User talk:Weezer76

I don't suppose your a relation of User:Weezer aka Michael are you? -fonzy


 * 1) Uploaded image file to do with "NOFX" one of michales pseudonyms
 * 2) User name Weezer.
 * er
 * 1) thats it.

I am not really sure how to respond to this question, since I have never used this feature before, but no, I am not he.

if you are "Michael" your making a good attempt to pretend your not him by acting all newbieish. If your not I suggest you talk to mav149 or jimbo wales. -fonzy

You need to study spelling and grammar. You sound like you're posting a personal on a Russian mailorder brides site.


 * We as a community also need to stop being so hair-triggered about tracking down our known vandals. Welcome to the 'pedia, Weezer76, I hope you enjoy your stay.  (Note to fonzy: Michael's grasp of reality is way too poor have progressed this far in a conversation without yet using profanity.) - Hephaestos 18:43 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Nice one, Hep! FearÉIREANN 18:51 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

If your not michael I am sorry for accsuing you, but it does seem a coinsidence to me. -fonzy


 * Coincidences happen Fonzy :) -- sannse

CAN SOMEONE help me, I apologize, but I just read the plethora of copyright information, and since I borrowed heavily from some copyrighted sources (offline), I would appreciate if someone could revert the page back to March 23 and delete the subsequent content. I tried to do this myself but someone then switched it back. I don't want anyone to get in trouble. Again, sorry for the confusion. Best regards, User:Weezer76


 * Which page? Pop punk? I changed that back, but you've edited it since. -- Jim Regan 19:13 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Is it this version we need to go back to? (If I understand, it needs to go further back than your revert Jim) -- sannse 19:17 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Yes, that is the version that was there to begin with (I think). I did not know about wiki until this week, so March is a good deal before that. That is my thinking. User:Weezer76


 * What I meant was, you made an edit after I made my revert, after you reverted it - you weren't logged it, so it just looked like some anonymous user relacing a good article with a stub. I assume now that it's the text which has the copyright problems - for images of album covers we invoke the fair use doctrine (see WikiProject Albums). Also, for future reference, when you're putting images in an article, have a look at Image use policy, using tables the way you did looks ugly in the rendered page, even if the  tags look ugly in the mark up -- Jim Regan 19:38 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Done. For future reference you can do this by clicking "page history", opening the version you want to revert to, and editing that version.  You might also want to know about the village pump, that's a good place to ask if you need any help.  Enjoy and welcome to the 'pedia :) -- sannse 19:32 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

We can't remove the versions in the history, that's a developer job not something a user can do (or an admin). You could try talking to Eloquence, the developer most likely to be around. But we don't usually worry about copyrighted text in the history as long as it's gone from the article itself. The other option would be to delete the article and then replace the stub, but I wouldn't want to do that because it would also remove all the article history. I would say it's best to leave it as it is -- sannse 19:51 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

If you could "delete the article and then replace the stub" I'd appreciate it. It looks to me like there was only one edit prior to the version that was there when I begun. And I can't tell that there is any difference in the single edit. Thanks a million. User:Weezer76

If there are no objections on "votes for deletion" then I will. But I would prefer to let the community discuss the principle of deleting valid history first. Would you be happy to let it stand as it is for a while? (the traditional period is one week). I will keep an eye on the page in the mean time and ensure the copyrighted content isn't replaced by someone not aware of the issue. Is that OK? -- sannse 20:19 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

IF Weezer76 is not Michael, then shouldn't his name come off the list of known Michael aliases? Arno 12:43 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Done. -- Jim Regan 15:05 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:


 * Image:Descendents--All.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:40, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:


 * Image:Lagwagon--Hoss.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,  if you wish to release your own work to the public domain,  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 06:43, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Saw that you edited the Pop punk article
Saw that you had editied the pop punk article, we're currently working alot of stuff out so if you want check out Talk:Pop punk. Also if you are not already, you might be interested in joining the WikiProject Punk music. Thanx! P.S. you might want to organize your talk page. Xsxex 18:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)