User talk:Smeagal

License tagging for Image:Shockinianatomy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Shockinianatomy.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. 03:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Blackprimefigureclear.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Blackprimefigureclear.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. 06:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ShockerToysArticle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ShockerToysArticle.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. 09:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Whiteprimepackageclear.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Whiteprimepackageclear.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. 10:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Advertising
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC) Not affiliated with anyone beat it!

Rude Talk Page Contributions
Regardless of how strongly you feel about any topic on Wikipedia, every editor's opinions are equally valid. Please try to remain civil as much as possible and realize edits such as your to Talk:Metalocalypse are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Also it seems to me that you are perhaps an employee of sorts for Shockertoys, so I must remind you that manipulating Wikipedia for advertisement purposes is not allowed. Have a pleasant day, and I hope these issues can be resolved. --NeoVampTrunks 01:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Yea and me being an employee is like saying you are part of a bias conspirecy for Wiki is that true? I didn't think so, so please do not talk about people who you don't know about...thanks! I have a right to freely post my opinions and correct talk I think belongs. This whole wiki nazi thing is out of control if it is a user written directory of sorts then why do half of the editors think they are god and can remove whatever they feel. Wiki is acting like the goverment!

Shockertoys/Dethklok
Before an edit war ensues over whether to include the Shocker Toys information on the Metalocalyspe page under merchandise, please share with us your case for whether the source meets the standards as laid out on[|this page]. I think that it would be more constructive to get a dialogue going about this because it's becoming obvious that it's going to be a point of contention.

I don't understand why they can't have thier own page. That does boggle my mind a bit, but I do see a rationale for why this particular announcement could be considered unverifiable given their history. I'd like to see your thoughts on this and get some consensus opinion before we decide to put the info back in or omit it. I've removed the information until we can get that consensus. I look forward to hearing your response. --Avatar of chaos 04:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

AOC you are an avid Macfarlane person aren't you? Why is every editor that has anything to do with Shocker Toys deletions or anything fans of a rival toy company? Shocker Toys will never go away even if all the wiki editors that are super fans of other toy companies want that. They are making the toys Brendon Smalls told me so! It is a fact so it needs to go back up and they should def have their own page as well as a page for their toys that they currently sell.....They do sell toys yes? What is the big friggin deal here??

-- I'm a fan of toys in general and a student of the toy industry. I do a lot of research on the industry. I do collect McFarlane toys. I also collect a lot of other toys from other companies. I even have a couple Shockinis. But Shocker has a history of putting out unreliable information. Brandon Smalls telling you things is fine. Provide a link to a verifiable transcript of the conversation, otherwise your word is meaningless. Shockertoys announcement has no current verification therefore I can see why there are questions as to its validity. So until you provide your case, I'm going to air on the side of caution on this. I'm looking for a consensus opinion. I will concede that it is a fact that they are a toy maker and that they made the announcement. I don't recoginize thier announcement as fact that they are actually making the figures. If we can get a consensus that it's worth adding, then it stays with no questions of objections from me. If not, then it has no place there. You can keep placing the link there all you want. If you don't provide a clear case and rationale which supports your position, I'll continue to delete it until you do.--Avatar of chaos 07:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

And I along with other Dethklok roadies from the AS forums will continue to add it! I do not have to post my private chat with Mr. Smalls for you to see it is mentioned in one of his articles on his blog. Go bother someone else and stop being crooked like the rest of this place!


 * Well, I might not have a totally cool and trendy 'roadie' status like you from being a member of a message board, but the information should be removed per wikipedia policies. And yes I am a Metalocalypse fan, probably a bigger one than you. DarkSaber2k 17:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Threatening to canvass people to keep adding information to an article can be disruptive if the information is not helpful to an article, and if it is very disruptive, could well be considered harassment. Continuing to add links can also be considered spamming and can result in that site being blacklisted.  I strongly suggest you do not carry out your threat nor keep making the threat itself.   x42bn6  Talk 18:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If I'm so crooked, then why did I even try to get the Shocker Toys page restored as an actual article when it was ridiculously redirected to Toys? And why would I be asking for a group consensus if I'm out to cause mischief?  The freedom to post/edit these articles is not absolute.  That's why things should be done by consensus.  I don't even know the people who also object to the way you were editing that page, but I do know that they also see the problem with self-published sources.  I could make a website and write an article tomorrow about how I now hold the license to make Venture Brothers figures and hold exclusive rights to make Murderface plush dolls and then go to the respective pages and make put in the info and link it.  By your logic, you would have to prove me wrong and let inaccurate information on.  That is why the idea of having verifiable, unbiased sources exists.  Consensus opinion further goes towards eliminating bias.  I have no problem with the most recent edit.  I will revert to that one if you continue to push the issue and your obvious agenda. --Avatar of chaos 03:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I almost didn't know you posted a new message as it is out of order! I do not have a problem with the recent edit either so let's leave it at that. --Smeagal 9:26, 28 April 2007


 * Order isn't a problem. All you have to do is go to history and it will show you what was added and where.  I place my responses under the commentary I'm replying to.  It would be kind of senseless to have five convos blending together, don't you think? --Avatar of chaos 23:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I strongly suggest that this place get a grasp on freedom of speech and information exchange!

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our Biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.  Cool Blue  Light my Fire! 21:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

So you mean ganging up on someone who believes an article should stay is against the rules as it is a personal attack?


 * Not at all. But saying You are truly a fool, as you did at the article, was a personal attack.  Cool Blue  Light my Fire! 22:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

That is understandable and will not happen again. But people ganging up and abusing their athority to take down a company who has done nothing to them is crazy. Once an editor who has a grudge or motive decides to remove a listing the rest join in and agree because one person decides to disagree. It is not proper form and there should be rules against that as well. Their should be special top editors for each type of thing......like toys for eg. That way people can't just gang up and remove something because they think it is power to do so and will hurt the person who wanted it to stay or took the time to create it. Wiki really needs to rethink how they do things so this stuff does not keep happening.

Speedy deletion of Shocker Toys
A tag has been placed on Shocker Toys, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g11.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.  Melsaran  (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC) We put the tag and there was no debate someone came along and removed it which is ludicrisp! The article was cleaned up and met wiki criteria fine so it should have remained. 15 different people and 15 different written versions have gone up and none of them have ever met wiki criteria according to the bias mods! i think someone should Speedy Delete Wiki for not following freedom of speech and use of a public information criteria.