User talk:Theymos

Image:Firefox tabbed browsing.JPG
Thanks for spotting the attack in Commons:Image:Firefox tabbed browsing.JPG. I see you've tagged the Commons image for speedy deletion. We can't actually delete it here, so there's no need to add a tag to the page on Wikipedia. It'll disappear when the Commons admins get round to deleting it. Thanks again, Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gmail Screenshot 1.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gmail Screenshot 1.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Need third-party comments in Comparison of one-click hosters
Talk:Comparison of one-click hosters My comments have been kept censored by the admin hu12. All comments have been removed (except a few leaving initially). I just want to leave comments to clarify my points. However he censored most of my comments and so my comments become misleading.

I have some questions I want to ask. I don't really know how this Wikipedia works. How could this seem to be fair if the admin:
 * is involved in editing the article
 * is involved in discussing and arguing in the page
 * is involved in making minor rules regarding how we should edit this page #1
 * is involved in the interpretation of the principles like Notability #2
 * is involved in enforcing those rules interpreted or made by him
 * a user has requested third-party comment about this page, but it turned our to be the same guy (Hu12) who gave a comment

(#1:He said an entry cannot be added to the article if it doesn't has an article in Wikipedia, but I couldn't find this rule anywhere. I asked him to quote the exact passage which says this, but my comment was simply censored and banned [Reason: harassment])

(#2:He said the same degree of standards required to create the page is the same as to add an entry / sentence within the article. It is what notability means. I said the same degree of standards are lower when you just mention it in one line or two. The impact and exposure is different, so do the thresholds)

He has a conflict of interest. He is acting an editor, arbitrator, legislator, judge, police at the same time. He can even censor comments. How come this kind of behaviour is accepted in Wikipedia?

I got fed up by his actions. I don't know how to criticise him for bending rules, taking multiple roles and abusing power without offending him. -- OM 12:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be directing your comments at him. Your comments should be directed at the wikipedia community as a whole. You have both been guilty of this, but that's not a valid excuse. If you don't agree with him, then you should rebut his arguments with yours, not attack him personally like you've been doing. I agree that it was inappropriate for him to remove your attacks personally, and it's a guideline not to do that, but your edit was an unacceptable attack on him, and I'm not going to argue it.


 * As far as I can tell he hasn't used any special admin powers(anyone can remove others' comments on a talk page), so there's nothing unfair about him participating. Why would anyone want to be an admin if they couldn't participate in Wikipedia at the same level as most people?


 * The guideline he is talking about is Wikipedia:Notability. Like all Wikipedia guidelines, it is open to interpretation by anyone. Our view is that it only applies to articles themselves, not the things they talk about. His view is that everything an article talks about should be notable by Wikipedia standards. Just because he's an admin doesn't mean his opinion is more correct or holds more weight than ours. Everyone has the same amount of power in enforcing their version of the guidelines; just edit the article. That is all he has done.


 * The RFC is a request for comments from anyone. No matter their interest in the article, they can comment. He has done nothing wrong by commenting.


 * So relax. Write a good argument that doesn't mention Hu12 at all. It will not be deleted, I guarantee it.--Theymos (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Pet rock.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Pet rock.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest?
Couldn't help but notice on your user page at the top it says "This user wants a World Government" but right below it states that you have the support of Ron Paul. Isn't that a bit ironic? Care to elaborate?--Papajohnin (talk) 09:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * A lot of his positions aren't optimal, but they're better than what we have now. In my opinion, socialism would be better than the hardcore capitalism he supports, but the hardcore capitalism is way better than the semi-capitalism we have now. I tend to support the extremes at all points on the political spectrum, but I dislike the center.


 * I think a world government would solve a lot of problems, but first we need to implement a type of government that works better than the one we have now. I don't support the Iraq war and other expansionist policies, at least not now.--Theymos (talk) 11:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Cayman Islands Investment Bureau
Hi there, I just created this page as part of WP:AFC it's an old submission from 2006 (I'm double checking the archives..) anyways I've reviewed quite a few submissions and consider myself to have a pretty good eye for self promotional articles but I didn't think this was one.. Sure it needs to be expanded but I don't think its overly promotional.. Also keep in mind that it's a government agency rather than a private company... I don't have any attachement to the article so if you still think it should be speedied thats your call, I'm just curious why you think so.. RIP-Acer (talk) 18:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It sounded spammy to me, with phrases like "investment", "establish a business" and "workshops". I can see now that it's not, and I've removed the speedy delete.--Theymos (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Clarence Charles
Hi there! Can you tell me why you have nominated Clarence Charles for speedy deletion? Micky 1234567890123 (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The article failed to establish notability. See criteria for speedy deletion, A7. With other TV shows, minor characters are typically talked about in an article called "List of minor characters from TV SHOW HERE". I suggest you create such a page. Here are some examples.--Theymos (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Surviving a raptor attack
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

 * Thank you, as well! You contributed much more to the resolution of this issue than I did. Theymos (talk) 12:46, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but I tend to get much more passionate about it and can easily lose my head. I was able to follow your example and find the correct RfC channels for a resolution. Rurik (talk) 22:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

comparison of email clients
Yeah! that was a really good edit. I didn't found time for that edit (but it would have been made...)  mabdul 0=* 11:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It took a while to do. Theymos (talk) 11:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

CSD of Kolamanpet
I have declined this -- the subject of this article does not fit under A7. Just notifying you in case you want to bring it to AfD, or PROD it. Thanks, &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 09:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

BT Clients
I support your motion that we remove non-notable and obsolete clients. Perhaps after the discussion is over, there should be a review of all clients marked as no longer on development to determine notability (in purple I think?). &eta;oian  &Dagger;orever &eta;ew &Dagger;rontiers  02:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea. Theymos (talk) 02:05, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Pet rock.jpg
File:Pet rock.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Pet rock.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Latest stable software release/Microsoft Outlook
Template:Latest stable software release/Microsoft Outlook has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Latest stable software release/Pine
Template:Latest stable software release/Pine has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 07:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)