User talk:Spike Wilbury/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- Y not? 02:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion of Blackbeard's Cave
Hi. You deleted Blackbeard's Cave, which was marked as a speedy. The person who appended the article would like to challenge the deletion, with a view (as I read between the lines) see seek to augment the article to prove notability. I'd be glad if you;d discuss it with him/her at User talk:Maikido, possibly with a view to undeletion. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * You're not so bad yourself ;) --Tagishsimon (talk)

Le Chat Noir (band)
You did notice that everything in that article was apparently posted by the band itself, right? All the text and all the images. generally, this is frowned upon under WP:BIO. Shall I AfD it instead, citing that as a basis?

Atlant 14:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I did notice that, but I would rather not speedy delete an article on that basis. Since the article claims several reviews, it's possible that it could be made more formal and notability established.  I'd rather get consensus for deleting.  Thanks for your attention to the matter! --Spike Wilbury 14:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback. Now let's see if I can figure out how to string a proper AfD together. But that will happen later, in any case.


 * Atlant 15:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Logo
The Alphawiki logo was not a copyright violation. It was similar to that of the football league, but I created it myself, changing the colours and the text. So it was different, and I created it. There was no reason in having it deleted. I will recreate it if nesscery. Eaomatrix 12:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Zoo
Gday Mate and welcome to wikiproject zoo, my names Adrian and i am here to help at anytime, i hope you have a great time editing our zoo articles and im sure you will give a great input :) CheetahKeeper 15:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Histiocytosis
Hi, thanks for fixing this article. I was going to do it when I saw it on WP:CP but I didn't had the energy then. :) Btw, you don't have to remove the fixed/deleted entries from WP:CP anymore. It's decided it's better to keep this for future reference. (after some researching) Hmm, I could have sworn I read that somewhere but can't find it anymore. Never mind then.... Garion96 (talk) 21:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me. I guess I also didn't removed them since for the last months I have been the only one working on that page, there was no one else to get confused. So yes, removing them seems like a good idea, the history can always be checked if needed. Hope you're here to stay for a while. Garion96 (talk) 23:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it actually compliant with the GFDL to clean up an article the way Histiocytosis was cleaned up. Since all the edits which created the article are now deleted. I assume it is since that always happens with a temp article created from the copyvio template. Probably too theoretical, but just curious. Garion96 (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Late response, sorry. To be sure I put a topic up here Garion96 (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Chetyre?
-- Y not? 02:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Methods of transliteration of Russian differ. On enwiki we have WP:RUS which dictates "Khrzhanovsky" -- Y not? 19:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jadarite.jpg
2007-05-09T19:15:17 User:Spike Wilbury deleted Image:Jadarite.jpg (improper license, wait for free image or ask for permission)  Shouldn't it be tagged according to Non-free_content? I was not sure about the fair use rationale to use. Rjgodoy 15:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

User page spam
Edit summary from User:Jizz1234: decline speedy, this is a userpage

Guy, spam disguised as user pages is deleted all the time: constantly, in fact. This batch is just from the last couple of weeks. FYI. --Calton | Talk 02:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. I will endeavor to be more attentive to the matter in the future.


 * No problem. It's not a widely understood problem, and it's only recently that there exist tools that make finding it easier. See User:MER-C/Spam -- source of almost all of the ones I've tagged personally -- for one of them. I've found spam that's been up for years through that page.


 * P.S.: Some joker -- -- apparently has taken it upon himself to rewrite other users' comments, including mine, on this page. Just a heads up. --Calton | Talk 05:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

MIDI files.
The reason for stating that MIDI is NOT fair use in the specfic examples was because the basis work was not out of copyright. IN music a copyright can be in respect of a number of things which include the original composition. Transcribing to MIDI from a copyrighted work, does NOT change the copyright status of the original composition.

However as you have stated, it was the entire song, not just a sample. ShakespeareFan00 09:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

24dash.com
Hey! I was disappointed to see you deleted 24dash.com just 14 minutes after its creation citing "no assertion of notability". I stated in the article that it claimed to be "the best read Social Housing an Public Sector news site in the UK" which I would have certainly interpreted as an assertion of notability, albeit one lacking a good 3rd party source. It's a news source which is cited by a number of articles on Wikipedia, hence I thought it merited an article, and hoped in creating a stub that this may be expanded in future. I wonder if you may re-consider your deletion? Regards └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 23:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey there, after looking at the article and web site some more, you are definitely correct. I restored the article. I would rather an external source backing up its claim, but it should be a useful stub for the time being. Thanks for discussing it with me! --Spike Wilbury 16:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Many thanks └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Giant's Causeway shore.jpg
Hi. You just removed links for the Image:Giant's Causeway shore.jpg commons image from the Ireland and Giant's Causeway articles, with edit summary note of "rm link to deleted image". I reverted your changes in both articles - because this image is not deleted (nor is it proposed for deletion). I assume this was just a mistake. If so, you may want to check your client or whatever update service prompted you to think this was deleted. If it's not a mistake, can you let me know why you think the 2 refs should be removed? Cheers. Guliolopez 19:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Howdy, I think it was deleted because I deleted it. It has an improper license because the source states that no derivative works are allowed.  However, upon deleting it I discovered that it is also at Commons, which I can't delete.  I tagged it for speedy deletion there, but as far as I can tell no one is paying attention to that at Commons.  Some images have been tagged since March.  So, I'm betting we are safe leaving the links to the images in for now.  Sorry for the mix up. --Spike Wilbury 19:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Makes sense. So - I suppose the reason it still shows is because it's "inheriting" from commons. Fair enough. Thanks for the explanation. Guliolopez 19:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Good
Good to see you around again -- Samir 04:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Key selection vector copyvio
OK, sorry for the over-the-top message. Here's the copyvio:

"The host initiates the first phase of authentication by sending the display its KSV and a 64-bit random number. 2. The display responds by sending its own KSV and a Repeater bit. This bit tells the host whether the downstream device is a repeater or a standalone display. 3. If the display's KSV is listed in the host's SRM, or if it doesn't contain exactly 20 bits set to zero and 20 bits set to one, the display is assumed to be unauthorized and transmission is terminated. 4. If the display's KSV is valid, the host and display each use their own Device Keys and the other device's KSV to generate the Content Key. These calculations are designed to run efficiently in hardware, requiring only straightforward 56-bit binary (modulo 256) addition. Each device simply adds together those of its Device Keys that correspond to the twenty bits set to 1 in the other device's KSV. 5. If both sets of Device Keys and KSVs are valid, the two Content Keys will be identical, and can be used as symmetric keys to encrypt and decrypt the video stream. To further ensure the integrity of the system, the actual Content Keys are never passed through the connection."

I don't remember whether I found any other copyvios on that page. Thanks. —greenrd 18:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Paulapatty
You're welcome, and thanks for taking care of the deletions. Here is your thank you gift. --Butseriouslyfolks 19:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Your Hierarchical Temporal Memory article deletion
Your deletion of Hierarchical Temporal Memory may not have been warranted. For one, the article did not contain direct text from the sources. Specifically, the contents of the source were rewritten in one's own words. It is not clear that this is a copyright violation. Finally, even if content had to be removed, not all of it had to go. There were parts in it that definitely should've stayed. And what makes you put a psychology stub for it? (It has nothing to do with psychology.)

It seems to me that you've been abusing your privileges, and this will be reported to and discussed with other administrators. --Amit 16:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you for the barnstar.

Now that I am here :), could you have a look at Anglo-Norman language for me. I deleted the copyvio, restored some sections etc. Originally the material was added in Anglo-Norman but was merged to this article. There already was no copyvio anymore in Anglo-Norman and I hope it all is gone now in Anglo-Norman language. I hate really old copyvio's. Garion96 (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that really was on old one. Thanks for checking. Garion96 (talk) 23:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

e-mail
Yeah sorry about that I didn't know I had to enable it, but I just did enable my e-mail so feel free to send me the message. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 04:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Heh? he he he...
Actually, my RfA failed for reasons which I must confess still escape me to some extent. I'll probably run again one of these days where I'm frustrated with the slow-rate of speedy deletions or AIV action. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 05:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. A few people have already proposed to nominate me so I'm just planning to self-nominate to avoid having to pick! Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 05:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI: I've finally decided to try adminship again. Pascal.Tesson 07:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Patchogue, New York
Thanks for fixing up the Patchogue article. I would have gotten to it, but... er... I forgot. :D --DCrazy talk/contrib 06:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, thanks for replying. I've removed my previous message. Still don't know you (I think - terrible memory), but understand the situation now :) Good to see you've decided to come back, and congrats on the music choice too ;) --kingboyk 21:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale...
Thanks, Will check :) ShakespeareFan00 11:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * OK All taggings checked through a second time, some have been de-tagged.. ShakespeareFan00 13:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for copyright violation handling advice
Hi, I'm new as an admin, and want to help on the copyright side.... I asked a couple of questions at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems/Advice for admins, but that seems like a low-traffic page, so I thought I'd ping you... don't want to mess up things.... --Alvestrand 20:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Small Request
Hello, I made a couple subpages and what I was doing to do didn't work. If possible, would you mind deleting this page and this page, please. Of course, please leave the rest of the subpages (and the actual userpage) as is. Many thanks....NeutralHomer T:C 05:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The "CatTrack" one, I had on preview the whole time, so I never saved. Which is good, cause it didn't work anyway. :) Thanks, though, for deleting the other page.  Have a Good Weekend and Memorial Day....NeutralHomer  T:C 05:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the fair use rationale, ComeLookAtMe.jpg DVD cover :-)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Stickarena.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Stickarena.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 10:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey
I got an article what was deleted through a AfD, and now it's back, could you take care of it please? It's E J Boys, AfD linked on the talk page. --Whsitchy 23:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Done :P -- Y not? 23:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

RFA
Thanks so much for supporting me in the RFA. I am grateful for your response, and it really means a lot to be appreciated. Thanks again!  hmwith  talk  04:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Future pavillion
This article is part of a massive astroturfing campaign centered around Marco Casagrande. There are too many editors, articles, and edits involved to assume good faith. This is a willful abuse of Wikipedia to their own ends. I'll go ahead and put the article in AfD. DarkAudit 15:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
I shall wear with pride. Thank you very much. :) DarkAudit 02:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of First Advantage Data Recovery
Okay I admit I'm new to this. And I certainly don't want to break any rules. But I don't understand why tihs company is deleted when so many others are allowed to remain up.

Do I need to go more into their historical significance?

Any guidance you can offer would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Non-free use disputed for Image:Andnowmylove.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Andnowmylove.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Berlin1948ss.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Berlin1948ss.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

18 May WP:CP
Late response. I missed your message in a bunch of other messages. Yes, I deleted the article. If OTSR comes trough (there is nothing yet in the queue) I will restore the article. Garion96 (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request
I am Spike_Wilbury on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/spike_wilbury. Thanks. --Spike Wilbury 04:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Admin IRC channel
Hi, per your request on this page, you've been added to the access list for the admin channel. To enter, you need to invite yourself using /msg chanserv invite #wikipedia-en-admins, then simply join the channel as normal. If you have any problems, PM me on IRC. Regards,  Majorly  (talk) 20:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Enjoy your time at the cabal-only cesspit. -- Y not? 20:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleted fair use images
Spike, unfortunately nobody else responded to my request for help reviewing these images, so right now it's just you and me. If you have any friends who might be willing to help, please let them know. For now, I'm going to start at the top of this list, and perhaps you can start at the bottom. I'm not expecting us to be able to cover the whole thing, but if you get tired of it and decide you won't be able to do any more, please let me know where you left off.

Thanks for your offer. TomTheHand 13:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I've gone through the first ~150 images or so and now I need to take a little break. I have a quick tip for you if you're still up for helping out.  This saved me a bit of time.  When you click on a deleted image link, if it shows only 3 deleted edits for the image, it cannot possibly have had a fair use rationale added, so there's no need to check.  Those three edits are the image upload, the original image description, and then the tagging for no fair use rationale.  If there are 4 or more deleted edits, it's possible that a fair use rationale was added and the image description history will need to be checked. TomTheHand 14:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

re:Message
Replied :) — M o e   ε  03:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Ck lostsword's RfA - Thanks
ck lostsword • T  •  C  18:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

my uploaded image
I request you to look at this case - removal of the image for, I believe, political reason. It was image of protest taken place in Iran and Iranian editors tried to get rid of it. I got clear permission for that image though maybe I picked up not proper tag. Upon my request the author, political organization, placed on its website: http://sazer.org with the following disclaimer "All materials in this website including articles, photos and images are allowed to use for humanitarian, educational and personal purposes. Southern Azerbaijan Independency Party ( GAIP) 2007."--Dacy69 04:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Michael Curtis Parsons
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Michael Curtis Parsons. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Mgm|(talk) 18:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Americal Vacuum Society
Please kindly le me know what was wrong with this article to warrant a deletion? thanks Ivan —Preceding unsigned comment added by IvanGeoPetrov (talk • contribs) IvanGeoPetrov 16:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Never Been Thawed
The only big thing missing, it seems, keeping it as a "stub" would be an inclusion of a cast section. Good references, etc., but the IMDB has a bigger cast section than just the two "stars" in the article. (I'll reply via e-mail on the other issue). Ciao - SkierRMH 20:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Updated the discussion templates to match the article! SkierRMH 00:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, a major frustration of mine is the lack of something clear that would be specifically related to films when it comes to the step between "Start" and "B" articles. If you take a look at Category:Film articles by quality you'll see that it's extremely subjective, and there isn't anything really clear. Additional section that can be added include: production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc. Two of these are required for the "start", but there's not much on the next step up. My personal thought is that production details, reception, and awards are pretty essential. If it's based on another work, differences from the source would also be key. Sorry I can't be more specific, but it's pretty vague, as you can see by the quality criteria for this. SkierRMH 22:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Issues on Ho Yeow Sun
Dear Spike Wilbury,

Can I check with you with regards to the status on the copyright issue in "Ho_Yeow_Sun" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2007_June_10/Articles ?

I noted that you had strike out this entry. May I know the significance of this? Does it mean that it has been addressed?

Can we now put the contents on the page of Ho_Yeow_Sun?

Thanks, Jing13 04:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply.


 * The webmaster @ www.heyaosun.com has allowed us to put up the contents on Wikipedia and has sent an email to permissions@. Can we then put it up?

Jing13 09:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

RFA Withdrawal
I am sorry to see you do this; I don't think its failure was a foregone conclusion by any means. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk  12:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind words. I obviously missed a bit of policy on the substitution thing, and my lack of main space contribs was causing issues for others. Never mind, no big deal and all that! I much appreciate all the feedback. Pedro | Chat  12:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Joebrownuke.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Joebrownuke.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 21:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

My Article being deleted
Hello, I am very concerned about our interactions with this editor. I did not even have sufficient time to get the article off the ground and he deleted it. I jsut went to check some facts and by the time I got back it was gone. Now there was a tag put on it by myself to expand and I informed him of that and in return I was treated rudely. I then put a holdon tag and he has gone yet again and deleted the article. Can you advise as to what we may be able to do about this? Junebug52 23:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Naconkantari
I expect to be drafting a RfC concerning this editor shortly -- I hope within the next 24 hours. I hope you will chose to comment. DES (talk) 23:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I have started drafting -- see User:DESiegel/RFC Draft/Naconkantari. The RfC is not yet ready to post Feel free to add diffs or reasons for the dispute. Please do not move this out of my userspace, however. I WILL be doign more on this, probably yet tonight (I live in the US eastern (UTC-5) timezone.) If yoiu think anythign I have written is incorrect or ill advaised, please drop me a note. DES (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC) -- I have been tracking off-wiki, and will add anything not already there. I was about to suggest the same way of proceeding. DGG 15:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

block
Thanks for the quick response on 70.162.4.188, but I'm curious about why you didn't go for much longer or indef - did you look at any of the edits this account made? They are vile, misogynist, and extremely offensive, and the user has shown no restraint despite many blocks, and clearly is not learning from the blocks. Every time his block expires he comes back with more vile garbage. This is bad for the project, and I just don;t get why we bend over backwards to be fair to blatant vandals of this kind. One month is good, but he's shown that increasing from a day to a week or a week to 2 weeks has had zero effect. Seems to me the time for giving one more chance has long passed. Just my opinion, but I thought I'd ask. Tvoz | talk 03:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. You make a very good point about IP addresses - I really wasn't thinking of that. I see the problem. Thanks for the response. Tvoz | talk 05:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Eddie VH pic you just deleted
It's not fancruft that Eddie looks great now he's out of rehab. Fact is, he's not been photographed in any freely available form since 2004. A tour was canceled since he had to go into rehab; it's noteworthy that he is now fine. (The Elfoid 16:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC))
 * See my note on your page. The fact that he's out of rehab is notable; a copyrighted picture of him out of rehab is unacceptable when a free photo is available.  It does not matter that there are no photos since 2004. --Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  16:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Free photos of him since recovering from alcoholism are not available. Have you seen what he was like before?

http://www.futurerockhall.com/blog_files/page2_blog_entry0_1.jpg

That was him made up to go to some poshish celebrity party in early 2006. His public appearances on a stage playing music in the 2005 - 2006 period he looked similarly rough.

It's not the age of the 2004 photos, so much as the change that has occurred. I've spent the last month and a half attempting to REDUCE the scale of the fancruft on this page (it was about 68kb when I found it, the majority of the work taking it down to 47 has been mine. The last 2 paragraphs of the main article were newly added information since then. So a lot of important things have happened and I still got it 21kb shorter. You can tell me what I write's no good, but it's not fancruft. Mentioning how much better he looks is also important - though I agree the stuff someone added about his hair is a bit pointless (The Elfoid 16:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC))

I think something could be added to the blurb. It does bring things 100% up to date. The main problem with that page is the one on 'four years of silence' since nothing there was very noteworthy, but it all was to a small extent. You can't put nothing, but pretty much all of it taken as separate parts of the whole is unjustifiable. The part on their influence is similar. And add what you like for fair use. I hate handling sources or uploading pictures (check the other pics on there - some of them I uploaded and were a bit dodgily justified simply since I'm bad at that sort of thing) (The Elfoid 21:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC))

Image:FischerTim.jpg
Greetings. I had tagged Image:FischerTim.jpg as "replaceable fair use", and you processed the image believing it to be non-replaceable. I know you were acting in good faith, and I really do appreciate the effort to take care of backlogs -- but I have to say, I disagree with your conclusion. I have listed the image for deletion so that perhaps we can get more eyes looking at it to see what they think. Feel free to comment there. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Mistakes: we all make 'em. Thanks for being a good sport. (We get tons of bad ones on IFD.) – Quadell (talk) (random) 02:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Spike - not exactly your fault but how many times do I have to put up Ilia's photo? The head shot that was up there was taken for Kulik's Krew (Ilia's official fan club) by our main photographer Laurie Asseo. We have Laurie permission to use her photo and Wikipedia folks keep asking me about it, I keep doing whatever they tell me to do and then someone else I never heard of takes it down. Now it's you. How do we get it up there and leave it up there.

Nancy President, Kulik's Krew

Dear Spike - not exactly your fault but how many times do I have to put up Ilia's photo? The head shot that was up there was taken for Kulik's Krew (Ilia's official fan club) by our main photographer Laurie Asseo. We have Laurie permission to use her photo and Wikipedia folks keep asking me about it, I keep doing whatever they tell me to do and then someone else I never heard of takes it down. Now it's you. How do we get it up there and leave it up there.

Nancy President, Kulik's Krew

Image:Cheronevanhalen.jpg
This image is another one that like I said, was of questionable fair use. There ARE other images of Cherone with Van Halen but I've not been satisfied with them. Tell me what you think (The Elfoid 08:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)) Plus due to their reputation for falling out so badly with frontmen (though Cherone is the exception) pictures of each lineup are important. Also helps that there has only been 3 lineups so each is vital (The Elfoid 20:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC))

http://www.wireimage.com/SearchResults.aspx?igi=269818&s=halen&sfld=C&vwmd=e

Photos from the Nascar show. Any of these able to be used? (The Elfoid 14:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC))

UScircleA Records page
why was it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake5150 (talk • contribs)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Ladmobag.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ladmobag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Wilbury
Can I also use pictures to support my claims. And if so how do I got about posting them proberly. Also one more thing I understand that your time is volunteered but, I have had problems in the past with my claims that I've posted as being untrue, and if you weren't too busy if I send you the autobiography, with the mag., newspaper articles and pictures, would be so kind as to review the material and let me know if it is appropriate for "Wikipedia". I ask this of you because my previous page was unfortunialty flagged because I was unclear of "Wikipedias" rules and formats. I do appreciate your time. Thanks. -Jess.

Fair use rationale for Image:Subconsciouscruelty.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Subconsciouscruelty.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Carrier Ethernet

Thanks for the advice. I got it. I'm taking it. I responded BTW It was actually my own work I was copying! --Marketword 23:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Wrestler's notability
Hi Spike. I wanted to give you my reasoning on that AFD. I feel the general guideline for secondary sources is a biz hazy for wrestlers, since they are generally not covered by most mainstream media (except when they commit a horrific crime). I used the secondary guideline under entertainers (which wrestlers certainly qualify as) where it says "Entertainers: actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and television personalities:   * With significant roles in notable films, television, stage performances, and other productions." . A wrestler can appear on a major wrestling show without having a significant role, however, being allowed to "win" a match would indicate that the writers feel his role is significant.

On another note, what would you think of Petty, Lynn, Dylan, Paul McCartney and Roger McGuinn as a new incarnation? <font color="#FF0000">Citi <font color="#151B8D">Cat  18:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Spike

Can you tell me why the page Exclusion of evidence because of unfairness is not now suitable as I have re-written it. Cheers Ron Barker 12:26, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Van Halen Newsletter
Seen the van-halen.com website recently? Not sure if it's worth including. I signed up a day after it was done and I've not received any mail from it yet but I guess it means someone's "alive". In the past the Van Halen world was left hanging in Eddie's alcoholic hands (The Elfoid 12:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC))

Michael Anthony's role within Van Halen
1997-1999 he only played bass on 3 songs on the VH3 album, and I doubt he was allowed to write all the songs he's credited to (band shares all writing credits).

In 2004 I've listed him as "bass (tour)" and Eddie as the bassist in the 2004 period on the members page, but that too is a bit iffy. Advice?(The Elfoid 12:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC))

What about Van Halen III itself? He was officially a member so I guess it makes sense. And as I said all writing credits are shared by the band. But it wasn't revealed till later that he didn't play on more than 3 songs so I'm unsure. I guess it won't offend everyone to leave it as it is, but I wanted to check. I've had experiences in the past where I find a page that no one's touching much (like this one was) and put too much of my opinion into it unintentionally, and had it all deleted. Attempting to avoid it by checking with someone else (The Elfoid 15:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)).

That reminds me, Eddie's page isn't one I've looked at much. I've been busy with Heaven and Hell (band)'s page. Which I need to get around to citing sources for when I can be bothered (everything can be cited if you look at Dio, Black Sabbath and the albums by that lineup's pages so it's all factual) (The Elfoid 17:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC))

Resonded
I responded to your request to delete content from my userpage. --User At Work 19:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Exclusion of evidence because of unfairness
Hi Spike, The article is not copied. The words are mine. Can you have a look at the style and see what you think. Cheers Ron Barker 21:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Re WikiCrimeLine and Article Exclusion of evidence on grounds of unfairness
Hi Spike, If you go to the history page of the article on WikiCrimeLine you will see I wrote the article. In fact I rewrote the article at the same time of rewriting the article on Wikipedia. Cheers and thanks for your time and help, which is much appreciated. I am actually an administrator at WikiCrimeLine Ron Barker 10:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Re WikiCrimeLine and Article Exclusion of evidence on grounds of unfairness
Spike; If you have a look at the articles on WikiCrimeLine you will find that I am responsible for posting nearly every article. Nearly all the articles are Crown Copyright. WikiCrimeLine has permission to post Crown copyright material through Andrew Keogh. The Article re Exclusion of evidence on grounds of unfairnes which I first posted on Wikipedia was Crown Copyright. I forgot where I had got the material from and I appologise for that. But then I re-wrote the article myself and posted it on WikiCrimeLine and Wikipedia.Ron Barker 11:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- <font color="White">But |<font color="White">seriously |<font color="White">folks  08:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:London bridge house estates bridgemark.gif
Image:London bridge house estates bridgemark.gif - I don't believe this logo qualifies for speedy deletion - at the very least, it has a (weak) fair use rationale, although I've little doubt a stronger one can be written if needed. (I'll do so if you prefer) That we also have permission is besides the point. I'm also not entirely sure it's copyrightable anyways ... the .gif is just a reproduction of a logo that's 300+ years old - although it's possible a minimal amount of creativity went into reproducing it in .gif form. At the very least, I'd like to undelete it with a stronger fair use rationale (or let you undelete it) if you've no objection. I'd happy to leave it tagged as copyrighted for the moment. Cheers, Wily D 19:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it alone for the moment and dig deeper into the issue. Thanks, Wily D  19:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was actually debating asking him/her (or maybe one of two or three other editors) about the issue, and how to address it. So, I don't mind ... Wily D 19:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi
You can delete the Hillel pic, I don't really care anymore. However, I have a question. Can you peer edit, or give me tips, on what I should do with an article I am trying to get to FA status, called Dookie? I re wrote the entire article in a day, and obtained a GA the next, and now I'm stumped. What else should I do? If you can't help, it's understandable. Xihix 18:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dean V
Please don't remove an unsourced tag without actually sourcing the section the tag is on. Corvus cornix 19:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. These music instrument articles are almost all big ads.  Corvus cornix 20:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the tip
thanks for the tip no i am not the same user as kingpie01, although i do know that user. i am trying to find a good place to get images of deans, to put on the pages. also, if the artist is on the dean guitars website as a user, then surely that makes them a dean user? just asking thanks

Re:
You can see my reply in the Admins' noticeboard. Next time, don't be so quick in issuing a warning. KlakSonnTalk 22:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dean Guitars (again)
I've been citing the Dean guitars pages and i was just wondering if what i've been doing is okay, i've finished doing the Dean Razorback page if you have time to check it out. KingPie01 11:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Fighting in ice hockey
You just removed a fact tag I had added to the article Fighting in ice hockey. I have raised the matter on the article's talk page. Feel free to join the discussion at Talk:Fighting in ice hockey. A ecis Brievenbus 22:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied there. --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b> talk  15:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Howies article deleted
Hi

You deleted the Howies article, saying it was advertising. It certainly had been advertising, but I had improved it considerably, with coverage of doubts about Howies ethical policies, and links to stories that record Howies acquisition by Timberland. Both these things are the opposite of advertising for a company that promotes itself as though it were a small, ethical independent.

Please put it back, and I'll improve it some more.
 * Sorry, no. The entire article reads like an avert except for two lines at the bottom attacking the company, neither of which have sources.  If you can come up with some independent sources that prove the company's notability and that back up any of the negative claims, we might have grounds for a useful stub.  Until then, it is better to stay deleted. --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  18:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this claim: "The entire article reads like an avert except for two lines at the bottom attacking the company". That's not how it was the last time I saw the page, right after I edited it. But suit yourself. I have better things to do than try to improve Wikipedia if improved pages are immediately deleted.
 * I don't suit myself, I try to suit Wikipedia. I think the article was one big advert, so my judgment was to delete it.  If you want to get some other opinions on undeleting it, you can go to Deletion review.  --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  21:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not interested in getting involved in Wikipedia politics or discussions about deletion policy, just improving the content of Wikipedia. The article you deleted had been marked for deletion, but then not deleted and unmarked shortly before I edited it to improve it. Under those circumstances it seems illogical and counterproductive to delete the page after it has been improved. If you think my changes were not improvements, that's another matter. But you haven't said that.

Thank you
Thank you for your attention to the conflict over edits to Ali, I do appreciate it. :) MezzoMezzo 14:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have upped the warning to a 48 hour block: see Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. On principle I am happy for you to down it again but the guy seems to be just arguing back at anything which moved and not listening at all. Its a multi repeated offence. --BozMo talk 20:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

recruiting and Bertuzzi
Ok you've got me. I'll go sign up on Ice Hockey. I considered it before but felt stretched too thin. As for the Bertuzzi image, I just linked to the one from his bio. Didn't check the fair use rationale. Sorry. Canuckle 18:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Chronology of Mahatma Gandhi's life
Hello,

Why did you delete these pages Chronology of Mahatma Gandhi's life, 1869-1914, Chronology of Mahatma Gandhi's life, 1915-1931, Chronology of Mahatma Gandhi's life, 1932-1948. I don't see how there could be any copyright on this, it is just a compilation of facts and events. Beside that, you didn't even noticed me. This is bad. I spent a lot of time compiling these pages. Yann 19:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI, Gandhiserve didn't write this. They copied it from The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, a publication of the Indian government, which is going to be partly published on Wikisource. Also Gandhiserve is notorious for claiming copyright on works they don't have any rights. They did so for all photos of Gandhi which are on Commons. Anyway I would like to keep a copy of my work. Could you please send me these to yann(at)forget-me(dot)net? Thanks, Yann 08:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Vytas.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Vytas.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Admin userbox
Haha, I'm glad you like it. It was just something I made up after a rather rough day. Feel free to use it yourself if you're so inclined. Cheers. NeoFreak 16:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Health board opposed to fighting in ice hockey
Hi. The health board correspondence is a primary source and my sentence was descriptive of its contents, so it might "skate" by under WP:OR on that count. But they do say to do so rarely. I was not trying to push an original, personal view but trying to supplement the preceding sentence that described a single school-board's effort. I thought to replace the health board correspondence with a published source as local news media usually cover these things...but I haven't found it yet. I'm not complaining about the revert, just providing some context. There have been research, reports and recommendations about the frequency and consequences of fighting. Getting at those sources would help the article avoid relying on "a slew of media coverage". Cheers! Canuckle 20:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh and thanks for cleaning up those refs. I have no idea how to do Harvard but will try to learn. Canuckle 20:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Blueturtles.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Blueturtles.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Elonka 2
Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 06:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello WikiProject Ice Hockey/Participant
I am an advisor to the National Hockey League. With your help over the next few months I plan to review and correct any information on wikipedia relating to the National Hockey League, its franchises, players, executives and partership organisations. I am here to provide you with information. Your work is appreciated. --NHLsource 18:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Camp Stephens
On June 20, 2007 you deleted the "Camp Stephens" article without any notice and I am curious as to the reasons. As the creator of the article, a listing on my talk page would have been appreciated as recommended by the administraitors of Wikipedia. I look forward to your response.JEdward 01:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I replied on user talk:JEdward -- Y not? 01:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

CRUX potential copyvio
I have reported a potential copyvio on CRUX in June. You removed it commenting that "documentation is GFDL". What does that mean exactly? Do you have evidence that the CRUX handbook is licensed under the GFDL? If so, what is this evidence?--Chealer 05:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 21:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Guitarist
Template:Infobox Guitarist has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kudret abi 05:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

deletion of Finers Stephens Innocent.
Why did you delete the above page when many other businesses have pages? The content was not biased, it outlined what the company did and some background and that was it.

Please respond —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.171.195.59 (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The article was spam garbage, and you admitted someone at the company asked you to create it which is heavily frowned upon. This is an encyclopedia, not a law firm directory.  If you want to create a respectable stub in an encyclopedic tone, I will not delete it.  See Addleshaw Goddard for an example. --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  02:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Komodo Lover is back...
Under the name "BRR's goodside". Pathetic attempt to disguise himself. You can check for him in Talk:Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals (check history because I removed his drivel).

User:Snocrates
Where do you suggest I go to resolve the issue, in addition to the fact that user slandering is vandalism along with personal attacks. Was that not the place to report it? I'm pretty sure it was. Carter | Talk to me 03:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly. I appreciate it. Carter | Talk to me 07:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Unretirement
Welcome back. -- Y not? 10:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Komodo Lover Section
OK, as the guy clearly does not know WHEN to give up, I'll just give one section for each of his sockpuppets. The latest ones are...
 * The giveaway is that he comes from Malaysia. I understand not EVERY Malaysian would be like him, but he still makes desruptive edits.
 * In trying to defend one of his sockpuppets, gave away his identity.
 * Need I say more?

Thank you
<div style="padding: 5px; background: #FFDCF8; border-style: solid; border-width: 10px; border-color: #000000; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 100%; "> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 200px; float: center;"> Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest Spike Wilbury, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your support is very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow  and  Phoenix-wiki  for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.  Lara  ❤  Love  06:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by  The Random Editor 's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel 's RFA thanks.

Sabotage of the Husaberg article
A friend of mine took a photo of the 2009 Husaberg being released to the public this week. He authorized me to use it on the Wikipedia page. There was therefore no ground for you to remove this photo. Please leave it as is. I had to fight one saboteur already and that was enough trouble. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteEcho (talk • contribs) 05:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Petrified Araucaria cone from patagonia-Edit1.jpg.jpg
Hello, Spike Wilbury. I've got your message about speedy deletion of the above image. I'm not sure what is/was the problem with the image. This was/is the version of the image, which was taken by me and edited by other user. Whatever the problem is I see the image is still present and has no template of speedy deletion in the image description. Could you please explain to me what is the problem with the image. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 06:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hereford Calf Portrait
Ditto Mbz1's comment re my Hereford Calf Portrait.

The images are fine, they were created and uploaded by Wikipedia/Commons contributors, are correctly licensed, and have not been deleted.

This appears to be vandalism. Please refrain from this behaviour. --jjron 14:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries. Hopefully you can fix up the deletion tool to stop it doing that. I wonder where these blank pages are coming from, as this is the second one of these messages I have got recently. I wonder if they're somehow being created to do with the FPC process? Cheers, --jjron 06:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama image
I undeleted the image Image:Obamakeynote2004.jpg. I am extremely familiar with our image policies and quite strict in my interpretation of WP:NFCC, but I think this image does meet the requirements, since it accompanies a large amount of text about the event in the article. The CSD tag specified 'per FUR', which doesn't make too much sense because FUR is not a deletion discussion. I didn't understand your deletion log entry, because the author did give a license tag and a use rationale. I think the IP who placed the log entry might have been deceptive. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 20:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I did misunderstand you deletion log entry, with the presence of the CSD tag. I am actively reconsidering my undeletion; I posted a question at WT:NONFREE to inquire about a strange aspect of the NFCC policy that I just now realized. I want to wait a day or so to see what the responses are to that before deleting the image again. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 02:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I deleted it again, this time as I7. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The issue I had with NFCC, by the way, is that this sort of use is permitted for book covers and other cover art, even if the art itself isn't discussed, although such use isn't permitted for press photos. I have run into book covers much more often lately, and had them on my mind when I saw this. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Updated comment

 * Thank you for the heads up on my talk page. I commented in the page re: the image.  FYI: I had recently updated links to copyright information on my talk page (scroll up to the section on those images; there are about 3); I think that the "fair use rationales" on the image that you commented on are better to have than the claims of "public domain" (which are not verified or apparently even verifiable due to incomplete information about dates of copyright and copyright renewals pertaining to the designs of the medal--from which all the images do derive, even if photographs of medals on display).   Because I can't take more time to comment on these image-related matters, I provided as much information as I could on my own talk page in the section on the Nobel Prize (R) Medal images.  I posted some of the links within the past few days. [no need to reply on my talk page to this.] --NYScholar (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I responded to your later comment to me on my talk page; after you see it, I will archive that too. (sorry for inadvertent strike-out; didn't know that it meant what you state there.) --NYScholar (talk) 09:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobel medal images
IMO, your recent edits on these pages reflect at least two serious misconceptions, and were not sound. See Talk:Nobel_Prize. Jheald (talk) 20:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but admin or not, your recent edits to Image:DSCN0732.JPG and Nobel Prize completely ignore a lengthy discussion of the issue by other admins((admins) and users alike. I would like to point out that your fellow admins have already made statements of the nature: "It's becoming clear to me that NYS doesn't have a case for wanting this removed, under law or policy" and  "The Nobel website indicates that the medals' design has not changed since 1902. So it's in the public domain. There's no need for permissions or to resort to fair use". I encourage you to take a closer look at the discussion before you decide to make unilateral edits. I would, however, like to fill you in on some important factors that have been established so far: 1) Fair use rationale is clearly not the issue here, nobel images are PD in the US since the medal was published before 1923 (hence, the image cannot be still under copyright by the Nobel Foundation). 2) The use of trademarks is allowed on Wikipedia. 3) As to the copyright of the photograph (i.e. the work being contributed) it belonged to me until I released it under GDFL. I am sure a review of the discussion will make these points clear. If you have a diverging opinion please elaborate on Talk:Nobel Prize first. Thank you. aNubiSIII ( T /  C ) 08:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Nobel Prize (throughout) and later sec. called "Arbitrary section break": there is no source that verifies that the design of the medals was published in the U.S. before 1923; the Nobel Foundation still asserts its copyright over the design of the medals and images of them according to its notices and according to correspondence with the Nobel Foundation of 2006 and 2007. The featured "public domain in the U.S." templates and statements saying that these images and designs of the medals are "in the public domain" or "in the public domain in the U.S." are not accurate and conflict with the information provided by the Nobel Foundation. Either these images need "fair use rationales" for each use in Wikipedia or they do not. Please make the image page descriptions and summaries and templates conform to fact and to Wikipedia image and media policies. These policies are linked throughout the discussions. I've linked the discussions in my talk page and throughout Talk: Nobel Prize and the image page discussions. Thanks. (Why is the image so large? See the other image which was reduced in size due to copyright violation concerns. Thanks again.)  --NYScholar (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The Westin Roco Ki Beach & Golf Resort
Hello,

Yes, I was reading after article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox

Hmmm, my intent was to make article about Roco Ki resort. It was simple descriptive article about it, and I can publish text material from a publisher, and I was given 6 photos that i can use in public...

I wanted it to look like as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap_Cana which is other huge project in Punta Cana, so I was thinking as Cap Cana is on Wikipedia, then Roco Ki must be. Those two projects are major luxury resort here in Punta Cana, resorts that gave life to this area, so I think it deserve an article page.

Please correct if I am wrong, I have no experience to put proper attributes of copyrighted material...

Thanks,

Milos Korac —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloskorac (talk • contribs) 21:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Miloskorac
You just erased my user page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloskorac (talk • contribs) 21:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Roco Ki
Oh, it was about the images...If I publish article about Roco Ki, with my own words, and neutral pictures, will this be OK, or I am waisting time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloskorac (talk • contribs) 21:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Miloskorac
Can you put my user page back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miloskorac (talk • contribs) 21:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Miloskorac
So, can you put my user page back

Milos Korac Milos Korac 21:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Miloskorac
* 20:59, 24 November 2007 Spike Wilbury (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:Miloskorac" ‎ (Speedy deleted per (CSD G11), was blatant advertising, used only to promote someone or something.)

I have this page for many years, and I am updating it regularly. It is About me.

Why would you erase my user page?

For example, I Would your red flag with dead scull, pretty offensive, childish and ugly, but I did not erase it?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rouge-Admin_JollyRoger.svg

I would like to have my page as it was before.

Thank you

Milos Korac 21:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Explain your self
I would need an explanation for erasing my user page? If you had time to erase everything that I did, so what do you say to explain why you did it and what was my mistake?

This is not really a friendly behavior, I can imagine that you are totally into this punishment role, and you are enjoying it?

I really lost my interest in Wikipedia at all, I think that I will make some effort of make some moves against this abusive punishment twisted minds, calling them selfs Administrators.

Milos Korac 21:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Cap Cana
So you think this is OK:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap_Cana

It is not a promotion?

Milos Korac 21:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat-Belated RfA Thanks :-)
<div style="padding: 5px; style="background-color: #32005B;" border-style: solid; border-width: 3px; border-color: "000000"; font-size: 100%; "> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 300px; float: center;"> <font color="E4D5E8"><font face="Georgia">Tapadh Leibh (Thank You)... <font color="E4D5E8"><font face="Georgia"> ...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful <font color="E0CCDB"> RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral.

I would particularly like to thank <font color="E0CCDB">Acalamari and <font color="E0CCDB">Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally.

If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me. (Oh, and if you hate RfA Thankspam, please forgive me. I promise I won't block you for deleting it ;-))

And forgive me if I need a <font color="E0CCDB">Wikibreak now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me <font color="E0CCDB">climbing the Reichstag, now would you?

Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!) <font face="comic sans ms"><font color="E4D5E8">Kathryn NicDhàna </b> <font color="E4D5E8">♫ <font color="FCD73F">♦ <font color="E4D5E8">♫ 

<font color="#000000"> This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.

Nuke Dukem
Any chance of WP:SALT the page above as it has been recreated several times. Hammer1980 ·talk 01:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks ! Hammer1980 ·talk 15:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: En dashes
I know that they need a "&". I just made a typo (then copy and pasted it :). Thanks for fixing my mistake. Cheers,Rocket000 (talk) 23:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks
No problem. I'll hopefully be doing more since there is such a backlog. John Reaves 05:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Cuz this bird, it cannot change
Lord knows I can't change Lord knows I can't change Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

RFID page modification
Nice! ;-) RFID-pro (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

reference : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Radio-frequency_identification&diff=next&oldid=174310034

Revision as of 05:45, 28 November 2007 (edit) (undo)Spike Wilbury (Talk | contribs
 * Awesome edit!! Love it! Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 03:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violations: Just saying hi!
Glad to see you're getting to deal with the huge October 29 page! I guess DumbBot just got taught about the copypaste tag... or someone updated that template to link the pages into the category DumbBOT searches.

I've done the odd page recently, but Real Life threatens so much (and I find copyvio work so frustrating) that I've totally failed to keep the backlog down - and this week, I'm at the IETF meeting in Vancouver, so there won't be that much time (except during boring meetings, of which there are some). I'll get some things done, but not much.

If you want to chat on jabber, try hta@alvestrand.com - or harald@alvestrand.no on msn. I'm usually not on IRC when I'm on the road. --Alvestrand 16:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I raised the question of "copypaste" on User talk:DumbBOT - seems that someone intends to fix that problem. Nice to see! --Alvestrand 19:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, someone's reading the VH project page?
I never knew anyone checked except me.

It's taking ages, but I think I'm making progress on the Van Halen page. Eddie and Roth's pages are a bit of a mess, and Alex's is lacking in content, but Mike's is just sloppy. And lacking citations, if you could check that out too. (The Elfoid (talk) 16:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC))

I just get into too many arguments on here, and forget to do anything useful. My latest escapade was on the talk page for The Elfoid (talk) 10:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC))

Ya
I suggest a protect of Westroads mall shooting. It's getting, and will get alot of negative edits to it, so to be on the cuation and stop the war before it starts, i suggest we protect it.--Cody6 (talk) 04:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Done.
Okay. done. *starts biting nails*. Part of me wants to go into hiding for a few days, and the other part of me knows, judging by the other entries there, knows I have to stick around for extra questions. :P Anyway, cheers =) -- slakr  \ talk / 09:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

RFA
Nicely done. I think my feelings on pre-transclusion comments are well know. I appreciate what you did there, even if you don't agree with my personal stance. Cracking candidate by the way, well found!! Pedro : Chat  10:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Cigarettes and Alcohol and Rollerblading
Well, So here was (approximately) my thought process here:

When I first checked it out, I thought to myself "Yup, looks like a CnP". Then I went through the history, starting from the creation, and went forward. From the pattern of additions, it seemed, to me at least, that the author was probably writing the article while watching the show in question. I also googled a half dozed phrases and couldn't find anything that even remotely matched the text. The user who started the article showed a pattern of starting other more complete articles like such. Seemed reasonable that the synthesis could have been original, but if you see something else I would love you hear about it!--DO11.10 (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * By the way, this day's entry seems to have an issue, I cannot strike through the completed articles, but the whole day is done. Should I just remove the whole day's listings? --DO11.10 (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, sheesh sorry. I meant I couldn't strike the 2007-11-01 (or the 2007-11-02) entry. It looks like the "articles" header is missing... --DO11.10 (talk) 19:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't finished 11-02 yet, but it appears to have the same problem.--DO11.10 (talk) 19:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Pan Am Cockpit 4 image
I intend for the copy on commons to be deleted but for the copy on EN to stay. IMO I don't see how any significant use of that particular image can be lost with a fair use license. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Alec Reeves
A tag has been placed on Alec Reeves requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. HotAbs (talk) 04:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Great success!
<div style="border: 2px solid #fff; margin: 0 0 0 0; padding: 10px 10px 10px 10px; background-color: #eef;"> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 250px;"> Click that-a-way to open your card! → → →

Cheers :)
I'm not the one to normally send thank-you-card type things, but I wanted to send you a special thanks for even starting the ball rolling in the first place. :) Cheers =)  -- slakr  \ talk / 14:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Mike Campese
Hi, could you please userfy this deleted page? You were the deleting admin on its most recent deletion, and I was asked if I could help try to create a viable article on him. I want to see if there's anything worth salvaging in the history. Thanks. Chubbles (talk) 18:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Would you take a look?
An image used in the article on the first Bangladeshi pornstar Jazmin, Image:WorshipThisBitch3.jpg, the cover of the DVD that made her the selling point, a first for a Bangladeshi, is up for deletion here. You may be interested to take a look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditya Kabir (talk • contribs) 21:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Dethzone
I understand. He's forced to play with his talk page because he's abused his user page too much. There was an earlier block and a bit of a discussion (including my favorite, "Who are you that you can block me?"). I wonder if I should escalate if he comes back and again does nothing but play on his userpage. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

sorry!
Spike, Just a note to say i'm realy Sorry about the delete of the Guitarist news letter. Did'nt mean to delete for every one. my bad. Darrell Darrell Wheeler (talk) 07:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Elonka 3
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because it's the holiday season and there are plenty of off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, Elonka 06:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Front Row King
Hello, I do not understand why you deleted my company profile... There was no advertising at all going on here. Google has a page, McDonalds has a page, Wal Mart has a page... Why don't you delete them as well? It was simply a page describing the company. It was not littered with links or anything like that. I know people on Wikipedia are very sensitive, but please keep in mind that deletion of an article should have nothing to do with one's opinion of if the ticket industry is ethical or not. This page was not created for more people to visit us!!! Please reconsider your decision. Would I have to resubmit the article? Also not sure if you read the article in full... there is a lot of information about the secondary ticket market that people don't know.

Thank you, Anthony —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seowebworks (talk • contribs) 12:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Fool
You have deleted a relevant page in Ethan Varnado! I will continue to create and edit this page no matter what! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Broberts1921 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Admin help please
Hey, you're an admin right? Uh, I'm having serious trouble with someone and I don't know who to report him to or what else might be appropriate. He's taking things personally, told me he refuses to respond to rules, says he wants to purge Wikipedia of any negative comments about Michael Jackson since these must be "lies", thinks since I'm not passionate about my love of Michael Jackson I have no right to edit relevant pages.

Summary
The guy thinks I have a personal agenda and I don't. He keeps going on about it. He's made offensive comments about the overweight, or white people. He swears at me. He has a strong POV which is causing trouble for someone who wants to make edits that remove them. I'll give examples of bits of our fights below.

Details
Right now, the discussion is over a page on a song I think needs deleting. It's a tiny article, the song's universally unpopular and barely heard of by anyone. On the talk page I said we should just list reasons to keep and remove the song and weigh things up - he could edit my list of reasons to delete for flaws and I could edit his reasons too. When I found negative reviews for the thing (by allmusic.com and Rollingstone - Wikipedia's most cited music sources, and three other frequentely cited ones) suggesting including the song on a recent Jackson compilation was mad, the song was rubbish and no one would care it was on there....he deleted it on the grounds that "I refuse to allow you to turn this into some sort of source-scrounging marathon - I don't care what some obese white piece of shit says about the Ultimate Collection this is about the SONG not sources". When I put the page up as proposed for deletion he simply said as he removed the proposition "so this is what you've been reduced to, randomly putting articles I made up for deletion? I will not let this happen without a fight".

I've made edits and his justification for editing them on the edit history has been "FUCK YOU seriously - all you want to do is revert all my edits because you have some problem. I don't really give a fuck".

People who know me on Wikipedia know I have strong opinions. I get in big arguments about them. I kick up a fuss if my edit gets reverted (see Talk:AC/DC or User:Realist2's talk page) and tend to have a big falling out with someone over things. Then when the dust settles I just think "He put accross such a good argument that I couldn't beat him, whether he agrees with me or not I respect this user's opinion" and end up asking them for advice or even collaborating with them on things. My attitude towards Michael Jackson is he's a guy who made some damn good music, and fanboys have horribly overused POV for far too long on Wikipedia. Realist2 is lord of the Michael Jackson fans on here, and he and I have a kind of yin-yang thing going on.

He has also called me a "hater", a phrase he has coined to refer to anyone who 'lies' about Michael Jackson on Wikipedia.

I shortened an article filled with lots and lots of pointlessly long sentences - you know how people can waffle on - and he said "some of the things I've been doing, like using 'flowery' language as you say, adding the photo... they're being done to beef up the article a bit, because right now there is little information. sure there's lots of sources, but it's all the same information. I'm just trying to make it look a bit better before the next wave of information. Yes, maybe not the most 'wikipedic' thing to do, but it's been done before, and when all is said and done, a picture does not detract from an article. at least keep it until more text can be added". He seemed to think making a page look good aesthetically is worth detracting from the encyclopaedic nature of it.

I quoted some Wikipedia rules about this, and was greeted with "I won't read your post, as I'm sure it's going to be filled with twisted policies and guideline etc.", and "There's one rule I like to follow, and it's called IGNORING ALL THE RULES."

There's other little things like his userpage claiming he wrote numerous articles himself "entirely", including one I've done major work on

(The Elfoid (talk) 18:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC))

one last thing
I don't want you to try and sort out my troubles - I just want to know what the proper channels to go through are. Right now he and I are talking, but it'll break down at some point probably and I want to know where to go if that happens. (The Elfoid (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC))

Thanks - I'll let you know if I don't manage to deal with this. (The Elfoid (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC))

Makoa Combatives
i just completed a summary for an article and placed it on Wiki---you deleted it for advertising (?)--not sure why---the article is clearly about a martial art called makoa Kaliwhat can I do to have this article addedit didnt fall under any of the restrictions I noticed in you guidelines---what am i doing wrong?

now I have to start over

Have a minute?
We crossed paths the other night at the Strat player page. I am guessing you are "in the 'guitar' know" and could use your comment. A user is having a difficult time understanding what the "notable instruments" field is for over at the Keith Richards article. (see the current discussion at the bottom of the talk page) He was using the notable instrument field as a "rig list" so I cleaned it. But then he felt that Richards' 1959 Les Paul didn't count as notable so he deleted it. Knowing the very significant guitar history footnote behind Richards '59 I added it back in along with a Tony Bacon reference. He still felt it was trivial and deleted it. He wanted to know the guideline so I posted the link. Now, for some reason, he thinks the field should be a detailed list again? Not sure what he is reading? I read the musician project talk pages a lot. I can remember the discussions back when the musician project adopted the field from the guitar player project. I don't believe the intention was for a long detailed list. If I am wrong I would like to know... but I don't think I am. If you have time to watch the article and comment it'd be great. Also... in keeping with the "no detail" idea... I noticed that George Harrison's infobox was a bit bloated with non-notable axes... so I trimmed it. I know where you get your user nickname from... so I hope you aren't offended. Looking back on it I am thinking Georgie's Country Gent might warrant a mention since no one else in England was using them prior to him... and their sales boomed after Beatlemania. But I can't find a ref for that. We have a couple of Tony Bacon books here at the library. But his Gretsch book isn't one of them. 156.34.208.175 (talk) 01:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I commented on Keith's page. Hopefully the user will respect consensus even if they don't agree.  You are correct in your interpretation of the field.  I can't actually find the discussion now (some of the template discussions were all over the place) but I don't recall anyone advocating for that field to be a long list.  I'm glad you trimmed George's list - I had been meaning to get to it but it seems like there are so many other fires to put out.  Almost every guitar equipment article is like a page out of a product catalog instead of an encyclopedia article. --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  14:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've tagged a few guitar/amp pages with {advert} tags. That's about all I can do. I own an SG and a Casino and a department store acoustic. I can edit SG and Casino pages if they need a cleanup (I think they look half decent). Beyond that all my guitars are just daydreams and fantasy wishlists. On the guitar topic... I have rv'd some "equipment section" deletions from the David Gilmour and Kirk Hammett pages. They were deemed unreferenced and trivial and unencyclopedic and etc etc etc. I agree they are unreferenced and could use a good cleanup. But I don't feel they are unencyclopedic as far as guitar players go. I think some guitar players may only come to Wikipedia specifically to search for technical information on their favourite guitarists and that these sections serve some purpose... if only to guitarists. But my re-instating these sections has been rv'd. What are your thoughts? Perhaps you could comment on those article discussion pages... if you have a free minute that is. Thanks for weighing in over at the Keef page. "Mr. Anonymous" shades WP:OWN an several Rolling Stones related articles. He's not a bad editor... just passionate about the subject. Have a nice day! 156.34.142.110 (talk) 15:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Keith_Richards&diff=prev&oldid=180443610 He still doesn't understand... sigh!?!] 156.34.142.110 (talk) 17:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Some users take longer to get through to than others. :) My personal view about equipment sections, and I may be in the minority here, is that they belong in guitarist articles if they are sourced.  We don't need a huge bulleted list of equipment (many guitarists maintain these themselves on personal Web sites, such as Andy Summers) but if a journalist wrote about their equipment, we can put it here and source it.  Summers is actually a great example - there have been entire articles written in Guitar Player and other magazines just about his rig.  To me, that means the guitarist's equipment itself is notable and should be included.  --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b>  talk  17:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I am facing similar problems in the David Gilmour article. The problem is that the whole list of musical equipment is a long, lengthy and UNSOURCED info. I asked User:NrDg for advice and he asked me to contact you. On the article talk page u can see the entire discussion and the problem. I request u to mediate and give some suggestion.thanxGprince007 (talk) 10:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Commented at Talk:David Gilmour. --<b style="color:#6666FF;">Spike Wilbury</b> <b style="color:#000000;">♫</b> talk  16:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Images and Public Domain
Spike, Some issues on Wiki I'm abit unclear on. I've got an image of Blind Blake which is actualy this one http://facstaff.unca.edu/sinclair/piedmontblues/blindblake.html. It is the only known Pic of the master. The image did exist in Wikimedia Commons before but was removed as not being public domain. However this site lists it as possibly public domain. Plus it's used in like every book and on every CD etc of Blind Blake (being the only known image). Is this enough to put it back in Wikimedia and use it? Could it's use be legal under a fair use argument? I've had a bit of a read through the guidelines and can't realy figure it out.Darrell Wheeler (talk) 02:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL block
On the frusciante talk page, you said, "The next personal attack or uncivil remark I see will get you a block for your trouble." Sorry, I wasn't clear - with regard to blocking, were you were talking to Grim, or Grim and me? Tparameter (talk) 04:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Article deletion
The Gibson Les Paul is obviously notable and was made by a prominent person. But I don't think this variation automatically inherits notability. The only source is a customer review site. Anyway, I've restored the article and hopefully it can be improved with better references. I still think the notability claims were pretty vague. Thanks. Spellcast (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

darwin award reference is irreleveant; it's a trivial pop culture reference and it doesn't belong in Terry Kath's bio
I keep removing the darwin awards reference in the TK bio because of the reasons I repeat in the subject headline.

I don't remove it because I don't like it (and I clearly don't like it) - I remove it because it doesn't belong and it adds nothing to an understanding of his life.

I would not remove text that called his death foolish, irresponsible, etc. - because it was, and it left many people in pain.

Citing this darwin thing because it can be referenced is silly. I can probably find Terry Kath's documented driver's license number if I look hard enough - would you add that to this entry simply because I can document it? No, you wouldn't, because Terry Kath's driver's license number, while factual and documentable, adds nothing to his biography.

Whoever keeps adding the darwin reference is more intersted in making themself look clever than they are in adding some useful, relevant, factual data to tht TK bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.86.56 (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Question about an unblock
I have just seen this edit, in which you accepted an unblock request. In doing so you reversed the decisions of five other administrators who had declined unblocks (Ohnoitsjamie, SQL, PhilKnight, Huon, and myself) and of the administrator who had imposed the block (CIreland). I do not see anything in the latest unblock request which indicated any substantial change in the situation since the previous unblocks were declined. (Indeed, even the blocked editor stated in his or her unblock request that he/she was only repeating what he/she had said before.) There is no record in your editing history of your consulting (or even informing) any of the six other administrators concerned. I find this very surprising, as under the circumstances you must have known that there was a likelihood that there would be disagreement with your action. Acting unilaterally against the unanimous consensus of six other administrators in a situation of this kind is contrary to the whole spirit of collaboration on which Wikipedia is based: it goes against at least two policies, namely Consensus and Administrators. Even if you thought there were good reasons for acting unilaterally without consultation, I would have thought that basic courtesy would have required you to inform at least the blocking administrator of what you had done. I would very much like to know your reason for acting as you did. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's been a while since then (and oddly, the editor never resumed after the unblock) but I recall seeing that several administrators were involved in active discussion on the editor's talk page. My interpretation was that you and others were looking for them to acknowledge they made a mistake, which they clearly did in their last unblock request. The whole thing was based on a misunderstanding by the blocked user, and I suppose I'm from an era where admins don't create unneeded bureaucracy (opening noticeboard threads, pinging every declining admin) before performing an uncontroversial action. So, thanks for the lecture and proceed with trouting if you're so-inclined. A more friendly approach would have been to simply ask for an explanation without the condescending tone and links to policies I "went against". --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)