User talk:Poccil/archive5


 * Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive1 at 21:34, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive2 at 16:57, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive3 at 22:40, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive4 at 04:34, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * /Unverified images

CKCKCKCK
Yo i see u tryin 2 change shit wit College Point, Queens but u probably dunt kno shit bout it. Come 2 CP at night to see wat i mean. if ur wite u will get shot. i aint lyin datz wat im sayin. im jus sayin i live in CP and i even get scared walkin round by maself at nite. so im sayin stop changin shit bout CP. Im Blood so u bettah watch out. dis summer ma best frend got killed by a Crip so im sayin dat theres many of em in da area so watch out niggggguuuuhhhh!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bkbkbkbk (talk • contribs).

Please
If you find another article of mine that you think is misplaced, please contact me on my user page before you edit-conflict me. Thanks. :) – ClockworkSoul 05:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

re: What's a Tobagonian?
I think that a Tobagonian is someone from Tobago :) But I couldn't be sure! It's certainly a very short list, and I agree that it's a speedy delete. &mdash; riana_dzasta &bull; t &bull; c &bull; e  &bull; ER &bull; 05:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Please remember to use edit summaries. When I saw that you had removed a stub tag at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Partido_de_la_speranza_dominicana&diff=72244219&oldid=69813123, I didn't understand why you had done that. An edit summary would have been helpful. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 20:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC) -- Peter O. (Talk) 00:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

OK. -- Peter O. (Talk) 00:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

PoccilScript
blocked becuase Template:NowCommons is quite sufficent for that kind of image. CSD is for stuff that has to be delt with now. Images that have been moved to commons can be delt with whenever.Geni 11:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Images to commons
I'm happy that you're moving images to the commons, but could we talk about image names. For Gutenberg books, I've always used a naming convention of Subject_of_article_name - POinter_to_Gutenbrg_Source. By removing the Project Gutenberg eText 12345 element of the image, you remove the latter of these. Is there any good reason for this? I appreciate we have not lost the metadata in the image description but I feel more comfirted if the imagename on its own is able to convey source info. As to my own images, I've always encoded the date the image is taken into the image name. Again, is there any good reason to jettison this? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * Thank you for the suggestion.Next time I will add the original image's name to the metadata info.Peter O. (Talk) 14:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Next time, I'd prefer you to leave the metadata in the title, or explain why removing it is a better thing to do. Your action verges on discourtesy. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Images on commons
As the deletion of the images here is not an urgent matter, please do not put them in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. That category is currently heavily backlogged and will become even more inefficient if it is used for so many non-urgent deletions (som eurgent deletions may be delayed by days due to the backlog). Thank you, Kusma (討論) 11:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I understand.Since this is the only page I can edit now, I might as well propose here a template to mark images ready to be deleted, but are not speedy deletions.They could be placed into a different category, such as:"


 * This image was moved to Wikimedia Commons and is now redundant and ready to be deleted.This image isn't, however, a candidate for speedy deletion for that reason.


 * I apologize for my actions.Peter O. (Talk) 13:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * There is already NowCommons. Isn't that sufficient? Kusma (討論) 13:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This is for the case when a (non-sysop) user already checked that the image is really used nowhere, that the image really exists, and that the image's metadata is already exported to the Commons page.For what I am doing, a template such as one above is needed at least now.I could change the wording to:
 * ...It has been confirmed that the image is orphaned and its history was exported to Wikipedia Commons.
 * Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 13:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem is with the expected time delaybefore such images are deleted (in terms of priority deleting stuff shifted to commons if pretty low on the list of backlogs needing to be cleared) they would probably have to be rechecked before they are deleted.Geni 16:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You shouldn't be blocked I've cleared the autoblock.Geni 16:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok User:PoccilScript has been unblocked.Geni 12:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Just curious about changing WP image names to Commons image name?
I note that you just changed the name of an image in the two articles Distillation and Fractional distillation from its Wikipedia name to its Commons name. I am curious as to why that was necessary. Is there some benefit to that ... or what? I'll await your response here on your Talk page. Thanks, _ mbeychok 21:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The purpose is to prepare for its deletion because the image is redundant in Wikipedia.PoccilScript 21:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. - mbeychok 22:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Removal of "notability" tag on page As Blood Runs Black
Hello there, I see you removed the notability tag on the above page. Can I ask why? It was placed there because the article lacks sources, content, and may not fall under the guidelines of WP:MUSIC.--Danteferno 00:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

-- Peter O. (Talk) 17:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Commons Images
Please consider having your script make sure that the images in the commons that are to replace the ones on WikiPedia are actually identical.I uploaded a newer much higher quality of Image:Sullivan-GS.JPG a few days ago, only to find it has just now been replaced with the horrible version copied over to the commons earlier.I meant to update the Commons image at the same time, but while I've been on WikiPedia since 2004, I only just joined the commons and it told me I was too new. --Anivron 04:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

File history from EN wiki
I've moved this comment here since it seems that you don't read your Commons talk page

Please only upload the file history from EN wiki if the Commons file was based on (or is exactly) that file. Many times you've uploaded the filehistory from EN wiki for a file which has originated from another language wiki or where the image is based on the original source directly. /Lokal_Profil 21:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

User:PoccilScript
Nice job replacing the flag images; I would be looking forward to more of this in the future :) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Flag infobox
I see that in the flag infobox you were having trouble applying "colour" instead to "color" to some articles with this infobox.Do you mind if I help apply this change for you?Perhaps it involves creating a new template or replacing existing templates in certain articles.PoccilScript 00:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Go right ahead, let me know when you finished and thanks a bunch. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Modular schematics
I just saw your idea for modular schematic diagrams and thought it was something I could help you with.Here's how I would handle it.

First, each of the graphics should be converted to SVG.(As you may know, MediaWiki has SVG support now.)Then, I could make a script that would piece together each SVG graphic into one big one, as well as handle text.I hope you can help me and that I can help you.Respond at my talk page. Peter O. (Talk) 05:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I abandoned that idea a long time ago.The script idea is intriguing, though.What did you have in mind? — Omegatron 05:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

SVG files are text files.I could make an online script similar to the one you have still online, but that generates SVG instead of HTML.SVG text of each schematic piece is used instead of images.The resulting SVG file could then be uploaded to Wikipedia.Peter O. (Talk) 05:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't even think of that.That is a very good idea.It is still limited by being too "blocky", though, and not very flexible.
 * See WikiProject_Electronics/Programs for the discussion of what to do about electronics diagrams on Wikipedia, which includes an extension that can be built into Mediawiki, but requires horrendous code and creates pretty bad graphs, some programs that can output SVG, but not very great looking.
 * See also Commons:Category:Electrical_symbols, which already has lots of SVG symbols, but they're all drawn by different people, so some are great-looking; some are ugly.Even the ones that are good-looking are inconsistent with each other.Like this, for instance:


 * They are obviously drawn differently, though both styles look decent by themselves.
 * I started to draw my own renditions of all the different symbols, in a style that is consistent with each other, but never finished it.I'll upload what I did so far for comparison:


 * We could try to emulate their style maybe. — Omegatron 05:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm getting some SVG, but it's not working seamlessly.I'm going to try to figure it out by myself (I'm not too familiar with the SVG code), but it would be faster if we could talk by email or IM. — Omegatron 23:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

New Boolean Logic pic ?
Hi, I see you replaced my pic with a new one, which is functionally identical.Since you didn't add a comment when you made the change, let me ask, what was wrong with my pic ?I thought mine had a better usage of colors to show sets, for example. StuRat 05:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, but couldn't you convert my pic instead of creating a new pic ? StuRat 06:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yǔn
Thank you for confirming that for me by moving it. I was having a dilemna when I started that one because Yǔn has several meanings and I did not want to create a disambiguation page. This is the same problem with many Chinese characters. The sounds are not as important as the meanings they convey, and I could not think of another way to start an arrticle about the right Yǔn unless I clarified it with the character intended. Do you think this might be worthwhile opening a policy discussion over?Kaz 16:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hope Evangelical Lutheran Church
You had prodded this article.I prod2'ed it.An IP editor deproded without doing anything else.I leave it to you to evaluate AFD nomination; I'm going to stick the relevant cleanup tags on it.GRBerry 03:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Orlík (disambiguation)
Do you think it is fun to clean up such mess? Pavel Vozenilek 23:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

concerning the Mercator-proj image
This image at english Wikipedia is better than the image at commons. English Wikipedia image is in the current optimal format for this type of image. The English Wikipedia image is 33 times smaller in filesize while still higher in quality. Please do not replace Mercator-proj.png with Mercator-proj.jpg, but instead replace Mercator-proj.jpg with Mercator-proj.png. Thank you. --Jecowa 19:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have restored links to the image and uploaded a copy to the Wikimedia Commons.PoccilScript 20:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's very good that you uploaded the better image to Commons but please don't use the PoccilScript output on the image description page. Currently licenses, categories etc are just down as nowikied tags. Please rewrite the information using the commons:template:information tag. Also if you upload a better version please link to it from the jpg version./Lokal Profil 11:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Keep PoccilScript off user talk pages
Could you keep PoccilScript from modifying user talk pages? I just a "You have a new message", just to see your script had changed a picture in a signature of an old message. --Apoc2400 13:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC) "
 * Yes, I could do that for you.Peter O. (Talk) 16:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks
...for your great work on moving images to commons. This benefits WP a lot. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[untitled]
Your edit to Cordillera del Paine created a completely irrelevant, and rather unpleasant, image. Was this a clerical error or malicious vandalism? Viewfinder 19:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It was definitely not vandalism.When the image was replaced to Paine.jpg, it was thought to have been pointed to the same image as on Wikimedia Commons, and not to a different one.Peter O. (Talk) 23:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, it was an accident and my vandalism accusation was premature. But the replacement of correct images with the sort of image that appeared on Cordillera del Paine, with a professional looking commemt to ward off vandal watchers, is not unusual sneaky vandal behaviour. Viewfinder 23:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Florida
Your recent edit to Florida (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 04:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, I thought I was reverting vandalism as well...Peter O. (Talk) 04:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

User:PoccilScript
It would be nice if you request and get Bot status for this user as he keeps flooding my watchlist without. --Denniss 02:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Applies to the Commons as well. --Denniss 02:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Poccil, I also came to ask you to do the same thing.Did you intend an "empty" reply above? —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-21 06:09Z 


 * No, it was a mistake.Peter O. (Talk) 06:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, any status on getting a bot flag? :) —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-22 06:24Z 


 * I would actually request that PoccilScript doesn't get a bot flag on Commons since the edit comments say explicitly "revert if wrong". If the edits pop up with a bot flag many such necessary revertings will go missing.
 * A botflag on EN wiki I have nothing against /Lokal Profil 22:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't really understand... "revert if wrong" is redundant politeness on a wiki; either the bot/script is 99.9% correct, or it makes mistakes and in that case should not run automated. —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-24 21:15Z 

I have begun the process now, but do you feel it will succeed?Respond at my talk page. Peter O. (Talk) 07:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Great; I don't see any reason you wouldn't get a bot flag if it's in good faith and contributing good work. —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-24 21:12Z 

"revert if wrong" is not only redundant politenes, it is Poccil pointing out that (s)he hasen't read the image information and thus doesn't know whether the Commons image has "inherited" anything from the EN wiki version. An example is an image when the En wiki version is a lower resolution version of a PD image. Then the history of the file on EN wiki is irrelevant to the higher resolution version on Commons. This was all discussed here on Commons. /Lokal_Profil 22:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay.I still think the edit summary is redundant on a wiki (an orthogonal issue), but I agree that if PoccilScript on Commons makes mistakes, then it should not run as an automated bot. —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-24 23:55Z 

template
i didn't create it, someone suggested it on a talk page so I decided to paste it into a template :-) --Frogsprog 17:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Mostly done?
What do you mean by "mostly"? Can we remove the state sections from the list? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  02:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

RE:Bengalis.png
Hi, I suggest making the following changes:
 * Replace Riya Sen's image (the actress in red dress) with another women. This is perhaps the most important, as the actress has acted in only a few movies and is not representative of any Bengali women. I'd have suggested Suchitra Sen, but don't have a free image of her. Perhaps Pritilata Waddedar's image Image:Pritilata-waddedar.jpg will be more suitable (and historically relevant) here, the image is in PD. It does have a low resolution, but perhaps that can be overlooked. Another option will beto use the one of Begum Rokeya, the women's education pioneer, the image is Image:Begum Rokeya.jpg. I'd recommend using it even more, as it balances out the regional issues.


 * If no free image of Amartya Sen is available, I'd suggest using the image of the poet Kazi Nazrul Islam (Image:Nazrul.jpg). This is a PD image, and the article is an FA.

I'll look into other images at commons:Category:Bangladesh to see if anything else is relevant. Thanks. --Ragib 02:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd also request using only black-and-white images to maintain conformity. Thanks. --Ragib 02:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here is a good guide as to choosing images. BBC bengali service conducted a survey in 2004 to find out the Greatest Bengalis. Bangladesh Observer has the full list here.


 * 1) Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
 * 2) Rabindranath Tagore
 * 3) Kazi Nazrul Islam
 * 4) A.K. Fazlul Haque
 * 5) Subhash Chandra Bose
 * 6) Begum Rokeya
 * 7) Jagdish Chandra Bose
 * 8) Ishwar Chandra Bidyasagar
 * 9) Maulana Bhasani
 * 10) Ram Mohan Roy
 * 11) Titumir
 * 12) Lalon Shah
 * 13) Satyajit Ray
 * 14) Amartya Sen

I suggest Sheikh Mujib, Tagore, Nazrul, and Begum Rokeya. All of these persons have PD images in their article pages. Thanks. --Ragib 03:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for resolving the copyright issue. --Ragib 03:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

RE:Image:Nocopyright.gif listed for deletion
Hey I'm fine with that image being deleted. When I uploaded it, I didn't realize that it was redundant. Thanks! Chrisbrl88 09:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Comparison of Internet forum software/w/wiki/Talk:Comparison of Internet forum software/w/index.php speedy deletion
The page was speedy deleted as a G8, in future, do not request protection on talk pages unless the damage is severe. Also, do not create pages in Talk: space if there is no corresponding article. Ans e ll 08:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe you misunderstood my protection request.I made that request in order to prevent a recurring link spam problem.I did not create that page but merely removed the spam links.I hope you understand.Peter O. (Talk) 08:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, in future please tag those type of pages as speedy G8. If you are worried about spamming on articles or talk pages consider adding cleanup-spam on the page. Pages will not be protected unless they have a consistent level of vandalism. I am not sure whether linkspam is considered as vandalism. You may need to review the protection policy and its discussion pages about that one though. Ans e ll  09:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

District maps
Don't remember really, it was a long time ago. Why? Renata 11:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Maps
Peter - I used a variety of maps to create the worldwide dataset that I now use for various mapping purposes. Baseline data (world administrative level 0 or countries) was from MapInfo (a free dataset distributed with their software). For all of the other levels of administrative data (I have admin levels for 1, 2, 3, 4, and even 5) I have used a variety of datasources that range from actual map images either captured or downloaded online (which are subsequently registered into the dataset and digitized as a separate layer) to actual map datasets that are available from freely distributed clearinghouses, government websites (such as countries, counties, etc.), special interest groups (such as the United Nations or ReliefWeb([]), nonprofits, and others. Some of the data were even captured off of Wikipedia maps and digitized into current form.

The trickier part is the referencing of the layer information. I have found that in many cases, Wikipedia lists the most up-to-date information for administrative layers 1 (and sometimes 2). For layers 2 and beyond, I had to rely on other sources and even do some generalization. Naming conventions are captured from a variety of sources - from government websites, to the United Nations, Wikipedia, World Gazetteer ([]), World Statesmen ([]), and even Statoids ([]) - although not to single out the website, but many times I have found data on Statoids to be inconsistent, incorrect, or old.

It is important to understand that once I digitize a lower level of administrative data (the higher the 'number', the 'lower' the level), the data is subsequently passed on to the higher level (lower number) to ensure that it has proper conflation between the layers. Make sense? For example, France has the country level (0), then regions (1), departments (2), arrondissements (3), cantons (4), and communes (5). All of this data must match the same external border (level 0) and internal borders (level 2 to level 1, level 3 to level 2, etc.). The data I use is in WGS84, which is a standard worldwide viewpoint for wall maps and such (as well as the standard for GPS systems).

So actual ownership of the data is now in my own hands, especially because the data is no longer in any original format. If you need source data for a particular country or administrative layer, let me know and I may be able to help you. Also, in the event that you should need a data layer in electronic format (either in MapInfo format or Shapefile format), I can also assist you (free of charge).

If you plan on moving any of my maps to Commons, I only ask that you give it the original name from English Wiki and quote me in the summary for the original source. Thanks! Rarelibra 02:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * What sort of shapefiles are you looking for? ESRI format? As far as licensing, once I would pass any on to you, they would be yours for your bidding, open license (just use me as the original source). ?Rarelibra 06:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Peter - sounds good. Let me know which country and administrative level(s) you need - contact me via email (I have the option available with Wiki) to discuss more. Rarelibra 12:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Camus' The Blood of the Hungarians
Hello Poccil, Thanks for helping sort this topic.I agree with you that it is better put into wikisource (the workings of which I am not familiar)FYI - the page in question is linked to an active Feature Article Candidacy.Im no expert on moving form wiki to wikisource but if this happens then it would be best if the link were preserved.I also plan to put it into the article itself.If you have a moment, please stop by and review it for FAC.Thank you in advance Istvan 16:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:800px-Oberländischer Kanal3.jpg
Thanks for fixing the tag.Moonraker88 13:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Image replacement tag
You left an image replacement tag on Image:Org_chart.jpg. Can I ask what your rationale was behind that? josh buddy, talk 17:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The Night image
Poccil, you've restored the replacement tag on this. Can you say where we are supposed to find a replacement? SlimVirgin (talk) 00:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, it's a strange instruction: find a free replacement, or else!If we actually had free images then the non-free one could be deleted, but not before. PoccilScript placed the same tag at Image:Bartleman image.jpg --gbambino 02:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

"Replace this image" tags
Is it really necessary to put this tag on every fair use image? Editors can already tell which images are fair use, but the tags interfere with the readability of the articles for non-editors (for whom the articles are written anyway). Wouldn't working with the rest of us to actually find free replacements for fair use images be much more helpful than constant tagging? IFCAR 11:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Still, look at your revision to Eagle Talon, tagging infobox images, which messes up the whole article. Stop with the tags, they compromise the readibility of the article, and make them look messy. Karrmann 10:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * --That was before I made changes to it later to better handle proper appearance.But still, I will stop this. Peter O. (Talk) 13:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It's also not all that likely that free images of actors playing characters are (or will ever be) available. This tagging thing is completely out of hand. Kafziel Talk 12:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

db-userbox template
I noticed you created the Db-userbox template with the intention to "be silent this time and not display a speedy deletion notice". May I ask why you would try to keep the deletion of userboxes "silent". Isn't part of the speedy deletion process to indicate on the page whether a page is up for speedy deletion. Harryboyles 08:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

The reason is that the last time I tried to create a template with a speedy deletion notice, it was deleted somehow.Thank you for your comment nonetheless.Perhaps I will try to make the notice look like a userbox.PoccilScript 09:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Please take a look at the template now.Respond at my talk page. PoccilScript 10:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Harryboyles 10:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Please don't edit my user page
Please respect the request on my user page not to edit it to bypass userbox redirects. WP:UM is not a policy, does not have consensus, and I do not support it. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Incomplete bot action
Hi Poccil, I expect all of your bot actions, like this are incomplete. They fail to bypass directory links, e.g., User OS:Microsoft Windows. What are the chances of you fixing this? Rfrisbietalk 21:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You wrote...
 * I thought I had completed all of the bypassing, but thank you for the report.Peter O. (Talk) 21:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, I haven't seen a bot or AWB user yet that completely fixes directories on the first try. Rfrisbietalk 21:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You wrote... It appears that I shouldn't do the "tl" or "tlp" replacing anymore, I have received complaints.Peter O. (Talk) 00:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You also received a complaint from me for not doing it. Go figure. I'd appreciate it if you would continue doing it on my directory pages. Otherwise, users will see a soon-to-be-deleted link with no redirect information left showing in the directory. Rfrisbietalk 00:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Category talk:Wikipedians who fear clowns
Why do you keep putting redlinked tags on Category talk:Wikipedians who fear clowns and User talk:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User clownfear as bogus replacements for User clownfear? Did you even READ what is on that category discussion page and user talk page?? Even if the template has been deprecated, the point of the messages is to discuss it's resurrection, and a link that goes to the wrong place doesn't do anyone any good! (The link you're trying to create is already at the top of the talk page, BTW.)

Having the example of the template (i.e., " User clownfear ") is very important to the discussion, as it points to the template that should no longer be used, as well as demonstrating to people why they should not continue using it.

I'm not going to get in a WP:3RR edit-war with you, but please, at least explain your reason on one of the talk pages!! &mdash;141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 23:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Complaint addressed.Peter O. (Talk) 00:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * And I took care of User talk:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User clownfear ... now just keep that pesky bot away from Talk pages, because of the historical contexts. :-) &mdash;141.156.240.102 (talk|contribs) 05:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Please stop your bot...
...from continually replacing User firefox on my talk page with User:The Raven's Apprentice/Userboxes/User Firefox. That isn't what the person wrote, and it results in a broken link to the template namespace.I understand that the original userbox has been superseded, but there's no need to remove non-transcluded instances.Thank you.&mdash;David Levy 23:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * My script is in the process of correcting this by replacing "tl" with "tlu" so the links work properly.PoccilScript 01:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The broken link was one concern, but I could have fixed that myself.The person who posted the comment on my talk page specifically referenced User firefox, and replacing this destroys the historical context.(The statement applies to that template as it existed at the time, not to the userspace page that subsequently replaced it).Please ensure that your bot refrains from editing my talk page.Thank you.&mdash;David Levy 02:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Bypassing "tl" links are tricky because they should be changed in directories.I commend Poccil for doing an essentially thankless job, and trying to please everyone!

Rfrisbietalk 02:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * My talk page isn't a directory, and I merely requested that Poccil's bot stop editing it.Poccil responded by implying that the bot would edit my talk page differently next time.This did not address my primary concern.&mdash;David Levy 02:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I know it isn't. I understand the difference between history and current events. That's why what he's doing is tricky. I still think he's acting in good faith. Rfrisbietalk 03:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no doubt that Poccil is acting in good faith.&mdash;David Levy 03:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * PoccilScript, thank you for teaching me something today (namely "tlu"). If I've one suggestion, I'd mark your edits as minor. I for one didn't need to see the "You have new messages" message. Xiner 02:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC


 * I didn't need to see it twice, and I hope not to see it again because of this bot.&mdash;David Levy 02:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * For the record, I saw it three times. Xiner 02:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:Vector version available
I'm not sure if it was your edits or ChrisRuvolo's, but see Template_talk:Vector version available ... AnonMoos 21:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ImreNagy.ogg
Thanks for uploading Image:ImreNagy.ogg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot.For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 03:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Finished.Peter O. (Talk) 03:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

PoccilScript and Republic of Texas image
I'm a bit confused by the image (linked in artice Republic of Texas). It seems to be an empty png image now, and I can't find an earlier version in the history, but it would be reasonable to assume an actual image existed at some point in time. I noticed it was marked redundant and deleted by your script; could this have caused it to disappear? Perhaps something went wrong when the file was copied to the Commons? Do you have an idea what went wrong here? Jochietoch 08:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you mean, you actually see an image (I don't; it could also be some problem at Commons), or that the image was already empty before your script marked it? Jochietoch 08:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:McnamaraOlympiacos.jpg
I disagree with your assessment of the image.I have provided reasoning for fair use on the image description page. -- Darry2385 14:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Userbox migration scope
Please do not have your bot automatically replace redirects without first making sure that those moves actually fit in the scope of WP:UM.Moving non-controversial userboxes, such as User trillian, only creates more annoyance and provocation, which is counter to the goal.Please check whether boxes are actually controversial before having your bot replace their links. —AySz88\ ^ - ^ 17:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Curious.
Hi, I saw you change a file link or something on my usertalk page. I don't mind, but I'm not entire sure what you did. What's this userbox migration thing all about? I'm not angry I'm just a bored student looking for something to do instead of his coursework.Simondrake 22:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. =]
Thanks for changing the userboxes on my page. ^_^ CustardToast 00:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Is image relocation an intentional part of the script's edits?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anna_Benson&diff=80281765&oldid=78303037 - I'm used to seeing images on the right side when on or near the top of an article... 24.19.35.187 03:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Source licensing for image
I was wondering about my Image:Plumbingsurveillancelightvectorpainting.jpg listed for deletion, if the problem might be the lack of licensing source, compatability, etc..If so, I've tried to address this possible problem by putting the image on GFDL-self (since it's something I took myself, and could release GFDL).Please let me know if this is acceptable. Glogger 06:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

SoraSafe
Thanks for putting it on AFD, I wasn't sure how the best way to handle deleting said article. Cheers V. Joe 16:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Userbox writing
I don't appreciate someone coming onto my talk page and changing things without my say.At least you could have sent me a message requesting that I do it. Jsp3970 18:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks:
Thanks for changing the user box on my user box page via you Poccilscript account. Have a good day.... :) Spawn Man 01:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:12ozmouse ep10.jpg listed for deletion
I didn't think that original image was a low quality file, but since you thought otherwise, I have uploaded a higher resolution capture of the same image. Justin Norman 20:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No worries.There are black regions because that particular episode of the show goes into a pseudo-widescreen format for dramatic effect.I thought it would be good to keep this effect intact for the screenshot to show the episode's visual distinction from others.Justin Norman 21:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

please explain your speedy deletion of my article on Graphic Display Systems
Hi there, recently i have been working on wikipedia explaining what graphic panel systems are and have published 1 page with images. I wanted to return to my work and update the page today and have found that it has to my horror (as i worked on it for hours!!) now been deleted. Please can you reinstate the page and perhaps explain to me how i can word my articles differently as i am a new user and have only published 1 previous article which was accepted "Roller Banner Stands". I saw in wikipedia that there are no articles whatsoever about these subjects and have spent a long long time researching my work. Any advice would be greatly appreciated as i would like to post more articles on a variety of different subjects. Thank you for your time.Peter lowe 15:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again
Thanks for getting back so quick. I have already searched and there are articles for point of sale but not any that provide really good information in any detail. I just spent most of today reading through magazines and visiting printing websites as part of my article and i'm really gutted i've wasted all this time. My other page Roller Banners seemed to be OK. As you probably realised from my log, i spent along time on this and was quite proud of it. I have loads more to add to it also. Please let me know what i should do about carrying on and getting my article back. Thanks for your time.Peter lowe 16:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC) ==I've just been searching again and this is a subject where wikipedia has hardly anything relating to my subject. I'm certainly not advertising anyone's products and have a list ready that i researched today of really helpful and informative sources. Perhaps i should go to the commons and ask for undeletion?? Please let me know as i have put in a lot of time and research on this and would like to be a wikipedia publisher. A good friend of mine has published articles on fairtrade and he loves it as he really knows his stuff and i'd like to publish more. I remain ready for advice. Thanks for your time...Peter lowe 16:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

==Hi there. I apologise for writing again but i am really sad that my work has been taken straight off of wikipedia. I have read through the rules governing deletion and really can't see how my article could be viewed as advertising given the fact that i have mentioned no companies at all, have no form of commercial information on the article and wanted to continue to write in the article providing sources of some excellent information.. I have searched through wikipedia and have found point of sale pages and display pages but not anything really similar to my article deleted by your self. I understand that as a new writer perhaps my wording could be different or better but surely a better way for you to to go about things would be to be to perhaps advise me first and then delete if you still believe that my article was advertising?? Please can you respond and advise me as i really have put in alot of time on this and feel like i've been treated quite harshly especially as it seems you are no longer resonding to my talk postings. I hope to hear from you soon so that i won't have to take this further and ask for advice from another administrator. Sorry to be so direct but i am quite upset by your deletion as it paints me in a bad light and seems to make me out to be a writer not interested in expanding wikipedia as a serious hobby.

Articles for deletion/R Valdez
Hello.I took the liberty of making a strike edit to your co-nomination comments at Articles for deletion/R Valdez to reflect the activity at Articles for deletion/Valdezian.I also added the AfD tag to the Undecided Party article. I hope you don't mind, and obviously feel free to revert or otherwise clarify.Thank you, Satori Son 18:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

==Thanks for getting back to me and i appreciate all your help. The article Graphic Display Systems took me ages to write (i'm still learning) and i'd like to link it to other articles i'm planning similar to my Roller Banner article (showing people how to use different display tools and what they are ideal for). Please could you tell me how i actually get the article back without having to rewrite it all? I've got some fantastic sources for diagrams, up to date information, standards for how graphic display systems should be built and lots of different pictures to choose from but it all takes a hell of a long time to get it all down. I'm learning – i promise and mean to make a really worthwhile article that will provide as much information as possible. Today i was fighting disillusionment but i feel much better now. Thanks again Peter lowe 19:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion review
Thanks for your efforts on this. I moved it to a user subpage so he can work on it there. Cheers, Fang Aili talk 19:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help from yourself and User:Fang Aili. They certainly have provided me with some extremely interesting reading and i see the points expressed! I'm just going to have to re word alot of my article but i'm sure that once this is done it will be a worthwhile addition to wikipedia. Just a quick one – on How to edit a page as you read down onto minor edits there is a quite offensive remark in there. Am i being stupid about this or should those words be there? I just saw this as i was reading through and it's slightly weird!! Thanks again. Once i'm finished, which may take a while, i promise to show you my work so you can give it the lowdown. Peter lowe 22:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TiVo.png)
Thanks for the heads-up... I actually replaced the image licensing with a better understanding of what "fair use" means.The image was created in a graphics editor on my computer, and is not the copyrighted TiVo logo. HokieRNB 17:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image
Actually, you added the no liscense tag right when I was adding all the information to the picture, which caused an edit conflict. So, I have now added all the proper information. Thanks. -- Mikedk9109  (talk)  23:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Attribution for Image Obtained

 * Obtained permission from image owner to use Image:PI Wawona.jpg to illustrate Project Insight article [11:57:28 (PST) Monday November 13 2006].
 * This image is the "free equivalent" to which the legal language about fair use in the display generated by the "subst:rfu" template refers.
 * Added attribution summary; commented out "subst:rfu" tag.
 * Must anything more be accomplished to forestall deletion of the image, seven days after Peter O. tagged it "subst:rfu" (14:08, 10 November 2006 UTC), as threatened in the edit summary?


 * (This is a copy of a message posted earlier on Image talk:PI Wawona.jpg.It is reposted here for the attention of Poccil/Peter O., who is free to delete this copywhen it is no longer needed.) Athaenara   (talk)  06:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Image: Copyright Violation?
I recently submitted a photograph taken by the Ohio Department of Transportation, which you deleted because youclaim it does not have copyright status.I explicitly entered the copyright status and gave links to the original as well as whom I contacted regarding the copyright of the photograph.I was given explicit permission to use the photograph which I stated in the image description, yet you claim that it has none.This is the fourth or fifth time you have done this.Why?I am pretty sure I wrote my image description in English, though maybe I should check. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polypmaster (talk • contribs)

User pages
Leave people's user pages alone.Rlevse 16:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for changing the user box on my user page. Lady Nimue of the Lake 21:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
I just noticed you fixed the userbox on my page.Much appreciated!

Image:DeKlyn's Chocolates - 1922.JPEG
I removed the deletion tag you added to this image because it was license tagged incorrectly.It isn't fair use, it is a Newspaper from 1922, making it public domain.The license has been fixed.--Isotope23 16:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hotpants.jpg
I removed the deletion tag you added to this image because it was license tagged correctly. It is fair use and its' source was fixed. Power level (Dragon Ball) 17:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Sputniks Down
Hi. Can you re-check this page? I've added a lot more content, along with various credible sources. Thanks {Dianogah 22:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)}

Reverted change
In the Pokémon species articles, we write about each Pokémon as if we're talking about all the Pokémon in the species.According to the Pokémon Collaborative Project's style guide,"Like sheep and fish, the plural of Pokémon is the same as the singular, and the same is true of each species, i.e., “One Snorlax, two Snorlax, green Snorlax, blue Snorlax”. Remember that you are talking about a species generally in the introduction, characteristics and video games sections - make sure you use 'they are' not 'it is'."I can see how this could be ugly with one-off Pokémon like Rayquaza and Celebi...I know!I suggest you start a discussion topic at the Pokémon Collaborative Project's talk page (where it'll get the most attention) about this problem.Sorry about the rapid revert, but generally, Pokémon in articles are referred to as plurals.--Brandon Dilbeck 00:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I'm currently undergoing an Editor review, and am trying to get a large amount of replies. I am sending messages to those who left me a message on my talk page as a way of getting the word out. I encourage you to add your two cents to the review! Thanks for your time, and Happy Thanksgiving! FireSpik e Editor Review! 20:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
Did you like this? leave any comments at my talk page! It's the meow on my signature!  K yo cat  meow! 23:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

...
sorry for the psp picture im new at this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tejaspulisetty (talk • contribs)