User talk:Nard the Bard/Archive 1

Hello Nardman1 and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:


 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type &#126;&#126;&#126; (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Meelar (talk • contribs) 07:03, 18 July 2004 (UTC)

Charles Taze Russell
You expressed your concern about the neutrality of this article before, so can you lend your support to a vote to put a NPOV disputed tag on this article? Just make a comment on the talk page. Thanks! --K. 02:00, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Blocks
Hi there - it seems that the edits to Bill of Attainder are more related to content, rather than vandalism. Despite this, I did decide to block the IP for 48 hours for a 3RR violation over two days. Normally, this is not done, so I am reviewing the series of blocks that I just imposed and may possibly likely reduce or lift this block prematurely. --HappyCamper 20:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, indeed, I've decided to lift the block after all. When I looked at the contributions, they seemed to be incremental changes. More likely a content dispute; I would not classify it as vandalism as it is. --HappyCamper 21:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from personal attacks
Hi, you recently reverted my edit at The Game (game) with an edit summary beginning "hey asshole". I would just like to remind you that we have a policy here called No personal attacks, and that it is utterly unnecessary to call other editors names. It turns out that I made that edit in order to conform with another policy we have called Verifiability. If you disagree with my judgement in this case, let's talk about it, like adults. How does that sound? -GTBacchus(talk) 01:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reasonable reply. The reason I deleted the material is because it isn't sourced in Reliable sources, as per our fundamental policies of Verifiability and No original research.  It was someone inserting something they happen to "know" into the article, which is the definition of original research, and it's not what Wikipedia's about. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

AIV
I'm afraid that the IP is correct. The link is a violation of WP:EL, as it links to a site that's only purpose is to sell something. We are an encyclopedia, not a directory of links, or a shopping helper. -Royalguard11 (Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 02:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In that one case he might be right, but he's doing it across dozens of articles, and he can't be right in all of them. Nardman1 02:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The admins have spoken. Second, I've been removing spam links from wikipedia for years, I just happen to be on a different connection lately (hence the different IP addy), and I've gotten plenty of kudos for it until you decide to reverse everything.  I'm not going to respond to anything else you have to say, but I'm going to leave it at this: look up "made for adsense" on here or through Google.  I can spot an MFA site from a mile away, I'm not going to have those people generate a profit by spamming wikipedia.  If a site has ads, fine, but when its over the top and the ad locations or number of ads suggest its an MFA, I'm killing it and leaving sites that weren't created for the sole purpose of getting clicks rather than displaying content.  Take a look at a link I removed: http://www.syvum.com/cgi/online/serve.cgi/recipes/drink/alcoholic/hurricane_cocktail.tdf?0 It's got Adsense ads disguised as a menu (to trick people into clicking the ads), Adbrite ads on the left, Yahoo ads, more google ads before you even get to the recipe, ANOTHER set of google ads after the recipe and two sets of AOL ads.  85% ads, hardcore MFA, yet I left the recipe (only one is needed) that wasn't a blatant MFA.  I'm also killing off spam references, where people only include a reference to 1. generate ad clicks, 2. absorb link value from a wiki article to boost how they are ranked in search engines.  I'm killing of commercial links which involve online stores, unless (maybe) the link is to a page on that site which involves some useful history.  Bottom line, I'm making sure links provide encyclopedic value without someone only posting the links to line their pockets.  I'm not going to bother reading any response you have so don't reply, this is just so you understand what constitutes spam links, why I leave some quality links but kill off the spammy ones. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.0.104.154 (talk) 02:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC).

Please relax/Notes
There is no need to make a personal attack such as "Keep, But just because that asshat doesn't want the link.", even if it may be appropriate. Also, you can't simply permanently block an IP address. And finally, remember to subst your templates! User:Logical2uTalk 20:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Cocktails
Hello. As an Active Participant in WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. We appreciate you being an active Participant. Thanks! --Willscrlt 08:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Merging Skiing in New Zealand with List of ski areas in New Zealand
It might have been polite to make a suggestion on the articles' talk pages, or even my talk page, before merging these two articles. They actually cover quite separate topics and should remain distinct: See the difference? Stevage 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Skiing in New Zealand would be a general discussion of the ski industry in New Zealand - its development, numbers of skiers, general trends in the resorts, ski champions etc. Something akin to Cricket in India.
 * List of ski areas in New Zealand. A list. Just a list. Just a list of links to articles about ski areas.
 * Your edit summary in creating Skiing in New Zealand was "create stub (it's about time)"...this leads me to believe you want this article to exist just because you like skiing in New Zealand. Please see WP:ILIKEIT Nardman1 04:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? You based your decision on that? Please, next time you're going to leap to conclusions based on an edit summary, check with the other person before you act on it. For that matter, next time you're going to replace anyone's newly written stub with a redirect, check with the other person first. And we'll all be happier. Stevage 06:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion contested
Hi Nardman1,

I'd like to know why you decided to Speedy Delete the stub page that I added about Pocketdish. It's now in AFD. Jaysbro 15:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:The legend of wisely chinese.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:G28808.jpg and Image:The legend of wisely chinese.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Donald Albury 03:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sources on images
The two images I notified you about (and I'm sorry about not linking properly to one of them), were tagged for 'no source' and 'no license'. Adding a license tag does not mean that a source is no longer needed. I don't care if the uploader found it on the web or scanned the cover his/herself, we need the information stated. -- Donald Albury 13:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's fine, I was just trying to clean up sourceless images. Nardman1 21:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop
The pictures of Bronze of China are free picture, why would you try to delete by many means????? I have my account and verificable address that I will be 100% responsible for any copyright consequences of these pictures.Dongwenliang 03:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Because I don't believe that they are copyright free, and I won't stop until you link to the page on bronzes.cn that says the images are free or licensed for redistribution with no restrictions (other than attribution). This is required by Wikipedia policy. Copyrights Nardman1 03:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I sent a letter to the website, I will let you know if I can get an answer, or if they never reply, please remove your stop sign.Dongwenliang 17:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Joke edits
Thanks for your contribution, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Some readers looking for a serious article might not find them amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do a bit seriously here. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the Sandbox to get started. I hope you can help us out! &mdash;Dgiest c 21:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)