User talk:Richardjames444/Archive 1

Marc Harrison
Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! In response to your question....a good number of editors with nothing to do at work tend to patrol the list of recent changes (see the left sidebar) to make sure no one is vandalizing pages. I saw your recent addition to the ALS page, but noticed the article link for Marc Harrison was red-linked, meaning it was pointing to a nonexistent page. I checked your recent contributions and saw that you had recently created the Harrison page, and decided to move it to help with the name format. Thanks for your contributions, and feel free to keep poking around here! -- H·G (words/works) 19:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio at Philip D. Reed
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your creation of the article, Philip D. Reed, but we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Please see Copyright problems for more information on this topic, or generally, Policies and guidelines. Please do not remove the copyright violation notice placed in the article or repost the suspected infringing text. However, if you would like to rewrite the article in your own words, follow the link in the posted notice to create a temporary subpage. If your new article is appropriate, and not a further copyright violation, the reviewing administrator will move that new article into place once the copyright status of the original has been resolved. Happy editing! Aguerriero ( talk ) 18:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Islam
Only administrators can s-protect an article. BhaiSaab talk 19:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Clinton Foundation picture
The question is not whether it's fair use or not right now (as it probably could qualify). However, we need a source for the image (in this case, the URL of the original image). Once that's done, we can get to fair use. Also, the image should be Image:MG 9624 copy.JPG, i deleted the redundant copy of it. Cheers. Sasquatch t|c 19:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, i'll start adding stuff in. Thanks :-) Sasquatch t|c 19:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok
Regarding the discussion, wherabouts should I go to? --Irishpunktom\talk 13:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is discussion on the renaming, altough I still want an "Islamic history". Muslim history I want to deal with as the history of Muslims, People like Akbar, Timur the Mughal Empire, the History of Timbuktu, etc. Because this is the Muslim history.  Islamic history concerns the history of the development of Islam as a religion, for example, the sciences of Hadith, the hadith collectors, and people lik Ali, Umar, Abu Bakr, etc.--Irishpunktom\talk 13:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

New Page Patrol
Wow, you beat me by mere seconds on the speedies for Da-nuh and Marina's Crack LOL!! Keep up the good work... --Bookgrrl 02:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Kelly Gaffney
Hey, I saw you placed a merge box on the article I just created on ADA Kelly Gaffney from Law & Order: Trial by Jury. The reason I created the article was to add more of the information known about her from the show, as certain specific details about her life really don't belong in the show's main article. I plan on further expanding the article. Further, most Law & Order characters have their own articles, including some which have been made on characters who have only briefly appeared. Utilizing certain resources, though, my intent is to expand on what we have listed on Kelly Gaffney on the show page, incorporating more specifics about her character, particularly in regards to cases prosecuted. Is that amenable? Michael 00:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hudud and Hudood
Hi, Richard. Thanks for your attention to Hudud. I did some digging, which I should have done at first :-( and found Hudood Ordinance. I think that's where I meant to add the info. --Uncle Ed 14:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Solitto deletion
It was REALLY tough to do that, but I thought I would be as polite as possible, I'm always going toleave them a message in their talk page. Wildthing61476 16:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

deletion
It's quite alright, not your fault at all. He's a little hot headed and it just showing what kind of person he is. I've reported him to the admins, so maybe they can talk with him. Wildthing61476 16:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

deletion
RIchard, I found this whole process to be hypocritical and without accountability. One can argue with facts and based upon the "rules" and such as outlined, others google a subject or person, tear one apart with insulting attacks based not on verifiable info. but opinion, and not respond to points well made. I've learned well enough by now, but absolutely unprofessional and hypocritical standards to delete the artist page. I'd like to discuss with admin..

deletion
Richard, again, I find your behaviour beyond reprehensible and unethical.

As such, I protest your bad faith:

Subject of article requests this page be kept as it qualifies in all regards of wikipedia article. Full edit request if necessary or amenable.

There were no requests for deletion until the below:

Author deletion requests made in bad faith: Sometimes an author will ask to have content removed because they feel frustrated with the project and resent it profitting from their work. However, they licensed their work to be used in this way and they have no legal basis for asking for its removal. The article must be clearly "mistakenly created", for example if the author created it unwittingly by misspelling a name.


 * blah blah blah...I can't hear you...lahlahlah...wow, beyond reprehensible and unethical !!! Can I tag my own page with a POV tag. I think I will.

deletion
Violent attack "Boom! Thar she blows" Richardjames444 18:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC) I find your display of violence disconcerting and inappropriate.-- 19:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm shocked, shocked... backatcha, son. I'm done with this conversation. Richardjames444 19:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow! A real and live fascist librarian! Lovely.!

I call Godwin's law. The rules clearly state that you have to stop bothering me now. Richardjames444 20:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Finally...
Among other issues established here, User:Wildthing61476 is a liar that you support, you are violent in your actions and words, and you in fact do function with fascist tendencies in the destructin of viable, verifiable and notable information. Your actions as an editor bring into full doubt your ability to hold a position as Master of Library and Information Science with objectivity and honor. As your behaviour and tendencies here are obviously a true indication of your character as one who out of spite cannont be trusted but to tear out pages that you don't agree with, to burn books and trash documents at Hagley and elsewhere.

I find all of this amusing, as with guerilla performance and tactical interaction, I am laughing as I play. I didn't want an entry for myself from the beginning. I just thought it would be a laugh to create an entry for earth man.

Sweet little country club you've assembled here! What fun. Cheers.


 * WP:CHILL Richardjames444 21:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm about to violate WP:CIVIL Here but I NEED to get this off my chest: what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. Wildthing61476 21:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I did file a complaint to the admins regarding his behavior today yes. Wildthing61476 21:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

"Richard James" who posted *I am currently an archivist at the **REDACTED AGAIN**, don't apologize for me. I take full responsibility for my words and actions. I have no problem with your deletions but that there is little or no transparency here for your actions as when you decide that an article or a person is notable, can be created and posted and uncontested for days, and then deleted on a whim, an emotion, or because of a disagreement or hurt feelings, and then shout out as you delete an accepted and uncontested article, ""Boom! Thar she blows" Richardjames444 18:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC) And Richard James http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Richardjames444 you had posted your employment with **REDACTED AGAIN**, and your email address there is as public as your posts and actions here.

It is too easy and prevalent for people here to hide in anonymity, yet the lives of others are on the block for your verbal attacks unless checked. Rick Kulacki, Jr. of Baltimore :  Someone googled me, so I felt it perfectly appropriate to google the "authorities" here. And "years ago" is a lie, unless you cant' recall last sept. of '05, and if you can't recall within the last year, what qualifies your mental capacity to participate here. What are you ashamed of. You vote for the pope to die, claim that last year "was years ago" and give and take points for someone's death. Your words and denials beg the question of your morality and ethics and your agenda and attacks from the beginning. And then as in your death game as I suggested earlier, you state above "I award you no points". WTF

I requested conversation with admin. before you deleted. No response. Your country club sucks. **REDACTED RACIST COMMENTS**

Report him to VP:Vandal. Wildthing61476 01:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Glassdisease.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Glassdisease.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 01:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Crizzled_glass.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Crizzled_glass.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

quer in arshloch is back == ==

user:Itemsubcriber reposted the article you deleted yesterday, apparently unchanged.Richardjames444 15:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I've deleted it again and left him a message on his talk page. — Mets 501  (talk) 15:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Crank mail re. deletion of The Serozza article
These are too good to keep to myself. The AFD discussion is here

Dear Richard,

I am writing to you about my article; The Serozza. I am also writing to you on the behalf of The Royal Family of The Serozza. They are not at all happy with you or wikipedia. I believe you wrote, and I actually quote "I changed the nomination to speedy- it's straight up nonsense and not worth debating. Richardjames444 13:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)." NONSENSE? I beg to differ. It may not be worth anything to you, but... it is to those families who are part of it! It's people like you that make me sick to know your out there. I can't believe that Wikipedia let you delete this page. I am putting forth a message to Wikipedia to have it UNDELETED. Part of The Royal Family and I (a prince of the royal family) would like to know why you thought what you thought of the tribal page? It does not matter what you or anyone else think, we are a tribe, and no one will tell us any different. We are Royal and hold it up with pride and stature. Just because we are a new kind of tribe, which no one has heard of for over 2000 years, does not mean that we are not. I look forward to your reply. Regards,

Richard, The reason we care so much, even though it does not matter, I mean, (The Hilton Hotel didn't care), is because to be demeaned in a way that Wikipedia did to us, is sad, because we help our local community, the internet community, we try to open our minds to such a thing as Wikipedia, and what do we get in return? TRASHED! I will make sure that everyone who has a connection through and to me (including several major political figures), knows how Wikipedia treated our tribe. We do not need Wikipedia to "recognize" us, because we are already in talks with the United nations to be recognized as the first Worldly tribe, not of a country or nation. I wished that Wikipedia and The Serozza could work together, but I guess not. It may not be worth anything to you, but... it is to those families who are part of it! As a prominent member of The Serozza, I am not personally offended that you did what you did, I mean, if I got that way with every LITTLE person that acted like a child, I would go crazy. I cannot worry myself with Wikipedia or you...You are nothing but a lonely person who has nothing better to do than to sit around and delete people off of Wikipedia, because you don't like what they wrote. If Everyone did that, there would be no Bible. What would you say if people called the Royal Family of The UK NONSENSE? We are just as real of a Royal Family as they. His Royal Highness, The Crown Prince of The Serozza

Response to your message
I am not an admin, so I did not delete the article. (I may have tagged it, though.) I've checked the deletion log, and it appears that the article has been restored:  Littleton, Colorado. -- Merope 15:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

George Allen article
You wrote:
 * You just beat me to the delete of the so-called 'apology' by Allen concerning the Macaca incident. Richardjames444 20:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Heh -- thanks much. I swear, keeping that article kosher is like playing whack-a-mole. --GGreeneVa 20:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Redrot.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Redrot.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Richard, as you have consistently shown contemp for the copyright of authors, photographers and publishers, you may consider studying copyright law, the Berne convention, as all published images, whether with or w/out notice as of 1989 and onward are copyright the photographer, writer, and or publisher the moment written or photographed. As is the standard, prior to 1989, all images and text must also include the copyright notice.

As wikipedia claims all rights thereafter publication herein, you are claiming and passing on the rights of the rightful copyright holder. You have no right whatsoever to claim fair use whence you have shown no attempt to ascertain the owner of the actual copyright, nor shown any contractual agreement by law to publish those rights under your meager attempts of reasearch. As wikipedia itself will not allow articles herein as legitimate references to other articles, you are in effect stealing other's images and text without the faintest of attempts at procuring rights. Fair use pertains only to legitimate reference, in which in the case of wikipedia is rightfully contested by a majority of academics.

You may consider studying photography, and learning how to shoot photos that others may appropriate without your due credit and consideration. Have you inquired as to the photographer's name, or considered requesting written permission from the publishers themselves before posting images. Do not steal for your glory, for those who flatter are serving only themselves. "Content must not violate any copyright. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL. " you cannot license others' contributions under GFDL." without their written consent.  How can you claim to give the right of the copyright holder to anyone for commercial or any right whatsoever.


 * Cripes, there's some kind of puritan copyright bot on the loose.

your email
Thanks, Richard, for your email, which I've answered. As I said, I think it wisest just to ignore this for now; hopefully it will pass. Bucketsofg✐ 13:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Laurentdion
Again? *sigh* Ok I'll post in the RfC Wildthing61476 13:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Yakasudo
Hi Richard. Yes, I agree, very annoying. My advice is to delete the vandalism and ignore. Also, I suggest that you stop referring to him by his old username, since that seems to only aggravate him to further vandalism. Best, Buck  ets  ofg  17:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Again, Richard, I encourage you to ignore what's-his-name and not use his old user name. Buck  ets  ofg 18:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Ava Lowery Page
Hi RJ,

We're, once again, working on the Ava Lowery article, where you were once quite active, so I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to participate. - F.A.A.F.A. 20:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)