User talk:StopSQLiquor

Fair use rationale for Image:JCQueen-2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:JCQueen-2.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. When you use a generic fair use tag such as or , 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 fair use images 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. Yamla 16:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:JCQueen-2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:JCQueen-2.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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 09:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

March 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to User talk:Tiptoety has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Will (talk) 02:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't realize it was wrong to call out a Wikipedia administrator for his turning a blind eye to racism and vandalism. Then again, I'm beginning to see that you Wiki admins stick together and turn a blind eye towards racism, at least where African-Americans are concerned. StopSQLiquor (talk) 02:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What's wrong is the trolling, rude, tone in which you left the message. Knock it off. Or you'll most likely be blocked from editing. Knowledge Of Self  &#124;  talk  02:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * As if others aren't going to take up the fight against racism here at Wikipedia. StopSQLiquor (talk) 02:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is NOT a battleground. It is not a place for "fighting", for or against racism, or anything else.  READ that link, please.  We take this stuff seriously.  No more accusations of vandalism, racism, homophobia here, please:  consider yourself fairly warned.  Antandrus  (talk) 02:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So Wikipedia admins are allowed to be racist and allow vandalism on Wikipedia articles? Wow, you learn something new every day! StopSQLiquor (talk) 02:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chuck_Knipp&diff=199028186&oldid=199028167 - Tiptoetry reverting an article back to the old, vandalized version. Yet there's no racism among Wiki admins. You all just delete and revert and deny. Uh-huh. StopSQLiquor (talk) 03:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please understand I am only human, and as such may make mistakes. The revert I made reverted some vandalism and restored some (not to my wanting though). Please let this drop, it was a simple mistake and seems to have worked its self out. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 03:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If this was just a mistake, why did you and your cronies go out of your way to cover it up? All you had to say was "I made a mistake." You didn't. You responded with a smart ass remark and even archived the conversation. It wasn't until I called you out REPEATEDLY before you've finally stepped up and claimed that you made a mistake. Whatever. It's dropped - but not because I believe you. StopSQLiquor (talk) 03:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page comments
You're allowed to talk. But talking about an admin's "interesting behavior" and accusations of allowing racism and vandalism aren't exactly constructive. If you want to ask a question or raise a concern, please do so with a bit more civility. Try and act as if you were talking to your own mother, if you can't think of adequate words.  Equazcion •✗/C • 03:03, 21 Mar 2008 (UTC)


 * I did that already, and the admin ignored me. Why are admins allowed to get away with things regular Wikipedians are not? I mean, can I be a racist and vandalize pages and revert them to vandalized editions? Can I roll back articles that include uncited and untrue facts? Or do I have to be an admin first? StopSQLiquor (talk) 03:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Everyone's allowed to ignore you. People can do whatever they want on their own talk pages. I don't know the specifics of this situation and I'm not commenting on what the admin did. What you're doing right now is continually posting an unwanted comment to a talk page, and after a few reverts, yes, that is vandalism. So stop doing that.  Equazcion •✗/C • 03:08, 21 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * Asking a question is not vandalism, and an admin ignoring a question about his own actions is poor form - especially when other admins step in to cover up. And sorry, just because I say something you don't like doesn't make it vandalism. I'm only dropping this because the admin in question has acknowledged my statement, which was all he needed to do in the first fucking place instead of being a smart ass. StopSQLiquor (talk) 03:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Great then, it's dropped. Pleasant evening.  Equazcion •✗/C • 03:11, 21 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Technologic
To clarify, the inclusion of "Daft Hands" at H,B,F,S is backed by a third party use of the video, asserting its notability. Simply stating "Daft Hands with Technologic appeared on YouTube" does not assert notability. Otherwise anyone could mention any YouTube video that features any Daft Punk song. You are welcome to join the discussions at Talk:Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger and Talk:Technologic concerning the "Daft Hands" videos. Just64helpin (talk) 21:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

File:Shirleywmyspace.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shirleywmyspace.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)