User talk:Roberth Edberg/Talk Archive 2

Crown of immortality - after a while
Hi Roberth, after a bit of a rough start I have to say the crown of immortality is looking up. In my humble opinion it now looks much less pretentious then the first go, and is actually getting there on the way to being a valuable addition. I hope you also agree it has much improved since the original start-off. Bit sad you got caught up in a debate about the value from first go, cannot say that will never happen again in other articles, but I hope you will not let that stop you from contributing. Have a nice stay and keep up the good work. Arnoutf 20:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanx Arnoutf, For a while there I almost lost my trust in Wikipedia. After some discussions with other wikipedians I found out that, this is the true essense of the data itself. We have all different views of things and as wikipedia serves as a sort of pan-brain databank, things get complicated. By reading about Fisheaters I realized the importance of participation. I will, as I already have done, continue to contribute as well as promote others to contribute as well. --Roberth Edberg 20:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issue with Arthur J Droge}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk: and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk: with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 09:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, As a newbe Wikipedian it takes a while to get into'it. I rewrote the article and commented it on Talk:. --Roberth Edberg 11:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry that happened, but it wasn't me. I'm not an admin so I can't delete articles.  I only tag them.  Did you use the  template and leave a note on the talk page? --Butseriouslyfolks 15:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe the admin who took care of it was rushing. If you go back to the page, it will give you an edit box now.  Find the fifth square bullet near the top and click the link to "deletion log".  That will tell you who deleted it, when and why (if the admin used the edit summary).  Sorry again! --Butseriouslyfolks 20:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

User box creator with template
I noticed you made a userbox here are two useful userbox creators you might be interested in
 * Userbox Creator with template - designed to easily generate Userboxes and has builtin template.
 * Userbox Creator with template has religious image database - designed to easily generate Religious Userboxes and has builtin template.

Java7837 20:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Authorization to use your image
Dear Roberth Edberg,

The Positivo Informática would like to request authorization to reproduce your image "Darius I the Great's inscription.jpg" for permanent use in our CD-ROMS and on websites kept by Positivo Informática, e.g. Portal Educacional (www.educacional.com.br), commercialized in Brazil and of restricted access to registered students and websites customized for some of our conected schools. We found this image on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Darius_I_the_Great%27s_inscription.jpg. We would like to receive information about how you do expect the credit lines to appear in the material. Please, let us hear from you as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Claudia Cruz Divisão de Portais - Iconografia Positivo Informática S. A. iconografia@educacional.com.br —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.15.218.39 (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC).


 * It isn't my image. It was Aryobarzan who uploaded it to Wikipedia. --Roberth Edberg 23:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seb logo.jpg
Hello Roberth Edberg, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Seb logo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Roberth Edberg. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Aspis.gif
Hello Roberth Edberg, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Aspis.gif) was found at the following location: User:Roberth Edberg/Sandbox. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 10:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikibot
If content author in Joomla! CMS use many times WiKiBot, Google PR of his site go down. Workaround this problem via add code rel="nofollow" to each hyperlink generated by WiKiBot on lines 129,131,136,138,142,144 in wikibot.php. Please add this to next release.


 * Oops! I don't like to cause problems for others. Wikibot upgraded to version 1.5.1! Downloadable from here: here. Thanks! --Roberth Edberg 19:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

modding wikibot
Hi Robert, really like the bot or Joomla. I wondered, is there an easy way to modify it so that it will replace content anywhere regardless of the component - for example in com_lms (Joomlearn) I have questions which would be good if I could put wikipedia links in the questions?

Many thanks,

Mark
 * Sorry Mark, Don't have time to dig into how such thing could be possible. A contentsbot only works on content as things work today. --Roberth Edberg 19:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

modifying wikibot - so one could use it in German
Hi Robert, never since I tried your wikibot in one of my joomla installations, I succeded in using it. It always tries to connect to [| ge.wikipedia.org]. The German Site of Wikipedia starts with de - de.wikipedia.org. Probably you can change your wikibot that way one day. Thanks Helmer from Radebeul/Dresden Germany


 * Strange! Have you checked you're Joomla Fish configuration? Must be something wrong there! --Roberth Edberg 20:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiBot and Joomla 1.5 Support
Many have asked for native 1.5 Joomla support and I'm working on it. As beeing a father of three little doughters, time is limited. But soon...
 * It's now fixed and published. --Roberth Edberg 07:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

\Roberth

AfD nomination of Joomla WikiBot
An article that you have been involved in editing, Joomla WikiBot, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. -- Kl4m  Talk Contrib 02:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Copticcross.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Copticcross.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. OsamaK 18:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2010 could be coming to Stockholm!
I'm leaving you a note as you may be interested in this opportunity.

People from all six Nordic Wiki-communities (sv, no, nn, fi, da and is) are coordinating a bid for Wikimania 2010 in Stockholm. I'm sending you a message to let you know that this is occurring, and over the next few months we're looking for community support to make sure this happens! See the bid page on meta and if you like such an idea, please sign the "supporters" list at the bottom. Tack (or takk), and have a wonderful day! Mike H. Fierce! 09:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:9 billion names of God.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:9 billion names of God.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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 STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Alex Jones review
Roberth, do you know the exact line Jones introduced his claim about the movie's aims in? I don't have time to watch the clip at the moment, and I'd like to avoid the appearance of original synthesis (John says X, but Bob says Y). Someguy1221 (talk) 17:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I changed the text and added his words from the clip, which spread wider light over Alex's interpretation of the movie. --Roberth Edberg (talk) 22:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Zeitgeist Movement
I have nominated The Zeitgeist Movement, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/The Zeitgeist Movement. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Phirazo (talk) 04:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Zeitgeist
Does it make sense for Wiki to have an article on "Two Girls One Cup" but not for Zeitgeist? Is that really logical? Why don't you ask them to delete that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kharelt (talk • contribs) 02:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Matrix-syncronicity.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Matrix-syncronicity.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 10:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Controversial Film
Category:Controversial Film, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 16:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Zeitgeist
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Sloane (talk) 19:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've reported your violation of 3RR at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.--Sloane (talk) 21:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That's good. Then we can get an outside opinion about it. --Roberth Edberg (talk) 23:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * My opinion is that you should be blocked for 3RR. So I have. 12h William M. Connolley (talk) 23:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I just wan't to state that each undo included an appeal for a discussion about it, but those who erase my edit's didn't take part in discussion. And please consider the fact that it's a controversial film, that media ignores, which make statement's director about a sequel Important. --Roberth Edberg (talk) 23:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Discussion, or trying to discuss, does earn you points. But it doesn't get you off the hook for edit warring William M. Connolley (talk) 00:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Not my intention either. Just to point out that, there may be personal interests involved here. I have doubts about the neutrality of the other part. --Roberth Edberg (talk) 09:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)