User talk:Oscarthecat/Archive 6

Help
Hi Oscarthecat, I hope you can help me, Im new to adding items to Wiki and I want to add a new page about Greendale, the place where Postman Pat is located. The problem is that there are several pages for Greendale but not for the fictional postman pat greendale. There is for Greendale- Fictional place for Sabrina the Witch and several other fictional Greendales. Any hints who to do this. Thanks --Applemacbook
 * Hi - the usual approach to this is to use an article name such as Greendale (Postman Pat), just like the approach used for places such as Springfield (The Simpsons). --Oscarthecat 18:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks --Applemacbook

giacomo bernardi
why did you edit my giacomo bernardi article, you changed it to the point that you put false information about him. As well as deleting important images that contributed to the article. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cruzkiter (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your speedy response, But I'm still curious as to the image, which I still believe is relevant. What copyright rules imply that it should be deleted. I have permission from Dr. Bernardi to place them on wikipedia even though they are already on his website. Thank you ~cruzkiter

Unreasonable deletion of external links
Hi. You have deleted almost all of the external links I had added to the various Stockport area pages, stating that they are spam. This is unreasonable. My community project is researching all the individual war memorials in the Stockport area and it is therefore perfectly reasonable to add the link to the relevent "suburb" pages. For example, there is a page for Heaton Moor; Heaton Moor has a war memorial; I am researching the names on it; why would I not put a link so that local resident know of it? If you wish me to call each link soemthing else, then fine. johnmh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmh (talk • contribs)
 * Hi John. I'm sorry you think my removal of those links to  was unreasonable.  The same link had been added to many Stockport town sites.  Following the link did not reveal content specific to the town concerned.   My criteria for there removal was the guidelines issued at WP:SPAM, in particular "appearing to the Wikipedia community that you are trying to abuse Wikipedia for self-promotion....Adding the same link to many articles. The first person who notices you doing this will go through all your recent contributions with an itchy trigger finger on the revert button.".  I don't dispute the fact that it's worthy and valuable external link, but adding it to every town's article I do class as spamming.  Using your example, suppose I knew of a website which listed restaurants in Stockport, should I add this link to every Stockport town's article?  --Oscarthecat 20:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * My apologies for not "signing" the post to you. I don't know how to do that.


 * I have read the guidelines and remain convinced that you are not being reasonable or consistent.Using two of your own examples - if the restaurant website listed businesses in a very distinct part of the borough, why would it be unreasonable to post on that specific page. Stockport is not a single entity (part of it is in Cheshire, part in Lancashire, for exmaple). Taking your other comment that content is not specific to the suburb page, why have you left the Stockport link intact - when like all the others it is not specific (as it contains all the details of the other memorials). Assuming that I am not going to be able to persuade you over this, please if there is a "disputes" procedure to which I may refer my complaint.


 * John


 * John - glad we've now resolved this, by discussion with other contributors on the Talk:Heaton Moor page. Regards, --Oscarthecat 18:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Whatever. One of the contributors was talking complete geek-speak that I had no idea what s/he was saying. The other raised a completely different point than the two you had raised. I decided that if there was going to be these constantly shifting sands, it was pointless continuing to to have a discussion. The lack of development of the various "suburb" pages is Wikipedia's loss not mine. It is reactions like yours that make Wikipedia a joke amongst serious researchers.

I may, of course, take another route. As you originally mentioned, putting several links on at the same time gets noticed. Sneaking the links back in over the coming weeks under slightly different titles (and put there by different users) wouldnt raise any eyebrows. Now would it? Have a nice day, y'all. Johnmh 18:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * John - sorry you don't like Wikipedia's rules. Oh well, hope you find a better site that isn't "a joke amongst serious researchers" then.  As for sneaking the links on, I'm sure you're more mature than that. Best of luck with your endeavours. --Oscarthecat 18:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Oscar - Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, eh? --74.96.172.96 20:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC).

Too quick on deletes
Hi, you're too quick on deletes. As a new user I didn't have time to add the special tag let alone expand the article from its starting point. --metorical 14:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

totally. --74.96.172.96 20:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC).

Devil May Cry 3 nominated for Featured Article
Please vote and make your comments here- 凶 01:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks from ill seletorre
Thanks for the lesson on the redirect. I also thanked you on my user talk page, but wasn't sure if you would see it or not. I'm new to the contrib community. Thanks again for helping with the learning curve! --Ill seletorre 08:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

A Digital image of Keighley
Thank you for contacting me, I do think that it could be incorperated into the main Keighley listing. Applemacbook
 * Okay, I've now added it in. I'll remove the standalone article now. --Oscarthecat 11:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou. --Applemacbook

CSI franchise
I have created the page CSI franchise, a page you said ud help contribute too once created. Do u still want to help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanDud88 (talk • contribs)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Private_eye_archer_memorial.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Private_eye_archer_memorial.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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 14:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Zzzax
Both Earthelemental99 and DCincarnate are unable to participate in the discussion due to recent blocks; do you mind giving your opinion before I request unprotection? Michael as 10 20:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

GoldenEye
Since you're also reverting the GoldenEye plot edits, can we get your opinion on the talk page about that section? ColdFusion650 18:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Dante
Dante is up as a Featured Article Candidate please voice your opinion here. - 凶 02:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Errorstock
I'm curious about your block of this editor for Attempting to intimidate or harass other users. Are there deleted edits that I am unaware of? All I see is a single edit as part of a content dispute. Guettarda 04:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi - that user had created some pages which fall into the db-attack type, see below (obtained via show contributions by Oscarthecat, show logs).


 * 1) 2007-04-29T20:14:54 Oscarthecat (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Baby rapist" (content was: 'Zzuuzz rapes babies!' (and the only contributor was 'Errorstock')) (Restore)
 * 2) 2007-04-29T20:14:44 Oscarthecat (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Baby raped" (content was: 'Zzuuzz rapes babies!' (and the only contributor was 'Errorstock')) (Restore)
 * 3) 2007-04-29T20:14:34 Oscarthecat (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Baby rapings" (content was: 'Zzuuzz rapes babies!' (and the only contributor was 'Errorstock')) (Restore)
 * 4) 2007-04-29T20:14:24 Oscarthecat (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Errorstock (contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (Attempting to intimidate or harass other users) (Unblock)
 * Hope this clears it up. --Oscarthecat 06:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, so it was the same anon who earlier claimed to be Brandt. I see. Guettarda 12:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

April 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The April 2007 issue of the Films 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. This is an automated notice by BrownBot 21:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nuclear Power Plant 2 cropped.jpg listed for deletion
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Nuclear Power Plant 2 cropped.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self-no-disclaimers to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-2.5 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Media copyright questions. Thank you.


 * Hey, I just got here and found the image deleted! But the uncropped image is still there.  I put the last image in as a temporary patch.  Can we try again? Simesa 01:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've reinstated the cropped pic, given it same license info as the original, so shouldn't get speedied again. Thanks, --Oscarthecat 06:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This image has been listed for deletion again because the source information is unconfirmed. To prevent this from reoccuring, please forward the email from the copyright holder releasing her rights on this image to "permissions-en at wikimedia dot org". An OTRS volunteer can then tag the image as "permissions confirmed" and the real name and email address of the source do not need to be on the image (unless she wants them there for attribution purposes). LyrlTalk C 01:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Dates
That says nothing about duplicating the links throughout the article. You have May 4 linked 5 times. Also, you included the year for every one, even when it wasn't present. That guideline doesn't say that if it isn't present that you should make it present, it just says to link it if it is. You have November 5, 2005 to November 15, 2005 (in the context, the year is only needed once).  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * They're linked not to offer an actual link, but to allow user preferred date formatting to take place. Why should a user want a date to appear as November 5, 2005 in one place in the article but their preferred 2005-11-05 format in the rest of the article?
 * As for "November 5, 2005 to November 15, 2005", why would you want it to appear as "2005-11-05 to November 15, 2005" ? Surely a consistent format of dates is preferable? --Oscarthecat 06:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thank you for butchering the External Quake Links
Wish it were easier to move links to the Open Directory, would save Wikipedia many, many problems. -- ReyBrujo 20:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Protected
Hi Oscarthecat. Just as you were recreating Blessthefall to salt it I was adding it to Protected titles/May 2007/List. Would you mind if I re-deleted it now? Picaroon (Talk) 20:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Whiskey in the Jar 21:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Ditto! Georgethe23rd 20:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Karachi riots, 2007
Thanks for your input to the article.

Please, if you could help moderate the current dispute. A number of fairly pro-Muslim (ie Jamaat-e-Islami) users have been deleting references that support opposing opinions or address the violence from third party perspectives, and replacing them with very anti-Musharraf sources. I think a more reasonable solution would be to include both. It is very frustrating to have my work deleted after taking the time to find a 3rd party observer that has a more objective opinion amidst the inflammatory rhetoric. Appreciate your help. Chantoke 21:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Baldur'sGateLogo.png
Hello, Oscarthecat. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Baldur'sGateLogo.png) was found at the following location: User:Oscarthecat/test1. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion summary
I think you want to avoid this. Rettetast 11:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * " WP:CSD - Attack page. " is suggested at Category:Attack pages for speedy deletion, but you can just write nonsense or attack. Rettetast 11:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Rettetast 11:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I just came over this at WP:AN. This will maybe save you some time. Rettetast 19:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, installed and works well, cheers. --Oscarthecat 13:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Listing WikiProject Film admins
Hello. There is a discussion about listing administrators on the Film project. If you agree or disagree, or just want to add your two cents, please comment here. Thank you. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 23:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

deleting space invaders high scores
why do you keep deleting the space invaders high scores? these are quoted from a now defunct book "Stratford Video Gaming Records, Premere Edition, 1980", which its copyright is now part of the public domain. This book is quoted all over the WWW and is hailed as THE source for video game high scores of the 80's. im a 6 year member of VAPS, 8 years on KLOV, i have a 36 game collection (including 6 SI's), I attend gaming auctions, I attend the FUNSPOT tournies, and fix boards, including SI's for people all over the world, including boards for Gail Henshaw, SI Player Extraordinaire. What makes you an expert in SI that you need to delete this information?--74.96.172.96 20:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Let's have a chat about this on the Space Invaders talk page. --Oscarthecat 20:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oscar, have you had time to review and consider my arguments on the SI talk page? I think compromise is in order. Thanks for your time and patience. --74.96.172.96 23:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
I tried adding an external link to an article I saw posted on the PSP's survivability since this is a big topic. I added it to reviews, others and some other category and you kept removing it? I'm not really sure why that is. It's an article that directly speaks to the topic of the playstation portable and it's no less valid than any other review article linked to there. And then to message me and say it's vandalism? I'm not really sure that the first message you send me to ask me to stop should include threatening to take privleges away and accusations of intentional vandalism. I'm sure we could have handled this without you immediately threatening me. I even read the definition of the word as you were so kind to link to me, and I still don't see how it fits that definition of vandalism. But regardless of your misuse of a word, what is that main problem with the link so that I know in the future when adding links? 68.38.111.241 23:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi there. On the page, at PlayStation_Portable there's some text about this, offering guidance : DO NOT ADD MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A COLLECTION OF LINKS. If you think that your link might be useful, do not add it here, but put it on this article's discussion page first or submit your link to the appropriate category at the Open Directory Project.


 * As a result, it's hoped that anyone adding links follows this, and discusses on the article's talk page first. Reason behind this is that there's a LOT of content about the PSP out there, and wikipedia isn't just a directory of links, that's what Open Directory Project is for.


 * So I removed the link you added, giving a edit summary why it was being removed. But you re-added, ignoring the edit summary and the guidance on the page itself.


 * Rather than repeatedly adding/removing, I placed a warning on your page, so that you could see the issue. I hope this helps.


 * The article you added a link to does have some good information, suggest you add it via Open Directory Project straight away, and if you'd like it added to the PSP page, then open a discussion about it on the PSP talk page. Regards, --Oscarthecat 05:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Spidey
No problem, I was wrong about the dates as I didn't understand at the time what you were referring to. I still think it's a waste, because I have yet to find someone that thinks "31 October" means there are 31 Octobers, but I understand the principle, and there may come a time when someone actually does think that. As for the lead, it probably could use a bit of shortening, to be a little more too the point, but I just wasn't sure about where to cut it.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  12:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:3d ant attack cover art.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:3d ant attack cover art.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, image now updated with fair use rationale. --Oscarthecat 09:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi!
I see, you are sysop and active here at the moment. Please block my Userpage for IP´s. These freaks are getting on my nervs and because I am not here so often i cannot revert quickly. Thanks, __ ABF __ - - Talk - - 16:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Robert Rosner
I've brought up your reproding of Robert Rosner ar WT:PROD. I'd like you to read my comment there, and respond to it - and not reprod articles. Od Mishehu 13:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * As an admin, you should know that PROD tags should not be re-added when a user has contested the deletion by removing one (that has always been the policy at WP:PROD). I'm going to list the page on AfD, since there's clearly controversy about it.  Mango juice talk 14:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edits regarding May 28, 2007
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:65.2.240.46, you will be blocked from editing. Super World Champions 19:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * In what way was my edit and block of that IP vandalism? That user had given an edit summary of "it's not coming out on june 18 you fucking idiots" earlier.  There's an article WP:CIVIL which explains the  petty vs serious examples. --Oscarthecat 22:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * To the best of my understanding, a user needs to be warned about bad behavior before a block. I see one edit with a WP:CIVIL problem in the summary. I also see that the 3 edits made by this IP address look like they may be reasonable, and that the IP address recieved no warnings. In addition, a 1 week block for a first offence looks to me like being too long. Od Mishehu 06:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair point. I've now unblocked it. I should have used warnings and blocked if continued. --Oscarthecat 08:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Adventure a planet of death 2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Adventure a planet of death 2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 16:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Adventure a planet of death 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Adventure a planet of death 1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 16:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Arcadia game cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Arcadia game cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 19:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

May 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The May 2007 issue of the Films 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. This has been an automated notice by BrownBot 22:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Jaffa Phonix
I added some references to Jaffa Phonix. --Eastmain 23:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Crash Magazine Cover Issue 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Crash Magazine Cover Issue 1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 21:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For reverting Maxl, on User:SmackBot's talk page. Unfortunately, the bot will still stop, so it's best to just leave these things. Rich Farmbrough, 16:15 3 June 2007 (GMT).

Tagging of Motivation (literature)
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Motivation (literature). I do not think that Motivation (literature) fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because this is not a valid speedy. Note that db-nn may be used only for people, bands, groups/clubs, adn companines, not other sorts of articels.. I request that you consider not re-tagging Motivation (literature) for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleting a page when it is being edited
hi. as i was coming to update the The Pugilist at Rest page with my *own original* info, i saw that you had deleted it within 2 MINUTES of me creating the page. Next time, please leave it a while before you do that. its very annoying. --Danbrown99 20:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Trivia tags
Hi. How far does User:Maxl have to go with this pro-trivia campaign before intervention happens? Howard Webb is the latest article to be treated to his section renaming convention. I have posted to his talk page, but I fear it will do no good. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 21:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * A rhetorical question, actually. It was not a request for blocking - I would hope that he could be persuaded otherwise in some way. However, you've told me; thanks for that. Best wishes. Ref (chew) (do) 22:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:How to power tune alfa romeo twin cam engines.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:How to power tune alfa romeo twin cam engines.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 03:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers sunshine on leith.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers sunshine on leith.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers restless soul.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers restless soul.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers persevere.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers persevere.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers hit the highway.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers hit the highway.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers born innocent.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers born innocent.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers best of.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers best of.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Hobbit adventure packaging.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hobbit adventure packaging.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 07:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Proclaimers_family_guy.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Proclaimers_family_guy.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is either no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use, or else the rationale given is not valid. 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 insure 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. MER-C 11:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

About PSP being 802.11g
J.ostheller has changed it back to "g" from "b" and is now in violation of WP:3RR here, here and here

I don't know what you want to do about this Momusufan 20:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Oscarthecat- I am new to wikipedia which you can probably see... This is what I do not understand

1. From what I can see, Sony did not officially announce that the PSP is 802.11g complainant. 2. With a non-modded retail USA PSP, and their current firmware, my PSP is connecting at 802.11g. 3. There are many other people on the internet that are also saying they too connect at 802.11g. 4. This has been well known for well over a year.

Now because there is no official word from sony that it does 802.11g, then you insist on it being 802.11b?

This is exactly like some companying saying the sky is red, yet everyone who sees the sky knows it is blue. Yet because this company said officially that the sky is red, wikipedia should post it is red? That is silly and ridiculous.

I am using the discussion page. The people who change it back do not have a PSP and do not know if it is 802.11b or 802.11g. The only thing they know is what sony wrote on paper, eventhough what they wrote (a long time ago) has been updated in real life.

Do you want wikipedia accurate, or outdated? your choice

J.ostheller 20:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi J. First of all, welcome to Wikipedia, hope you become a regular contributor to all these PSP-related articles.  When contributing to wikipedia, it's important to cite sources (there's a article on this, see WP:CITE, in order to avoid continual edit/revert wars between users.  Right now, there's a Sony source saying it's 802.11b, which I've added to the article, to help clarify things.  If another source can be found to make clear it's 802.11g (not necessarily Sony, a respected industry source would be ok), then let's get the article to cite that source and avoid all this trouble.  Right now, if the only decent source says it's 802.11b, then that's how it'll need to stay.  It's imperative that sources are cited for any claims, particularly where there's disagreement over their validity. Regards, --Oscarthecat 20:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Oscarthecat.

Can we table this discussion to the PSP discussion area? It is getting confusing for me jumping back and forth.

I believe your logic here to be flawed. The PSP is 3 years old, and ever changing. Just because Sony does not document a change, does not mean that the change did not happen. anyways... I had an important question on the discussion page


 * OK, discussion continued on the Talk:PlayStation Portable page. --Oscarthecat 07:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

'non notable'?
Eidiki Katastaltiki Antitromokratiki Monada (EKAM), is Greece's main police special forces unit, a highly trained and proven to be highly effective anti-terrorism force. How does this qualify as 'non-notable'? english bastards.--NeroDrusus 13:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism in Nadar caste
please monitor Nadar caste which is having a lot of Vandalism. Tn pillai 05:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Footnotes, again
Hi there,

I'm here regarding Infobox VG which was recently protected and reasonably so, but a disputed field managed to make its way in there while its use was still being evaluated, and it was also contested in a RFC (the comments are available at Template talk:Infobox VG) So, I'm going to formally request that we omit this for the time being.

I lack the admin powers to do so myself and I was wondering if you would consider doing it.

Thanks for your time, and hopefully I haven't wasted it. Combination 13:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The field in question is 'footnotes', it's at the bottom of the list I think. Combination  15:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi - there was a misleading edit reinstating these footnotes, "no users oppose it" in edit summary, so have now removed it. Thanks for spotting this. --Oscarthecat 17:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Earlier transgressions on the Warhammer page explanation
dear Osmond

I apologise for my earlier conduct. I was sadly inebrriated (a vice i attribute to my neglectful father) at the time and misread the article titles. It was ment to be Warhammer but i changed it to warhammer 400000. It wasnt vanadalism it was because i want not in a sober state of mind. please dont tell an admin about it, because i will not repeat such foolishness in the future.

all my Love, Carlos (Confidente) Montoya —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosmontoya (talk • contribs)

Harold Wilson
Hi Oscar, I've reverted your edit on the info box for Harold Wilson. Unlike many of Libs23's other edits on info boxes this one has a certain validity to it. Wilson held several more senior positions than this that have a far more deserving claim to such a prominent place on the page. Galloglass 18:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you
Hi! Got into a bit of a revert war with User: Matthew over the inclusion of US release dates in the infoboxes of British films, specifically Shaun of the Dead and 28 Days Later. Per the style guidelines, I included them, and User: Matthew removed them. I went to check the style guidelines to make sure I had got them right, but the style guidelines had been changed. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_Films%2FStyle_guidelines&diff=137926165&oldid=137195326 Not sure what I'm doing wrong or what I'm meant to do now. Any advice would be appreciated. Geoff B 19:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied on Geoff's talk page. --Oscarthecat 22:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Pssst
Thanks for the revert of my idiotic change, I was thinking of Cookie... :)  Mi re ma r e  19:42, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No probs, keep up the good ACG work. --Oscarthecat 19:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Proclaimers family guy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Proclaimers family guy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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. —Angr 14:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Request your comments
I created a proposal. Please comment here.

Note: Please analyze each proposal on their own validity - do not reject a proposal just because you rejected a different one. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

deletion of Fuglybetsy's Uraguay fact
that fact about Uraguay is true and should not be counted as vandalism.--Skiskiski 21:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * User has "form" as a vandal, so that unsourced edit has been reverted. --Oscarthecat 21:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Tim LaRoche
Hello. I've removed the speedy deletion tag you place on Tim LaRoche because the article clearly asserts some notability. If you still believe the article should be deleted, you should submit it to articles for deletion where a proper debate can take place. Thanks, Pascal.Tesson 14:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback, appreciated. I don't see how it meets WP:BAND though, so have listed it at Articles for deletion/Tim LaRoche. Regards, --Oscarthecat 17:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi!
I see, you are a sysop, who is active at the moment. Because I am not able to edit wikimedia in the next weeks (see my German Userpage) and vandal IP´s like my userpage, please protect my userpage and my talk in en.wp [edit=sysop; move=sysop] to prevent vandalism. When I am back, I´ll request for unprotection. Thank you, __ ABF __ - - Talk - - 08:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

June 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The June 2007 issue of the Films 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. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Nehrams2020 08:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

American films
Please please!!! help fill in List of American films. Even if it is just a few details it all helps -any contribution you can make will be more than appreciated!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 17:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Oscar (cat)
You may be interested to know (or maybe not), that an article has been created on Oscar the cat that (supposedly) can predict the death of people. Its deletion is discussed at Articles for deletion/Oscar (cat). --Tikiwont 07:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

PlayStation Portable
Your recent contribution to PlayStation Portable is vandalism. Further contributions in this manner will result in loss of editing privileges. You have been warned. --Oscarthecat 11:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

That's very interesting. As I have never ever edited the english version of wikipedia, to your information. I've got the account (Bóg Markus) on polish edition and nowhere else do I cotribute. I suggest you to consider the information that I've been displayed -> "Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users..."

And yes, I know that you suggest me to create an account here. Will do soon.

--83.27.53.125 11:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Marek Koczorowski

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The July 2007 issue of the Films 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. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 19:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)