Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tcatron565

In order to remain listed at Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 16:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is:, 29 July 2024 (UTC).


 * (Tcatron565 | talk | contributions)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

Statement of the dispute
''This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.''

Description
Tcatron565 has repeatedly violated Wikipedia's copyright policy, along with other policies. A quick viewing of the discussion page shows the user has been warned by at least the following users:
 * User:Yamla
 * User:Probell
 * User:Extraordinary Machine
 * User:NSLE
 * User:Revolución
 * User:Golbez

The user is only just 18 and may simply not understand copyright law and Wikipedia's policy. However, the user has been warned over and over and over again over the past ten or twelve weeks and continues to upload copyrighted material. I am not sure what more can be done and am looking for some suggestions.

Evidence of disputed behavior
(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)
 * Special:Undelete/Image:At20056_sat.jpg
 * Special:Undelete/Image:Mostwantedsignedit.jpg
 * Special:Undelete/Image:Marvelcave2.jpg
 * Special:Undelete/Image:Grandfathersm.jpg
 * Special:Undelete/Image:Betastrike.gif
 * 
 * 
 * 

Applicable policies
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
 * Copyrights

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
(provide diffs and links)
 * User talk:Tcatron565

Users certifying the basis for this dispute
{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

(sign with ~ )
 * Yamla 16:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Golbez 18:38, 29 October 2005 (UTC) - I think this is simply an age/maturity problem, but it is extremely difficult to communicate with someone who thinks using fifty exclamation points is helpful. --Golbez 18:38, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, this is the kind of deceit I think we have all come to expect from you, Golbez. There are actually four hundred and sixty-seven exclamation marks in that diff, far more than the mere fifty you cite. Furthermore, the last one is in bold. I am shocked by this attempt to maul the truth. -Ashley Pomeroy 20:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * probell 13:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC) - The user removed his images after I pointed out the copyright issue, but from edit history and talk page, it seems clear that he didn't absorb the information on copyright that I pointed him towards. I guess it's age/maturity. /probell (Talk) 13:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * NSLE 01:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC) - I also once removed some images he added to the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season article and added him to WP:VIP with a note on his talk page. He didn't stop, and obviously readded the images, as Golbez had to remove them again later... -- NS LE  ( Commu nicate! ) < Contribs > 01:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary
(sign with ~ )

Response
Hi, I'm Tcatron565. I'm sorry for all the violations. I swear I will never put pictures on this site again! I'll leave that to you guys above. That is mostly the problem. I will just put on basic correct text. For ex: I have put on the dates of the 2005 hurricanes. If you people need to have me do something to improve a page, I'm your guy!

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):
 * Tcatron565 16:19, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * - latest image was uploaded after this "swear", without a source, and just syaing the image is copyrighted. -- NS LE  ( Commu nicate! ) < Contribs > 01:39, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems to have been deleted. -- NS LE  ( Commu nicate! ) < Contribs > 05:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, sorry, I noticed it before seeing it linked here and figured removing a copyvio was more important than preserving evidence. If any further are found, I won't touch them. I think enough people know what's going on without maintaining a concrete piece of evidence, the user's comments betray that they have been uploading Wunderground images, and the deletion logs show that they were uploaded with an unacceptable copyright license. --Golbez 18:59, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Outside view of Hipocrite
Copyright is a very difficult thing to understand. It is perfectly OK that Tcatron565 has had a hard time navigating it. As opposed to never uploading a picture again, in the future, Tcatron565, if he has any question about the legality of a picture whatsoever, instead of just uploading it, should instead approach one of the endorsers of this RFC or the endorsers of this summary with a description of the picture and where he got the picture from, and ask them if the picture fits within our copyright policy.

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):
 * 1) Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 18:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Agreed. Linuxbeak | Talk 19:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Makes sense. Robert McClenon 13:24, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) I'm still new, but it sounds good. --64.9.10.166 16:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Outside view
''This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.''

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):

Discussion
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.