User talk:HighInBC/Archive 6

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

It's not really new per say, as you've been using it for a few now, but I just had to add that I like the new sig! нмŵוτнτ 18:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you take a look at Talk:Chinese in the Russian Revolution and the Russian Civil War and give me some thoughts on how to proceed? I defer to you since you were the one who protected the page. --Richard 18:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Do you ever feel like you are babysitting? 1 != 2 18:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Lucky guy. I feel more like I'm stopping WW III (I'm kidding).

• It appears that you've protected the page in which the Proposal for Deletion has been improperly removed.
• May I suggest that you restore said Deletion Proposal notice?
• Now you may go back to your Baby Sitting - lick guy!

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 23:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I really don't know how a {{prod}} can be improperly removed, anyone can remove it if they disagree. I also don't think it is appropriate for a {{prod}} to be on a protected page as the whole point is to see if anyone removes it. The edit history of that article is rather clogged up due to edit warring. Can you show me where a proposed deletion was removed improperly? Once I have more details I can make a more informed decision. 1 != 2 23:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

OK. I think that the Proposed Deletion Tags were Removed by numerous re-namings. But here's one (of several) which I've found (is that what you've asked for?): [1]. Yours truly, --Ludvikus 00:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

That is not a proposed deletion but a request for speedy deletion. The reason you gave is not amongst those list at the speedy deletion criteria. Speedy deletions are only done in non-controversial situations, you are welcome to nominate it for deleted through WP:AfD, but I am not sure how well that will go so soon after the previous nomination. 1 != 2 02:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Aren't you supposed to put it on your user page or something? You just fill in the template, put it on a page (your userpage), save, and it's all done?Rlevse 15:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

You need to calculate the checksum yourself, I used this tool. Then you only publish the checksum, userpage is fine. 1 != 2 15:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Original content moved.

I'm taking the liberty of moving this discussion to the article Talk Page. Short admin discussions might reasonably take place on user Talk Pages but content discussions belong on the article Talk Page. Revert me if you disagree with this. --Richard 16:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. 1 != 2 16:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I see that you too appear relatively even-handed in the matter of the dispute over this article. I therefore intend to listen very carefully, and give it significant appropriate weight, to anything you have to say in the matter of avoiding any disruption at Wikipedia. Cheers. Yours truly, --Ludvikus 17:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

To give advice I need to know if you think that the problem is an issue of disputed content, or if this an issue of behavior. The two ways of handling this is mediation(done with content disputes) or a request for comments(done for behavioral issues). I have seen that Mikkalia has said he is unwilling to go through mediation or other forms of dispute resolution with you. I wonder how you feel about the idea of having a third party mediate the discussion between you and Mikkalia? 1 != 2 19:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

hi sir! about that we had disdussion in the policy talk page. it seems you are opposed, may I ask you explain your reason and discusse about it with me?! regards,--Gordafarid 17:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

It was discussed, a general agreement was reached, and I waited a while to see if anyone else wanted to comment. I have implemented the agreed on change now. 1 != 2 18:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

ok dear. also I`ll be in wait for others. if any change reached plz say to me in my talk page. thanksgiving for your attention.--Gordafarid 19:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

• hi. we can do that change now? it seems anyone doesn`t opposeed. then we can add the sentencess that admins must notify blocking to users that aren`t vandal and have minimum 50 edit in the wiki. else admins may notifying.--Gordafarid 15:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

That change was made days ago, see here. It reflects the outcome of the discussion of the change you initially made. It seems to have been accepted. 1 != 2 15:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

thanks alot! I didn`t see it. thanks for your attention.--Gordafarid 08:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Until(1==2), That is a nice name. Now can I edit again on my car? There is much instructions on my page, so I do not know what is best. I will try now to edit good. Please help if I make wrong to something. Call me Alliz if you wish as my logon I am proud of (respect to my family)but is not always easy.

Mank thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allizkiwfoteppupkcosaton (talk • contribs) 16:05, 27 October 2007

No, you need to get a name change first. You are unblocked so that you can get a namechange. There are instructions on the message I left you. If you resume editing before making a name change you will be re-blocked.

Thanks for helping out on the wiki, I hope after your name change you will become a regular contributor. 1 != 2 16:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please no re-blocked me yet. I will not edit as you say. I must research more on my car. American culture is good, but names are difficult to define for these Hi-risers type automobile. They are only here in some places and people on street know them much, but it is hard to find documents in library on such things. I like this name I have now, can we see if you may like it somehow? Already I e-mail family to show them my edits. These instructionns confuse me, please help me to know how I keep my name and can edit at same time. I promise to have my writing checked by daughter for proper words on these proud pages for all to read and learn about. Something else, how is this you sign your words. I would like to make this happen for me to look like real editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allizkiwfoteppupkcosaton (talk • contribs) 16:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have made the instructions as simple as I can make them, you just click the link I gave and post the text I gave. You are welcome to simply create a new account if the instructions for a name change are too difficult. A username block will not effect your ability to read the encyclopedia for your research. To sign a post you have made to a talk page add 4 tildes after like this "~~~~", that will add a signature. 1 != 2 16:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have done these things you say. Now I wait some more? May I make edits while you deside? Many thanks Allizkiwfoteppupkcosaton 16:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

You asked to be unblocked so you can change your name, now I see that you are saying on the name change board that you do not want your name changed. I am going to reinstate your username block. You can simply create a new account under a simpler name. 1 != 2 17:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. It is actually of a lower quality (it is not a duplicate), esthetically, irrespectively of the format. Regards, El_C 15:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

It is tagged as fair use, if it has an open license for some reason it should be marked as such. 1 != 2 15:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I see you already have changed the tag... I have no reason to dispute the new claim. :) 1 != 2 15:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Years ago, I tagged it as PD, which was somewhat inaccurate (it is free use), so I guess someone tagged as FU by default. El_C 15:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ahem. User:Say No To Torture and User:I don't like torture? Trolling, pure and simple. I've hardblocked the second and blocked the first. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 23:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hehe, good call. 1 != 2 23:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Apparently!! -- Flyguy649 ^talk 14:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I know this page was deleted, but I'm wondering if you would unsalt the page so Im So Hood can be moved to that title as it is now notable. Admc2006 09:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

According to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I'm So Hood, it was deleted due to having a lack of verifiable sources. I am looking at the new version Im So Hood and I do not see any verifiable sources for the information. If you find some sources to verify what is being said in the article I will gladly unsalt the alternate title. However, unless verifiable sources(soon) are found I will delete Im So Hood as a recreation of AfD'd material without addressing the issues. 1 != 2 16:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

OK, here is the source showing the peak chart positions of I'm So Hood. Admc2006 16:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Okay, that is at least a demonstration that the subject of the article is significant. I am going to unsalt I'm So Hood, but please understand that you will need to find sources to back up any claim made in the article. 1 != 2 16:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

You left a "rationale please" template on my talk page for Image:LRonHubbard-Dianetics-ISBN1403105464-cover.jpg. As you can see at the image page, there's a rationale in the text ... presumably it's not in this week's correct templated form ;-) Could you please edit your template to name the correct template to put the rationale in, with an example? This should also lead to less angst for others not sure how to proceed. Thanks :-) - David Gerard 11:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

When I left the note it did not have a rational, it was added by another person after I left you the note[2]. The current state looks fine. What it had before was an assertion of fair use, but not a rational. A template is not required, if the criteria are met then a custom made one is fine. 1 != 2 15:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks :-) - David Gerard 19:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for telling me User:Alice.S, it seems I made a mistake and would have missed it if not for your notice. 1 != 2 20:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome (although we'll have to agree to disagree about "mistake" - grin)Alice.S 20:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

He attacks again romanian users. He blocks them, he threatens them, he deletes their work.

Mikkalai (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

post your view on WP:ANI —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.254.193.119 (talk) 19:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'll look into the situation later and add it to my notes if there is anything to add. 1 != 2 22:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, thank you at least for notifying me, which is more than what most of the admins around this place would do. But seriously, this whole "fair use rationale" thing is starting to wear thin. I won't make an issue of this since the screencap really is unnecessary... go ahead and delete it. For the record, my version of the image was actually a replacement for a near-identical lo-quality screencap that already existed (and noone made an case against it that I'm aware of). Sweetfreek (talk) 01:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well the crux of the issue is that a rational is needed to describe why it is necessary and how it fits into fair use. If it is not necessary then we should not use a non-free image. The whole "fair use" thing is something we just have to deal with. Sorry if it bothered you. 1 != 2 21:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.