User talk:XLR8TION/Archive 3

Requesting help #2
I'd go to dispute resolution about this one. I dont think the picture is appropriate to the article, but having an "official" word determining this may be of help. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Go to WP:DR and start there. I saw the picture and I really don't think it belongs in the article at all. I'd suggest checking out the Mediation Cabal as well, and ask for them to view the page. Wildthing61476 (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR
Hi. I have reviewed a 3RR report regarding your edits to Dominican Day Parade. Both you and the other user appear to be in violation, but since you are discussing it on the talk page, I don't view blocking either side as constructive at this time. Please continue to discuss the issue and work together constructively. Thank you. --B (talk) 00:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Munalee.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Munalee.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. Nishkid64 (talk) 02:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, this is a legitimate edit. Message boards are not reliable sources for Wikipedia articles. As far as I see, B made no racist accusations whatsoever. The material came from a poorly chosen source, and he made that clear in his edit summaries. Your belligerent and threatening behavior, as seen in your edit summaries and the Wikiquette alert report, is unacceptable. Nishkid64 (talk) 02:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I feel that the block is unfair and biased. You did not look into my contributions history nor my discussion on the talk page to make a clear decision. A block until January 10th is really unfair and I would like to point out that I have made significant contributions to this site. Why don't you take a look at the article for the Dominican Day Parade in which a user call UnclePaco posts libelous photographs that I have to removed. I even requested a third opinion to try to get this resolved and still he refuses to listen to my discussion. I would like for you to reconsider this block.--XLR8TION (talk) 04:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, I have put some carriage returns in to fix your unblock tag. --B (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your edits.--XLR8TION (talk) 04:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:SKILL
Your recent comment regarding another user's language skills is inappropriate. Belittling another user based on their grammar (on a talk page no less, where content is not a part of the encyclopedia's text) is unnecessary and creates a hostile and adversarial editing environment. You have a history of civility violations, and I suggest you heed this warning and others. However much you contribute to the content of articles, you are still entirely responsible for your conduct, and such behavior is detrimental to the encyclopedia and hurtful to others. Since it is unclear if you have been notified, this is in response to a complaint filed against you regarding the relevant breach of civility guidelines. --Cheeser1 (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Your response:
 * I did not make a uncivil attack. I pointed out that user UnclePaco (who has a history of unconstructive edits)does not use proper grammar or structure when making his series of unconstructive edits. If you look at the discussion page for the Dominican Day Parade you will see what I am talking about.


 * I'm afraid that is exactly what WP:SKILL says not to do. Belittling someone for their grammar is unnecessary, inappropriate, and uncivil. Please read that section, if not the entire page to learn more about how to be civil on Wikipedia. --Cheeser1 (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * How can someone be blocked if they aren't warned first? Isn't that a bit unfair? I have seen admins warn editors/vandals about their behavior to great success. Again, I feel that the page should have been blocked and that both myself and UnclePaco should have been warned. --XLR8TION (talk) 05:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * (ec)I think you're confused. I didn't block you, your block isn't even related to this incident, and I'm not the person you should be appealing your block to. I'm just explaining to you that your actions were, by definition, uncivil and inappropriate. You have seen that such incivility will get you in trouble, and so in a few days when your block is over, you can either take the advice of all the people who've asked you to tone it down, or you can keep doing what you've been doing. It's your choice. You don't get a nice warning for every instance of incivility/edit warring/personal attacks - sometimes, when it's clear you should have known better and are stepping across the line, you get blocked.


 * As for your assessment of the situation, UnclePaco was warned, and you would have been too I assume, but you'd already been blocked for an unrelated incident in which you were edit warring (not to mention being uncivil). As for "blocking the page" - an article cannot be "blocked," so I can't speak to what that might mean. --Cheeser1 (talk) 06:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * When you have been warned and blocked for violating policy before, you don't need a warning for possible future violations. You are expected to know policy, and you will be blocked if you violate it. Nishkid64 (talk) 06:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Exactly. --Cheeser1 (talk) 06:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

A little too late apparently
Hello XLR8TION!

I just stopped over from a Wikialert posted about you. It seems I have arrived too late as you got blocked here for some reason.

Anyway, While I in principle agree that UnclePaco was wrong on his edit, that is not a good reason to disparaging other editors. Part of the civility code around here requires that we all keep cool heads when someone else start making either edits we simply disagree with, or edits that are flat out wrong. Its important to engage in discussion rather than taking a swipe at someone (intended or not). There are procedures to review edits that any of us think are out of line. I would suggest starting at the WP:Community portal, which is on the left side of your screen under "interaction".

Best of luck, good editing when you get back in, and .... stay cool. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

(rats .... seems Ol' Cheeser there beet me to it ..... I'm just here then to reiterate what he said). LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * LonelyBeacon, thanks for your help. I am appealing the block. I feel that UnclePaco's edits are not only unconstructive but his rogue editing skills only bring this site down. I will appeal this block. I wasn't warned on anything wrong I did, therefore I feel that the decision was both biased and unjust.--XLR8TION (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I haven't read everything going on, and I must admit that I just took a quick look at the edits on that parade article. However, if you have ever been warned before about uncivil behavior (if .... I don't know if you have), then that constitutes the warning.  Trust me, I know that these matters can be difficult.  Just remember this:  when you write a response to someone: if there is almost anyway they can misconstrue what you are writing as an attack, you should probably assume that it might get interpreted that way ...... even if there's no way you mean it.


 * I'm just giving out some friendly advice to help you out ..... Try and engage in dialogue on the article Talk Page ...... make sure that comments don't come across as anything but genuine, and are strictly about the material, not the editor. If there is still a problem, you can always try WP:RFC ..... that's typically the next step.  Hang in there ...... Peace! LonelyBeacon (talk) 08:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for arbitration "Anti-Dominican racism"
I have issued a request for arbitration case involving you. Please see Requests_for_arbitration. Zenwhat (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You're invited!
...to the next New York City Meetup!

In the morning, there are exciting plans for a behind-the-scenes guided tour of the American Museum of Natural History.

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to discussing meta:Wikimedia New York City issues (see the last meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Attention XLR8TION you will be unblocked
XLR8TION, User: Nishkid64 has agreed to lift your block if you are willing to accept the following conditions:

I. You must not indulge in any edit-wars. You should consult an admin if a problem arises. 2. You must follow the 3R rule and avoid such actions by consulting a third party. 3. You must change your attitude towards others and avoid personal attacks by the way you express yourself. In other words, you should avoid making comments which may indirectly offend another party.

If you accept these conditions Nishkid64 will lift your block, however he may block you once more if you break your agreement.

Please state your acceptence by signing ~ :

posted by: Tony the Marine (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Tony, first of all thank you and others who understood what i went through and defended me. Your noble actions are truly appreciated and I admire you and others who try to present my case. I do accept the terms, but please be aware that I did ask for an adminsitrator's help many, many times but never heard back from anyone. There are many rogue editors out there and I did my work in trying to keep a NPOV on all articles. I will make any necessary edits on any articles and will reach out to you and other adminss if any trouble arises. Thank you for all your help and God Bless.--XLR8TION (talk) 17:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Great to see you back! Nobody can keep the PR list in order like you do. Remember, do not let anyone drag you into anymore situations. We who believe in you are here to help whenever you need us. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR block
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. The duration of the block is 2 weeks. Nishkid64 (talk) 06:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sit tight ... UnclePaco has been indefblocked and appears to be a reincarnation of a banned user. --B (talk) 09:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Seems like I got here a ilttle late again. When I went over to the Talk Page, they had already caught you on a 3RR.
 * I think [[User:B|B] has some good advice. Go chill and do something else for a while.  Come back in a two weeks refereshed.  It looks like:
 * 1. Some people have already chimed in that the inclusion ofthe parade violence section was unwarranted.
 * 2. The editor trying to add it was a sockpuppet, and is banned.  He likely will not be back in these parts anytime soon.
 * If I may recommend: at some time over your break, take some time to read up on the wikipedia policies. Knowing them can be helpful in terms of not doing things that will get you in trouble, especially since I don't think that is what you are trying to do.  I thik you are a passionate editor who has a lot of sontructive things to add.  You need to learn how to defend yourself "Wikipedia-style" while you are here (I know that sounds cliched a bit .... sorry to sound sappy). LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You have been unblocked because you did not violate WP:3RR. UnclePaco was a block-evading sockpuppet, and under the rules, undoing the edits of a indefblocked user is an exception of 3RR. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sometimes justice has a very nice smell to it! Congrats XLR8TION, you are vindicated! LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * LonelyBeacon, thank you for your kind words and help. I simply was telling the truth last week when I was blocked. I am a great contributor who will like to see this site reach its' mission as a reliable encyclopedia, but unfortunately trouble comes walking my way and I have to spend time trying to protect an article's integrity by undoing unconstructive edits. UnclePaco (and his many sockpuppet aliases) simply refuses to listen to reason, logic and guidelines. His rogue editing only causes more problems than it helps. I will update you of any troubles that might arise from the Dominican Day Parade article. Many thanks to you and other admins who believed in me. I truly appreciate it! --XLR8TION (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * LonelyBeacon is not an administrator, and I would remind you that even when dealing with suspected sockpuppets, WP:CIVIL and other guidelines apply. UnclePaco turning out to be a sockpuppet does not excuse inappropriate conduct. I hope that your conduct in the future will be as positive as your contributions to articles. --Cheeser1 (talk) 03:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Cayey, Puerto Rico
I left another message on the user's talk page asking him to justify his removal of these names on the article's talk page. If he doesn't I can no long assume good faith, and I will report him to [WP:AIV as a vandal editor. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know enough about the situation to form an opinion, but you are right to try not to violate WP:3RR with this user. My suggest, look up WP:RFC, and see about getting another opinion. From what I gather it looks like you feel one way, he feels the other, and there's no middle ground in between. The discussion at least is there, however there doesn't appear to be a finalized criteria as for who is considered "Cuban". Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of Cuban Americans
I protected the article so that the dispute would stop. In the protection request, you asked for dispute resolution from admins. Unfortunately, such actions are not in the job description of an admin. You may seek further dispute resolution through WP:RFC, WP:3O, WP:MEDIATION, or any of the other processes described in Dispute resolution. Thank you. If you need anything else, let me know. --Jayron32. talk . contribs 19:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * (copied from my talk page to keep in one place)
 * Thank you for your help with the article List of Cuban Americans. I have attempted the Third Opinion option and that hasn't resolved anything. What's the best route do you think I should head on to get this resolved? This user has many sock puppet accounts and I have asked him (or her) to keeop the disputed names off the list until a third opinion is heard, to no success. Very stubborn bloke, but if you see talk page I have provided conversation on why rumors, unauthorized bios, multinational families, and baptismal certificates are not valid references to include these entries on the list. Please help!!! --XLR8TION (talk) 19:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I would recommend WP:RFC. Most of the steps higher up on the WP:DR heirarchy usually require that an WP:RFC is atleast attempted before they will take them on.  If that is unfruitful, keep escalating as described in WP:DR.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  19:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

No personal attacks
Please refrain from personal attacks like calling ignorant. I've asked you kindly before. 72.144.39.229 (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Please do not be so critical of other editors. Just comment on content, not other users. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Requesting help
As it says on the top of my talk page, I'm only sporadically active these days, so I'd suggest you ask somebody else if you need urgent help.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  22:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lalupegh.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Lalupegh.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

New mailing list
There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it!  Cbrown1023   talk   21:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

You are invited!
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates. This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 03:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ilikeitlikethatdvd.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ilikeitlikethatdvd.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes 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 non-free media 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. Project FMF (talk) 01:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Quentin Elias
Hello, I know this is old news but, just out of curiosity, I'd like to know about your exchange with the vandal who tried to turn the Quentin Elias article into a vanity page. Are you sure it was Quentin Elias himself ? Given his alias (Qnyc), this is probable, but it could be his agent. Did you exchange emails with him ? I'm just being curious about his approach to public relations. Thanks, Wedineinheck (talk) 11:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Mcatoday.jpg
I have tagged Image:Mcatoday.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Use rationale examples. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts). This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edward P. Felt
I noticed that after “Edward P. Felt” survived a proper AfD, there was a later quickie used to deleted it with just three votes being declared consensus. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 02:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Second Annual WikiNYC Picnic
Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come! You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Imagenrevista.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Imagenrevista.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan
WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT


 * Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
 * Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)

WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:


 * Wikis Take Manhattan page at The Open Planning Project


 * 349 W. 12th St. #3
 * Between Greenwich & Washington Streets
 * By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop

FOR UPDATES

Check out:


 * Wikis Take Manhattan main website

This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,
 * Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ruthomissuniverse.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ruthomissuniverse.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hectorlavoe.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Hectorlavoe.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 04:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You are invited!
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, finalize and approve bylaws, interact with representatives from the Software Freedom Law Center, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the June meeting's minutes and the September meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikis Take Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wikipedia Loves Art! bonanza, being planned with the Brooklyn Museum for February.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)