User talk:SixTimesBlue

Vandalism/Block Discussion
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. -- Satori Son 04:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol, you obviously don't watch The Colbert Report. :-P All changes to Reality and subsequent pages containing "Reality has become a commodity" and any variation thereof were all provoked by Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report and are therefore a joke. --SixTimesBlue 05:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

And are actually all vandalism. Mak (talk)  05:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Right you are, right you are. I'm sure no one had any intentions of true vandalism, and I'd be willing to bet Stephen Colbert himself wouldn't have wanted anything of this magnitude to have actually happened. But one suggestion though, perhaps something should be done about Colbert's future shows mentioning extensive editing of Wikipedia pages, ie. contacting Comedy Central about the matter. I myself will proceed to do so. --SixTimesBlue 05:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much! --SixTimesBlue 07:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd assume you were blocked because a flood of Colbert fans tends to make for itchy fingers over block buttons. Were you planning on making helpful contributions from this point on? – Luna Santin  (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course. I didn't even know I was blocked until it wouldn't let me add to the Talk Page for the Narnia film series.  --SixTimesBlue 08:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * May I also ask why you agree that the admins "run this site based on their own personal vendettas, not logic"? That does not sound like someone who is truly sorry for the vandalism and intends to only contribute productively to the encyclopedia. -- Satori Son 15:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hold up, I didn't actually say that I agreed with it. In fact, I don't even remember why I said "I can see that".  All I can remember about that is that I thought it was rather humourous that someone had the nads to come on here and say that about the admins.  I do thoroughly understand why the admins do what they do, and quite honestly, it is a good thing (this place is pretty much the only place I come to for research means).  What I don't understand, however, is why I was blocked for a single vandalism incident.  In my mind (which, of course, does not represent the views of the admins), that would merit perhaps a large warning at best, saving an actual block for a second (or perhaps third) event.  No offence to any of the admins, but I do agree with Luna somewhat as to why I was blocked (Colbert = itchy trigger finger).  But of course, you have your own views.  --SixTimesBlue 10:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, Satori, didn't you yourself say I could be blocked if I "continue in this manner"? Why then was I blocked after one incident?  --SixTimesBlue 10:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * And exactly what views do you assume that I have? I firmly agree with Luna Santin : you were blocked quickly after one incident because Wikipedia was undergoing a massive vandal attack from Colbert show viewers.  Vandal edits were occurring at a rate of several dozen per minute, and the admins could not keep up without hitting the block button more quickly than they otherwise would have.  Whether that was appropriate or not is debatable, but I will point out that Wikipedia does have an official policy called Ignore all rules, which basically says that if rules or procedures prevent you from properly maintaining the project, then ignore them. And that is exactly what happened. Many, many new users were blocked the same time as you for only one vandal edit.
 * Actually, I was more than willing to give you a second chance and support your unblock request (although I must disclose that the final decision is not up to me). I only asked one question to see if you were apologetic about the vandalism or whether you agreed with the vandal that came to your page and commented. I'm not sure whether you answered it or not. If you do deserve a second chance, I truly hope you get it. -- Satori Son 19:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * To answer your questions...
 * -- Yes, I am apologetic about the vandalism, and all I really want to do is contribute to the project in a helpful manner.
 * -- No, I do not agree with the anon poster who visited my page.
 * -- When I made the comment that you have your own views, all I meant was that I was acknowledging the fact that what I think isn't necessarily what you think, and that you (and everyone else, for that matter) have your own opinions.
 * Also, reading over my own posts on this page, I noticed that some of the things I've written could be taken as rude, though I assure you this is not the case. (That is the main trouble with written words, as they can't convey emotion and attitude exactly as intended :-P )  But anyway, in your opinion, should I repost the unblock appeal once more?  --SixTimesBlue 23:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I say post it one more time. Now that you've had some time to reflect and participate in discussion here, it doesn't appear, to me at least, that you are at all likely to vandalize again.  And it is kind of a shame that you got permanently blocked after just one bad joke edit because a very large group was doing the exact same thing at the exact same time (even though I really don't think the banning admins had much of a choice given the extreme situation). Hopefully, you will catch the eye of an understanding admin who will give you one more chance.
 * In your unblock request, I would request that the reviewing administrator please review the full comments on this page. Best of luck and I hope things work out for you. -- Satori Son 01:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Dunham
Just out of curiosity, did you happen to be watching his special on Comedy Central when you updated the section on Peanut and Santa Ana? Because I happened to be looking up both Dunham and Santa Ana, and I thought the coincidence too uncannily amusing. hellenica 01:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Caspian Trilogy
(Note: The discussion that was copy/pasted from this page has been removed from my page. If you still wish to participate in the discussion, leave me a note here, and I'll repost the discussion.)

Question
Three questions regarding userboxes this time...

Hello, you used the helpme tag. How may I help you? When you've asked your question, please put the tag back so we know to check back. Alternatively, you can join the Wikipedia Bootcamp IRC channel to get real-time help. (Use the web-based client to get instant access.) —— Eagle 101  Need help? 03:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) For anyone who knows how to make userboxes, I'm confused about how to make them. I want to make a language-style box for sarcasm (I was sure one already existed, but I was unable to locate one).  If anyone knows where one can be found, can make one for me, or can show me how to make one, I'd appreciate it.
 * 2) Regarding this section on my user page, you'll notice that in the table, right after the userbox for Slowhand, the other boxes have been shifted down. I'm not sure why this is, but if anyone can help with this, it'd be amazing.
 * 3) Another one about how to create regular userboxes. Again, I'm kind of confused about this.
 * Thanks! -- 6 x   B  03:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:USERBOXES.  Real96  03:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

helpme
 * Unfortunately, I don't think you quite understood what I was asking. I mentioned that I didn't understand the userbox page, and that I needed a bit more explanation.  Also, that page does nothing to answer my question about the weird table alignment after Slowhand on my user page.  If anyone else can help out, that'd be awesome.
 * Thanks! -- 6 x   B  14:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I can answer number 2 at least. There was an error in the coding for the Slowhand userbox (which I have now fixed), which was disrupting the rest of the row; your userpage should be fine now. As for creating userboxes (1 and 3), you can do it by filling in the parameters to userbox (a very simple userbox would be which looks like, but there are many more parameters that can be filled in if you want a colour other than grey. I don't know about the sarcasm userbox (although I vaguely remember seeing it around...) If you have any further questions, feel free to put helpme back up. Hope that helps! --ais523 15:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:6xbsouthparkey5.png
Thanks for uploading File:6xbsouthparkey5.png I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 06:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)