User talk:Regular Daddy

My concern about your username (Werkbot)
Hello, Werkbot, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here? Your name implies you are a "bot" (automated process) which is problematic according to WP:USERNAME

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:
 * If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
 * If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as asking for a "third opinion", or requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Admins usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
 * If you decide to just go ahead and change your username, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under the new username: simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account.

Let me reassure you that my writing here means I don't think your username is grossly, blatantly, or obviously inappropriate; such names get reported straight to Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), or blocked on sight. This is more a case where opinions might differ, and it would be good to reach some consensus — either here or at WP:RFC/NAME. So I look forward to a friendly discussion, and to enjoying your continued participation on Wikipedia. Thank you again! Dweller 14:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC) --Dweller 14:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Uhh... I'm quite human. "werkbot" is just my attempt at making a commentary joke about being a carbon-based production unit, whose social significance seems limited to my output, or work. It's my online alias. All that matters is the tax I pay, and the money I make, and so on. To add that gothic touch, I Germanicized it to "werk". Would somebody who programmed a bot NAME it "Bot"? That's not clever, is it? Anycrap, I'm as real as any of the rest of you, but considering I live in Los Angeles county, that might not weigh an awful lot.

Oh. Just read the username rules. That explains it. Hmm. Well. Does this mean I have to change?


 * I'm afraid I believe so. If you go to WP:CHU you can request a name change, so your "edit history" moves across with you to your new identity. Lots of Wikipedians change names for all sorts of reasons. It doesn't reflect badly on you - we know we have lots of rules, which are difficult for newbies to take on board. --Dweller 15:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Your username
Hi. You don't yet seem to have requested a name change. Please do so as soon as possible. --Dweller 08:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

My monitor melted down - just got the replacement. Off to the namey-changey-thingy. You called me a newbie. Only the truth can sting like that.

David Beckham Photo
Thanks for loading the great photo of David Beckham up; it's really great. Probably the best action shot I've seen of himWikipediatastic (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:BolsaChica JUL2009.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:BolsaChica JUL2009.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 17:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:JustinBraun2010.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JustinBraun2010.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, 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, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. 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 Non-free content, 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 created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 11:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)