User talk:Yamla

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 3 days are automatically archived to User talk:Yamla/Archive 8. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

• Archive 1 (from Dec 16, 2004 - April 17, 2006)
• Archive 2 (from April 17, 2006 to May 31, 2006)
• Archive 3 (from June 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006)
• Archive 4 (from July 1, 2006 to August 14, 2006)
• Archive 5 (from August 14, 2006 to September 2, 2006)
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8

All I did was an a link to a couple fansites I found, I don't see the problem. It says on that page you linked that fansites are okay, so I think you are really over reacting. It's certainly not innapropritate, and I don't have anything to do with them so take a chill pill. Don't be a link nazi just because you don't like them, it's perfectly valid to link sites that offer additional information on the subject. - 67.163.235.67

"Don't be a link nazi just because you don't like them." Hey, its Wikipedia, thats how they (unfortunately) work. Now..., if those fansites paid Rick Jeliffe to add those links, like his work on Microsoft, they may have stayed up. Its the essence of wikilobbying! After all, reality has become a commodity! Thanks Wikipedia, give it to us naughty! - ZombiesNTea 00:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you can just delete this image Image:Famous logo.jpg, unless you could tell me what it needs. Sry for the inconvinence.

This moron vandalized the Rolling Stones page. Please block him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75pickup (talk • contribs)

Greetings Yamla, seeing as you've had contact with the first user above I thought it would be good for you to know about this user's sockpuppetry/block evasion. User:Pschemp indefinitely blocked Mactabbed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as well as Exclusive bad apple (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) a result of these ANI threads. Now this user is puppeting again as User:Juror 8 and has again been blocked by User:Pschemp. Given your negative interactions and prior blockings of this user I thought you should be aware of his continued disruption. Thanks. (→Netscott) 06:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hesitant to believe that this image is "replaceable". To begin with, I've yet to see an image of the girl that was not derived from one of the two advertising videos. This article is not really an "actress bio" of Ellen Feiss, it's more an article about an advertising character played by Ellen Feiss, as Ellen Feiss isn't notable for any other achievement, and wouldn't be notable for this one either if not for her cute, goofy, and slightly doped-up appearance in the TV commercials for Apple Computer. Even if she got cornered by paparazzi next week (not likely), she's like age 20 now and likely no longer resembles the girl in the video. —freak(talk) 23:54, Dec. 9, 2006 (UTC)

Hello Yamla, I noticed your block review message and just wanted to let you know that you originally repeatedly blocked that user (under another sock) for fair usage violations. User:Pschemp eventually permablocked for the same reasons, etc. under another sockpuppet →User:Mactabbed. Hope that helps to jog your memory. Thanks. (→Netscott) 05:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a copy violating image on the Ajithkumar page from the film Aalwar. Just thought you should know.

I added the Fair Use rationales for Image:Hilary Duff - Metamorphosis.jpg and Image:Hilary Duff Most Wanted.jpg is it okay to take off the No Fair Use templates now. Quasyboy 15:20 2 January 2007 (UTC)

About Nicole's image.I want that you he helps me in a photo for the page of the Nicole because when I you place the image in the same page of it strap with copyright certain.

i think Playstation Portable should be protected...

if u want to then delete it but as i said earlier its only for illustrative and informational purpose - i have given two sources links - if that is wrong please then tell me step by step what to do, thanks cusulli

Hello Yamla, I have a quick question for you. I would like to know why you blocked Shaericell. Not that I oppose your decision if you had a reason, but I'd like to know why. Did she do something? RyGuy Sign Here! My Journal 12:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I looked at her talk page, and she had images that you wanted replaced. I still hold my query though. Why was she infinantly blocked? RyGuy Sign Here! My Journal 15:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

She was indefinitely, not infinitely, blocked because I believe her and her "sister's" profile are fraudulent, because she has been uploading images with apparently deliberately false licenses, using Wikipedia for social networking, etc. I have contacted her by email and given her several options, all of which would involve unblocking, and would be happy to do so if she is willing to adhere to Wikipedia policies. Once again, this is not meant to be an infinite block, it is meant to be a temporary block until she can resolve the licenses on the images her and her sockpuppet have been uploading or until they agree not to upload fake images, and until she has read WP:NOT. --Yamla 15:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you block this user before he edits any more please? Blatant vandal account and I'm just following him around reverting. Thanks, SteveLamacq43 16:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your note on Pschemp's page. Please note that User:RJII was banned for one year, effective July 1, 2006, by an Arbitration Committee decision. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Infinity0#RJII_banned. I assume you weren't aware of this, which is understandable as it was never reflected in the account's block log, although the case is linked on the user's talkpage. Regards, Newyorkbrad 17:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you unblocked "All Male Action." What does your edit summary "Parent account was blocked for being shared" mean? Is "All Male Action" now capable of editing? 172 | Talk 17:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the block of RJII for "shared account" was before the ArbCom ban, so I believe the latter would supersede the former. Newyorkbrad 17:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of the ArbCom decision. When I took a look, it appeared that the account was blocked solely because it was a shared account. Based on this, I unblocked All Male Action. It appears that this was the initial block but that the ArbCom decision later modified this. My apologies, thanks to everyone who spoke up. --Yamla 18:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. (I made more than a fair share of misapplied blocks and unblocks myself.) Thanks for the note. 172 | Talk 18:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/DeanHinnen Thank you so much! --BenBurch 21:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have granted the user's request to unblock to ask for a username change; however, the account is still blocked. (Personally, I wouldn't have unblocked the user, as he seems to be only here to cause trouble; but if your opinion is different, it's your call.) - Mike Rosoft 23:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree on both points. I think possibly unblocking the user is stretching WP:AGF but hey, I'm a hopeless optimist. --Yamla 23:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the cite for the information which has been on this page since 2005. http://en.allexperts.com/e/k/ka/kara_borden.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tommypowell (talk • contribs) 16:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia cannot be used to cite itself. Please reread WP:RS. --Yamla 16:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All right-here is a newspaper article from the Lancaster New Era newspaper dated November 22, 2005. You must sign up for the archive to read the complete article.

http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/18762

Or you can go here and read the first result: http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&safe=off&q=lancaster+new+era%22+kara+borden%22+ludwig+2+06+91&btnG=Search Tommypowell 19:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Read WP:CITE to learn how to add this as a citation and feel free to add the information back. Thanks! --Yamla 19:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at User:zach1114's contributions and the only time zach111493 comes up is by the part where the page is called user:zach111493/easier format. 24.190.158.229 18:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These two accounts are clearly owned by the same person. They edit from the same IP address. --Yamla 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He probably are relatives or one doesn't have i.e. 24.190.158.229 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With the same name and the same birthdate? This is close enough to qualify as a sockpuppet as per WP:SOCK. --Yamla 18:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the account is Zach1114 is that it was the quickest name I could think of for my friend and he agreed. By the way he doesn't have internet so he only uses it when he comes to my house. From Zach111493 ^{my talk}my contributions 02:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will you please do something about Lilb1293? This person is still uploading images without adding the source info. I had recently nominated an image claiming to be the cover to Keyshia Cole's sophmore album, Tears From a Soldier's Heart, for deletion. Well, that image has recently been deleled, but the user uploaded another image (different from the first) claiming to be the official cover also. Either he/she should provide the necessary source information, or stop uploading images altogether. Admc2006 20:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked him indefinitely. --Yamla 21:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just to let you know that I have responded on the image talk-page. I'd like to ask you to be patient with me as I am obviously new to the strict rules governing image uploads, so please be assured that if I "technically" commit a violation then it is most assuredly unintentional. In all fairness I expected a helpful explanation from you the last time around and did not receive one. I have explained all of this on the concerned talk-page and would be grateful for a response.

Also, please advise on the correct procedure about gaining copyright permission from organisations. I have contacted PETA (India) and they have granted me permission to upload a certain image to Wikipedia with the sole provision that "PETA (India)" is credited. Please advise on how to go about doing this so that I do not commit any inadvertent violations. Thanks, Ekantik ^talk 01:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can read about how to request permission at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Note specifically that it is not sufficient to get permission just for the Wikipedia. As to the other image (I'm sorry, I forget which image it is), please note that we may only use freely-licensed images to depict living people. That is, an image released from copyright or one licensed under the GFDL or some such license. We may not use promotional images or images from films or posters or such, not if the subject is still alive. If you have any more specific questions, please ask. --Yamla 04:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for that helpful explanation. I meant to say that I have already made the enquiries and permission has already been granted, so now I'll need to forward those emails to the WM Committee as per the link you gave, thanks again. The image in question is Image:ShilpaShettyPETA.jpg, and per ShadowHalo's advice I am just about to follow the procedure of informing the WM Committee that permission has been granted. Ekantik ^talk 02:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just spotted this photo from Flickr and it looks reasonable enough to have been taken by the uploader and has an acceptable license, is this suitable for uploading to Wikipedia? Also, as the image seems to have too much background, it's ok if I crop this picture into some kind of close-up, right? As the license allows derivatives, this should be no problem isn't it? Ekantik ^talk 04:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The license permits it. However, I have serious concerns about the source. The account has uploaded only this image. As such, we really would need additional confirmation that the uploader took this image with his own camera. That is, some evidence that this person is not simply taking credit for someone else's work. I'm not trying to be difficult here, it's just that this image was only uploaded yesterday by a person who has only this image as a contribution. It's more than a little dubious. How did you find it, by the way?--Yamla 04:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just searched Flickr for "Shilpa Shetty" and it came up in the results. I suppose it is the only picture because the user account may be new, or the uploader's other contributions are set to "private" and thus not publicly viewable. I'll send the uploader a note for confimation but of course I suspect he/she will say "yes", and it may be a rather extreme application of WP:AGF to accept it. :) I'll let you know of the progress nevertheless, and my other efforts to find free images are also ongoing. Ekantik ^talk 06:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You really know how to organize a page, Yamla. I was wondering how to get a backround or maybe even one of those editing counters on my User Page. I'm relativley new to this whole experience and need a few pointers. By the way, You're my favorite wikipedian. Just thought you might want to know.

-Nick B. Student and Wikipedia Editor

--I am your father. 17:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add any links to Zac's article. I removed one...but I most certainly didn't add any...did you maybe post on the wrong person's talk page? -Sukecchi 20:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This could very well be. I suspect I had too many browser windows open and added the comment to the wrong one. Please accept my apologies and feel free to remove the warning from your talk page. Have a good weekend! --20:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, mistakes happen. I hope you have a nice weekend as well. -Sukecchi 20:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, I seriously need help. You see, there is currently an edit war going on at the Billa (2007 film). User:Anwar saadat, User:Prince Godfather and User:Pokkiri have been constantly adding unconfirmed info into the article and whenever I try to remove them, they keep reverting back. The problem is, the plot section they keep adding is directly taken from Don (2007 film), of which Billa is a remake of. Don was shot in Malaysia you see and I dont think Billa will be. And the trivia section I've trying to rid the article of is FILLED WITH FANGUSH. Help me. Btw, here's are those edits ====> [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] -- Hariharan91 04:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have left messages for those concerned. You are also expected to discuss your problems with the plot on that article's discussion page. --Yamla 04:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely clear why you protected his talk page; he's making expressions of frustration with a block he clearly does not agree with, but cutting off communication doesn't seem likely to help him understand or change his behavior. I didn't see his behavior as warranting cutting off his last method of communication on-wiki. Would you consider removing protection and settle for removing any explicit attacks? -- nae'blis 17:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He was blocked for rampant personal attacks. He continued making these personal attacks on his talk page once he was blocked. In my opinion, it is entirely inappropriate to allow him to continue making the personal attacks. If you can get his personal assurance that these will cease, I would be happy to lift the protection from his page, however. If not, the protection expires around the end of his 48 hour block, give or take a few minutes. --Yamla 18:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think you should check on LoveHate Question. He/She may be a sockpuppet of Lilb1293. This person uploaded an image claiming to be a cover of Keyshia Cole's sophmore album, Just Like You which is very similar to this image, with just a title change. And, instead of moving the previous title, Tears From a Soldier's Heart, to the new page, LoveHate Question simply created the new title and blanked the old one. Will you look into it? Admc2006 19:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a clear case. The account has been shut down and all the edits I could find have been reverted. --Yamla 20:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for verifying the details and unblocking me. Previous requests before the checkuser were simply removed without reply!!! Frater Xyzzy 15:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, seems like my IP got blocked as well, User:204.122.16.13. While I have no intention of editing with it myself, I noticed that a couple of edits in the history were not mine, so it may be a shared IP? It's a new service for me so I'm not sure, but I wouldn't want to be the cause of the other editor who used it previously being blocked if it is. Since I'm unblocked, there seems to be no reason for it to be blocked... Frater Xyzzy 23:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dispute the unblocking, for the following reason:

I don't care that Frater Xyzzy is not Jefferson Anderson. Xyzzy stated clearly he moved - of course it's not going to match. He had to have been blocked for a very good reason by the admin who did so. My reason for the RFCU was that while Xyzzy was blocked, he continued to edit as an IP, thus evading the block, and later admitted he was said Xyzzy openly. He masqueraded as an anon IP editor on an article he wrote as Xyzzy (Obligations in Freemasonry when it was prodded; he removed the prod (which he in hindsight should not have done, as he was evading a block) and forced an AfD as a result. He then claimed COI on said article on AN, when being the original author, he was in fact the one with the COI, and has generally been acting disruptively on that article. He has now gone back and changed all his IP comments to "Frater Xyzzy". I don't care what the technicality was, he did not follow proper procedure, he knowingly evaded a block, and has violated a number of policies by doing so. As a disruptive bad-faith editor, his block should not have been lifted. MSJapan 16:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user was blocked for being a sockpuppet of Jefferson Anderson. When the checkuser came back conclusively negative, it was no longer appropriate to leave this user blocked. If there have been other violations meriting a block, please report the user. He was unblocked solely because the reason claimed for the block turned out to be false. --Yamla 17:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea, I've only seen it today when I blocked some nonsense username creations earlier. Seems to ip User:216.220.101.115. --pgk 22:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just today, I reverted a few back around Christmas time. Very strange. Normally I have some vague idea of who I supposedly have a crush on. But there you go, live and learn. --Yamla 22:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be Special:Undelete/Kate_McAuliffe --pgk 22:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]