ago, and I've already had lots o' problems) I think I need the url from you. They both sounded pretty cool in the player though. I have the ones from your site importing to i-tunes right now (actually, I think it's already finished). What do you play again? Oh, and definitely tell me if you ever plan on playing in the Arcata area.  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read?  06:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Ack, oh no. I hope this doesn't go on long. I'm typing up a repsonse to the anon who brought up the debate on the talk page. As for being too broad, do you have a problem including punk bands that weren't part of the British 80s scene (like say, This Bike is a Pipe Bomb) or just adding people like Emcee Lynx? We did have the discussion about all anarchist PUNK or only Crass-era anarchist punk, but Emcee Lynx is definitely not appropriate (even if he is cool).

BTW, when I got your message I was listening to your band. I like it, and that weird creepy instrument (is it a bowed saw or something) is pretty cool. So, are you guys sXe (lol)? I think my favorite line I've heard is "We'll put wine in the cuppy and go freak out some yuppies!" I'm definitely recommending you guys to some of my friends. I haven't had a chance to look into those other bands or download your other two songs, but I'm really liking this.  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read? 08:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Hells Yeah!
I'm finally free! Got out of my mom's place today and am living in the dorms of Humboldt State. Damn.  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read? 03:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Have you ever heard of the Pine Hill Haints? They were playing at a pizza shop just off campus tonight.  It was pretty cool.  They had two songs that were very punkish, which was pretty cool.  It was basically a group of punks playing traditional country & folk music, so I thought you might know them.  Anyway, it was pretty nice.  I still like you guys more though (and I really do mean that).  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read?  08:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)