User talk:Timrem/Archive 02

Center for Bits and Atoms
I'm not understanding why it is you continue to change the page back to the copyright notice, even after the material has been changed to something that is completely general. There is no need for an administrator to look at it, as by just deleting it to the utmost of generality makes it free and clear of any copyright restrictions. Logic here please? -Shadowfax0 06:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Tim
Yes. My name is Chris. And yes, it is the Chris you are probably thinking of.

>Yes. I was in those two (2) classes with you.

thanks
thanks for the advice Matejo360 18:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Def.Close
Hey, I just got your message - and I though I had it, but for some reason the template still isn't working. Would you mind taking a look? (It's the long section, impossible to miss) Template:User_Guilt - if you can't i completely understand, but thanks either way! -- DanielFolsom T|C|U 19:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh nm, I think I got it - thanks though!-- DanielFolsom T|C|U 19:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Funny Timrem
I beleive is a sockpuppet of  being used to evade a block. Cyber Lopez Lt began editing the day after Cyber Lopez Rt was blocked, and in addition to the similar user name, has similar edits such as adding his own barnstars and editing Tanya Memme. Also may be affiliated with blocked user, whom I just noticed also edited Tanya Memme. Thanks. timrem 17:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see, , and as well. timrem 18:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Got ya!! But I have been editing Wikipedia for 2 years now and I know all the secrets to it. You still need more practice on this. Have a good one. Bleak Lopez 11:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Mausam (album)
I saw your addition of the Unsourced template to Mausam (album), and appreciate your efforts in ensuring that Wikipedia remain a source of verified information.

The source behind my most recent edit ("The album's title track, 'Mausam,' is a remake of a classic Hindi song of the same name and was the second single to be released.") is the band itself - specifically, I asked one of the members (q, specifically) how he came up with that song, and this is what he told me.

Putting myself in your shoes, I can see how this sentence looks like unverifiable information - I would definitely welcome any suggestions you might have on how I can rephrase or cite it. Please feel free to respond on my talk page.

Thanks again for keeping an eye on the article & keeping things on the up and up around Wikipedia. -Rhrad (talk) 21:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I found an article to use as a source, and removed the Unsourced template. Thanks again for your help! -Rhrad 21:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk page speedy deletions
It is my understanding the db-blank is not appropriate for use on talk pages. From what I remember, blank talk pages should just be left alone since they're not hurting anything, and they'll only have to be re-created if someone then wants to use them. The only CSD criteria for talk pages, I believe, are G6: Housekeeping, G8: Talk pages without a main page, G9: Office actions, G10: Attack pages/libel, and G12: Copyright infringement. I'm just trying to make sure a valued contributor like yourself isn't wasting time on unnecessary work... happy editing! timrem 05:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough. I figured since they were either vandalism that had been removed, or accidentally created pages that the creator had blanked, they might be better off deleted. It also seems to be somewhat misleading to bring up an article and have the "discussion" tab coloured in blue when there isn't actually any discussion. But I won't tag them in future – Qxz 14:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

sl:
Thanks for your notice, I fixed the sitenotice. effeietsanders 20:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. timrem 20:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Upload file
Dear Timrem, Please, have a look on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Real_Potential_Difference_Number_1.svg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Real_Potential_Difference_Number_2.svg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Real_Potential_Difference_Number_3.svg in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Electrical_diagrams Can you help me? Tsi43318 18:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

New
Old signature: Tsi43318 New signature: mseg Please, have a look on http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebruiker:Tsi43318 mseg 10:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I don't speak that language, but if that was a compliment, thank you! timrem 17:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I have A Quick Question For you!
hey. Do you know about "heroes Del Silencio"???if you do, can you help me out in their discography section and Albums?User:EdwinCasadoBaez
 * Sorry, no I don't. I just randomly came across some of those articles and made some minor edits. timrem 01:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Seemingly unremarkable editing
Very mature :) Coldmachine 08:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Confusion
There has been vandalism to the article Todd Manning which appears to be racism someone *protected* the page with the vandalism in place how can this be fixed?--Migospia 23:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You should post a message on the talk page explaining what should be changed. It appears you feel that the wrong version is protected (follow the link to learn more about the wrong version). So, as I said, go to Talk:Todd Manning and explain what you feel should be changed. timrem 02:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have been to the Talk page have you not been there?--Migospia 02:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Following my post to your talk page, I looked into it more. It appears to certainly be a case of The Wrong Version, but I see no racism in the current version of the page (Note, I'm unfamiliar with the show). From what I see, though, all The Real One Returns is doing condensing the information currently in the article and removing Evangeline Williamson from the page. From the talk page discussion, it appears that he intends for Evangeline Williamson to be included in the article if more happens between the characters, but that the relationship is not yet serious enough to be called a courtship/affair. It appears you both have your own point of view on this issue, so please try to work it out civilly on the talk page while the article is protected. Also, in the future, watch how many times you revert a page so you don't violate the 3 revert rule. Discussion and consensus, not reverting and accusation, are the best way to build Wikipedia. timrem 02:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You said you do not revert the the 3 rule but what if there is obvious vandalism? And if the page is protected with the vandalism in place? --Migospia 03:32, 25 March 25 2007


 * In this case, the edits were not obvious vandalism, but edits you perceived as vandalism. Obvious vandalism is like this:  , not a content dispute. timrem 03:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the definition of courtship it is obvious that Todd and Evangeline relationship is and Vicki (a character on the show) even said It is clear to everyone in Llanview you are courting Evangeline so NO it is NOT an opinion. How can Marty stay when ALL that happened was a one night stand and rape but with Evangeline and Todd has been going on for years and they kissed more than once and have admitted feelings for each other as well people surrounding and in Llanview are quite aware of the courtship between them. I think it is sick that you guys are defining courtship and affair only by sex and rape.

The Real One Returns only removed it because Evangeline is of black decent, how can that not be rascim there is no other reason to remove it, I was not even the first one to put it it has been there for a while I was just undoing his vandalism to the article --Migospia 03:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As I said before, I don't know anything about the show. I was just trying to calm down an obviously tense situation. I'm glad you were able to make a compromise about this issue. timrem 03:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I was calm I just do not understand why Wikipedia would allow and accept this kind of stuff to happen, so far there was no compromise, do you not understand what I am saying there was vandalism it is sitll there and no one is doing anything about it --Migospia 03:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Using Caps Lock usually means you are not too calm, italics and bolding are better to stress a point. If there is no compromise, what did all of you agree on on the talk page? I know that article hasn't changed yet, but no admins have been told to unlock the page. Try going to Requests for page protection to get an admin's attention. timrem 03:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Or using caps could be to get people's attention because they kept avoioding Evangeline so I captizlied her name and no one would listen to me. I have been trying to get an admins attention to protect the page but somehow someone protcted the worng edit since all throughout the day, how can someone protect page and not a mod or admin?--Migospia 04:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll respond point by point:
 * You probably should have used bold text instead of caps lock, but that point is moot
 * To get a page protected, you can use Requests for page protection
 * You said it yourself, they protected the wrong version follow the link if you haven't already
 * After The Real One Returns posted to Requests for page protection, an admin locked the page. You'll need to post to Requests for page protection to get the page unlocked, or put editprotected on the talk page to get the article modified while keeping it locked
 * I hope I've addressed your concerns satisfactorily, as I'm going to sleep now and won't be able to respond until tomorrow. Happy editing! timrem 04:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

who are you???
dear timrem, who are you?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Coolbeans.555 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I'm a person. I edit Wikipedia when I can. I'm involved more in the upkeep of Wikipedia than writing articles. I also help other users with problems they may have when I can. You can find more about me on my user page, anything beyond that I'd rather not reveal. timrem 01:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit your Wdefcon?
Hi, Timrem. I was going around populating Category:Wdefcon templates when I came across your request that all edits to User:Timrem/Wdefcon go through you. So, if you'd like your template to be in the category, please add or allow me to add   to the page. Cheers!  W ODU P  08:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ - For future reference, that message was intended more for style changes than anything else. Thanks for checking with me, though! timrem 19:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Suggestionz
hey there, well i was going to suggest making like a seperate wikipedia thing for users to just talk without it being about wikipedia because a certain user (im not gon put her name on blast) keeps getting in trouble when me and her are talking together. me + ma sis luv us sum Pretty Ricky! (wat waz dat?) ''' 02:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems what you'd want there is a social networking site such as MySpace. I'd suggest you see what happens if you take your conversations to Uncyclopedia if you want to stick with the wiki-style discussion page. timrem 00:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

lol ok..=] me + ma sis luv us sum Pretty Ricky!  (wat waz dat?) ''' 01:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Jersey Guys
I got your note about my edit of Jersey Guys. There is o licensing issue as I own the copyright on the article I put there.

The article is an important point not only for being current, but the "Jersey Guys" are hiding the issue - call their show and mention that the "Jersey Guy" lives in Pennsylvania and they will hang up on you.

I'm well within the rules to post it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justified Right (talk • contribs) 12:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Even if you own the copyright, it is still copyrighted material. Wikipedia articles can only contain material released under the GFDL. In addition, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is not in the business of disseminating the works of single individuals (such as the column you wrote). Feel free to add content to Wikipedia such as you would find in an encyclopedia, but please stop reposting the same copyrighted text repeatedly. timrem 17:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status
The Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to and/or  status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate Image:Snellen.svg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Snellen.svg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Snellen.svg is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Snellen.svg, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot 09:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)