User talk:Winhunter/Archive-May06

Honk Kong infobox
I voted to delete the infobox that informed me about.

However, have you seen the infobox that was recently placed on the Hong Kong page. It is just awful to look at. I put in my two cents worth about it on the talk page. I think you (as a regular editor to that page) should also get involved in the discussion. If there were some minor problems with the other template, they can probably be taken care of easily. Those are my thoughts, what's yours? &mdash;MJCdetroit 16:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Establishment of The Wikimedia Hong Kong
encyclopedist 08:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:CP
Thanks for your participation at copyright problems! Just to let you know that before listing the alleged copyvio article there, do replace the content of the article in question with the template first. Happy editing! :) - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 19:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * ''The following discussion is an archived debate with Instantnood about retiring the old HK Flag, which his actions has lead him to be blocked from Wikipedia for two weeks (Instantnood's block log). Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made under a new topic in this talk page.

Please stop
- Please kindly stop switching the flag image from .png to .svg. Anyone can promptly tell they're indeed different. Please preserve the status quo before your and user:SchmuckyTheCat edits. Thanks in advance. &mdash; Instantnood 07:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Replied in User talk:Instantnood in an attempt to reason the unreasonable person that has a very different view of the world from other Wikipedians. --Hunter 08:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 *  The .png and the .svg ones are cleary different. We don't know which is correct, and both could be wrong. If the .png one is indeed the correct one, and the .svg one is wrong, the .png one cannot be retiring. Don't make further changes before it is solved, and please revert those you've changed. &mdash; Instantnood 08:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  It had been peaceful until you came around, saying the .png image must be retiring, and modifying the entries which the .png image is used en masse. Please keep the status quo before your edits. That's the basis for further discussion. &mdash; Instantnood 08:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  It was because nobody replace the flag image en masse like you're doing. Who're the " multi users " are you referring to, and how many of them are there? The ArbCom case was another thing. I was not able to submit any statement before its opening, therefore its opening, and subsequently the entire process, was not entirely properly, appropriately, fairly and justly conducted. The blocks are associated to the ruling of a such conducted ArbCom case. Please kindly restore the flag image that you've replaced, and discuss at the image talk page. Thank you. &mdash; Instantnood 09:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 *  I don't understand why a statement in the first case would have yield the same result in a following case. WP:RFAr/Instantnood 2 was not my case, by the way. I was not the only person the rulings were imposed. I'm neither the only Wikipedian to have disagreed with user:Huaiwei, user:SchmuckyTheCat and user:Alanmak before, if you're really looking into contribution histories. &mdash; Instantnood 09:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello again. You're already told that the two images are not identical, and obviously either one must be wrong. Until you can assure which one is the correct one, please stop replacing the .png ones, and revert what you've done. Thanks. &mdash; Instantnood 20:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 *  That's hardly a consensus. You can't even demonstrate if it the rest of the community actually recognise the two images are indeed different. &mdash; Instantnood 00:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 *  Show us if members of the community all know the two images are not identical and still agree with the replacement. &mdash; Instantnood 01:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Does it mean you're not going to show us that the community actually agree with the replacement? &mdash; Instantnood 07:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That is one of the stupidest things you have ever asked. SchmuckyTheCat 07:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * First, there is no "us" involved, only you keep ignoring those facts. Second, I already provided too many evidence to show conensus and I am not going to repeat them again and again. --Hunter 14:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The evidence you provided fail to demonstrate there was a consensus among users who recognised the two images are not identical. An .svg flag image only replaces the .png counterpart when it is identical with the .png one, or it satisfies the legal/official specifications of the flag. &mdash; Instantnood 15:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * An .svg flag image only replaces the .png counterpart when it is identical with the .png one, or it satisfies the legal/official specifications of the flag. &mdash; 
 * First, please discuss this on the flag talk page, not Winhunters user page.
 * Second, where is this rule about when the flags can be replaced?
 * Third, the new flag DOES satisfy the legal specification of the flag, see its history.
 * Fourth, you've been asked to show why it does not, if you believe it does not, and you have not done so.
 * SchmuckyTheCat 16:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Flag
What's the deal with that, anyhow? SchmuckyTheCat 18:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Replied in User talk:SchmuckyTheCat --Hunter 19:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed it from my user page. SchmuckyTheCat 01:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Blackshirts saltire.png
Hi and thanks. I had actually created it myself but, since I hadn't uploaded anything before, I had problems with getting it right. The version you mentioned on my page may be deleted at any time, as a version with all required specifications (and a better title) is this one. Dahn 14:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

About that picture.... (Shangaicompare)
I got those pictures from several different sites on the web. The buildings were seperate, so I pasted them together and made that picture. All 3 sites showed no signs of any copyrights whatsoever. :-)

--Moped 21:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)