User talk:Yamla

Archive

Archive (from Dec 16, 2004 - April 17, 2006)

2006

Hey sorry, wow I didnt even realise it was ACTUALLY editing the page, i now understand wikipedias ways. I should have used the sandbox or whatever you said. My bad, sorry.

Yo. I'm sorry I wrote all of those things about the black eyed peas, fallout boy, micheal moore and Pete doherty. Oh and the kooks, but what I said wasn't false, that guy is freaking ugly. What the fuck. Emo sucks.

April

Yamla, thank you for your comments. If I have valuable information or great pictures of an artist, why can't I link it to my webpage? I understand that the information should be included in wikipedia instead, but what about the pictures? Why can't I create a link to my own webpage, however I can add links to other's webpages? thanks for your response, I am new on wikipedia and I would really like to collaborate. Being part of the team of the Cannes Film Festival and the Monaco TV Festival, we have taken pictures of hundreds of important actors and I think this would really enrich the content of Wikipedia. (About Evangeline Lilly) April 25th,2006 Thanks, Iliana from Biosstars

I'm sorry, Wikipedia policy dictates that it is inappropriate to add links to these sorts of sites to Wikipedia articles. Please read WP:EL for information on what external links are appropriate. You should never add a link to a site you run, which means the entire Biosstars website cannot be added by you. More generally, a collection of pictures, while a useful web resource, is not particularly valuable to an encyclopedia. Now, on the other hand, if one of your pictures can be licensed appropriately (basically, freely licensed), please feel free to add it to an article if the article does not already have a picture. Thanks! --Yamla 20:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It was not nonsense as u suggested, i recommend that YOU double check before coming down hard on ppl who want to contribute lawfully. Check this out,

http://entertainment1.sympatico.msn.ca/Celebs/News/ContentPosting.aspx?newsitemid=KP18040609&feedname=CP-SHOWBIZ_V2&show=False&number=0&showbyline=False&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc -- unsigned comments from 24.43.168.82 (talk)

But that's not what you used to cite the information you added. The citation you used was this which says nothing about her birthday party whatsoever. Additionally, the site you provide references the UK Sun and that is most definitely a tabloid and not suitable for a Wikipedia citation. --Yamla 23:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Suri Cruise

It was a mistake, I was kidding around and didn't even realize I saved it. Secondly, do people normally get "last warnings" as their first warnings? I have never been accused of vandalizing a page before. And, as far as the subject matter goes, I am sure there has been/is much vandalism on this page as well as on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' page, but i fyou look at Holmes' page you'll see that I was actually one of the contributors to that page being named a featured article. Though I understand where you are coming from, I hope you can except my excuse and I'll expect an apology as soon as you get a chance.AriGold 22:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the apology. I was blocked once before (I think for one hour) for engaging in an edit war with a poster who 3 mods had been told not to do something. I kept reverting the article back to the way the consensus of mods had told the other poster it should be, so I actually thought I was doing the right thing. Needless to say, the other poster was banned for a while, but I was given a banishment as a token punishment for engaging in the edit war. I always knew that would come back to haunt me, ha. I was really ticked off when you gave me that last warning and I too apologize for being kind of mean with my response to you. Glad we worked it out.

I ment the speedy deletion tag. Jonathan235 11:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

RED HAIR

Wikipedia was having server issues, so I got the "wikimedia server issue page" after I hit the preview button, so I simply posted the update and would check back when things got back to normal. I am pretty consistent with my edits, so no worries. Thanks for being observant. --Cabanaguy :)

RE: Vandalism

"Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Ciara, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Yamla 17:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)"

I just updated the charts! And I deleted unconfirmed information (The name "Fever" has never been confirmed) - that's no sign for "vandalism" ... So why should I be blocked?

You did not cite your changes. You've already been warned about that and there's a big warning specifically on the Ciara page itself. --Yamla 13:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Hduff2 image

hey. I don't really understand...how can I make the photo right? (CENA LUV 17:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC))

You claimed that the copyright for that image fell under the terms of the GNU FDL. However, you presented no signed statement from Maxim to this effect. Your best bet would be to scan in the letter you received confirming they have licensed this image under that license. If you did not receive a signed statement from Maxim, your next best bet is to take a look at the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and find the appropriate one. I am not aware, however, of any fair-use justification for using that image on that page. In other words, I suspect there's no way we can use the image without violating copyright. Image copyright is a tricky thing. You generally are not permitted to use magazine scans on the Wikipedia. --Yamla 17:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you for your help with the Reese Witherspoon article. Greatly appreciated! --Marysunshine 22:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Why do we need a CITE to hear a pitch? I guess this is were I have a problem because like it or not, the entertainment companies are not packing them in to test their abilities scientifically. This is just one of those areas where it is easy to hear whether a pitch is high or low. I think nearly anybody can tell if a pitch is high or "glass-shattering" high. Sorry, just my two cents. Antares33712 16:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

We need a citation because Wikipedia has a policy against original research, because Reese Witherspoon's whistle register abilities are disputed, and because you had already been requested to provide this citation on that article's discussion page. --Yamla 16:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

RE: Urban Myth

Sorry for that. Actually i have got scrap in orkut about how Mr. Orkut earns money out of orkut. I just like to share information with others. If you are saying that the information was wrong then could you tell me how Mr. Orkut and google earns from ORKUT. Please answer this, i am curious about it.

Shattering glass

Hi there. I was just browsing and came across the article on Whistle register. I see that on the talk page you commented (some time ago) about a programme in the 70s/80s where someone demonstrated the "shatter a glass by singing" thing. I wonder: could you be thinking of Think of a Number (or perhaps its sequel Think Again), a children's maths and science programme presented by Johnny Ball on the BBC? The dates are right. And I think I saw the same thing :) Telsa (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

tool

the website is 99% english with some minor stuff in italian, and i added it under the fansite section, so it's normal for it to be a fansite. put it back :) Unixer 15:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

As per WP:EL, at most one fansite may be appropriate in extreme cases. There's already a fansite on that page so I don't think your addition is appropriate. If you disagree, though, please feel free to bring it up on the article's discussion page and I'll be happy to debate the merits. Thanks! --Yamla 15:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

yamla i'm brazilian and i have dificults in traslation inglish...my inglish is sucks but i try...sorry for image [P!nk]....is delet now....cause i don't put copyrith because i dont know how make it!! but i don't pratic vandalism...and please!!!! Stupid girls is #4 in uk charts no #2!!! thanks hooker

My user talk page....

How is it that I can't delete anything from my talk page? DarknessProductionsInc 02:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

The reason you are not permitted is because this serves as a record of what other people have said to you. For example, we can see that you've uploaded several images with problems. If you just delete the comments, it looks like there's never been any problems. Additionally, they are not your words to delete. --Yamla 02:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

You should not delete external links some are good resource. --unsigned comments from Grace kalenda (talk)

Some are, but you are spamming links. Please reread WP:EL for Wikipedia's external links policy. --Yamla 02:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Spore release-date

Yamla, you recently reverted one of my additions (or rather, corrections) to the Spore (game) page for lack of citation. You're probably right, my source is http://games.telenet.be/index.php?act=one&nid=22377 which talks about the fact that both ebgames.com and gamestop.com have changed their pre-sale shipping date to the 1st of Feb 2007. Not really citable imho, so maybe it's best to keep the information as it is now. Thanks for pointing that out. Theroachman 03:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of account

Is there any way that I could get my account deleted? I just don't care to have an account with Wikipedia anymore. DarknessProductionsInc 16:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Account_deletion#Deleting_your_user_account for information about deleting user accounts. --Yamla 16:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

re: Natasha Henstridge

No need to introduce that category into the Natasha Henstridge page, she's already listed as belonging to one or more child categories.  :) --Yamla 16:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing up "child categories" to my attention. I realize now that the hierarchy should be sufficient. I've been adding "Canadian actors" to a variety of Wiki bios and maybe many of those should be reverted as well. One question regarding "British Columbia actors" category, which is where I actually started adding to actors/actresses categories. It's also listed as a "child category" so what is the best way to reconcile a "geographical" child category. Maybe that "category" should have been set up differently? Southsloper 08:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Checked out some of the Categories discussions - I'll read some more on those to understand it better and conventions :-) Meanwhile I'll stop adding "Canadian actors" and "British Columbia actors" categories until I understand the whole scheme better. Thanks. Southsloper 09:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

red hair

I have read your user page, but i do not believe that i have "added non-sense to any article". I added this list: alex 15:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC) May-Bee, but maybe it also takes a Cockney expert to proove that. I am not one. alex 16:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I refer to this edit. I'm sorry but it is complete crap that 'ginger' refers to the Gaiety Theatre on South King Street in Dublin, Ireland. --Yamla 16:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I completely disagree with this statement of yours. I read the edit, and under the gaining of information about the meaning of words, it has value. Please, stop placing your value-judgements on the edits of others. In this case, you're most inaccurate, and wrong. Zennie 9:39 May 19, 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I provided a citation that Akidd dublin was incorrect (though not here). The original statement on Red hair was correct, Akidd's edit introduced false information and was later reverted. --Yamla 16:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Nicknames for people with red/orange hair

• Tomato
• Redhead
• Ginger

I do not see "adding vandalism" within this. The term "ghey" is not scientific. I can refuse to spell a non-scientific term (within a official work contract, or something that is compareable to it). No one can be urged to use "ghey" in a non-scientific sense. "Cockney" is about, well "free usage of language", but not about "throwing rotten tomatoes".

This is not meant personally. I suggest that you use the discussion page: Talk:Red_hair, to communicate about modificatios of the article. alex 15:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

A related discussion is taking place on Talk:Red hair. I have no idea what this user is talking about with "ghey", however. --Yamla 16:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

It is an alternative spelling of the french word "gai", which is abused in a non-scientific meaning as of present age (2006). Several references within IRISH songs do not mean "gai" people, but the originial "merriement". It's not Cockney, but not worlds apart from britain. I can not proove if the spelling in the article is "wrong" or "right". Definetively Cockney is not "french". alex 16:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

May

Spam complaint

My apologies. I am no Spammer. I was merely adding links to a non-commercial movie review site that I thought would add value for your readers -- since the majority of the reviews are for seldom reviewed movies. I will refrain from future edits.

No need to refrain from future edits, just please do not add links that violate WP:EL policy. --Yamla 14:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

what is vandalism?

I am sorry for what was said, but i thought it required to improve the article Red_hair. Later on, i found something which looks like vandalism to me: Aztec_calendar (at the bottom). The category information was removed. Removing information=vandalism! One does not always know, if information might be useful for someone, even if it looks "bad style", wrong or unrelevant. Personally, i do not really remove information. An attempt to add data is not vandalism! Adding links to commercial sites (unrelated) is called spamming.

I hope this shows i do not have an interest to bug people unneccessarily. alex 08:32, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

What?!

Hey Yamla, what the hell are you talking about, my friend? I didn't write anything about that crazy bitch called Hilary Duff? Maybe I have a dynamic IP, but I think the only thing dynamic around is your brain, azzhole! --200.93.196.236 14:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

In that case, I suggest you get a username. You'll likely get more warnings about vandalism if someone is using this IP address to vandalise articles. And in the future, please note that personal attacks are grounds for a block. --Yamla 15:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Merlinus Blocked by Accident

I am new to Wikipedia, I tried to make an edit and it said I was "autoblocked" by you... whatever that means. But it called me by a user that I never heard of. Maybe it confused my AOL IPS number or something... please check on it and leave a breif message on my user discussion page. Thanks, MARC--merlinus 16:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)--merlinus 16:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked. This one looks like collateral damage as I did not issue any blocks against that user name. Merlinus, please let me know if you are still unable to edit. If so, I'll need to know the exact IP address you are trying to edit from. Hopefully what I've done already is sufficient, though. --Yamla 16:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Still blocked:

something about Havla? I dont know wwhat my exact Ip adress is? --merlinus 16:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are still blocked, I need your IP address to unblock you. Please try a site like this to figure out what your IP address is. --Yamla 17:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Yamla, but it's me, fellow admin Rlquall that you've got blocked at this IP now; I'm stuck with AOL for now and know that I'm not supposed to unblock myself, tempting though it is. Thanks, Rlquall 20:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Its Merlinus, You have done some wide amount of blocking of AOL Isp numbers this morning and caused a lot of trouble for me! Please fix it ASAP so I don't have get into a big hassle over this. Marc--merlinus 20:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)--merlinus 20:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)--merlinus 20:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)--merlinus 20:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, these users should be unblocked now. Sorry, folks, it was unintended collateral damage on a legit block. --Yamla 20:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

IP

When I'm blocked, it always shows me what my IP address is being shown as, which is why I usually can get unblocked fairly well. There is a way to get into any connection to any ISP using the "advanced" button on its software to see what IP address is being used, but I think that it varies among ISP's and in any event is to much to go into here. Most users can probably get it from their ISP's tech support, but we both know just what a hassle that can be. Rlquall 21:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Jluv's sorry

I'am new on this site and I love it I'am sorry for what i did on the Ciara page thuoght it was fever because on the Kayne west page it says  Fever I'am sorry. Next time I change somthing i'll tell you thanks.

No reason to tell me when you are about to edit something, just be careful to read the comments and not to change cited information without providing a better citation for your change! --Yamla 23:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:ChloëSevigny.jpg

I uploaded it, and placed it in the article. you removed it, citing it not being 'fair use' justification. I really could care less, honestly, but I was a little confused, since it is a press release photo from HBO for a new show shes on. Isn't that fair use? Cornell Rockey 03:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I still don't see any evidence that this came from a promotional kit, though it may have been. You are also meant to provide a detailed fair-use justification for each use. It's probably fair use, but not definitely. --Yamla 03:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

That link I've posted as a source seems pretty press-kit-like to me, and as I said, I really don't care that much. No one else seems to have taken issue with my liberal interpretation of 'press kit' but whatever. Happy wikipedia-ing. Cornell Rockey 03:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Confused user

You have written:

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Laura Prepon. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Yamla 14:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, what you are talking about. I never edited anything in the article of Laura Prepon. I never heard from this woman before. --unsigned comments from 195.3.113.174 (talk)

If you did not make those changes then someone else using this IP address did. That is fairly common if you share IP addresses or are on a dynamic IP. As we know a vandal sometimes uses this IP address, I suggest you register a username to prevent your edits being confused with that person's edits. --Yamla 15:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR violation

I wanted to let you know that I have reported your five reverts within 24 hours at Natalee Holloway at the 3RR noticeboard for consideration of the question of blocking you under WP:3RR. You may wish to comment there. Stifle (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

vandalism removal

it is not required to reply. However, i appreciate your removal of explicit graffiti from the article Red_hair. It looks a target for such things. By the way i found an exact suiting template for some formulations within the article... have a look. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 13:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Ken Hitchcock

Sherwood Park could be considered part of Edmonton even though it is still considered a hamlet and city due to it's size. fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 2:45PM (UTC)

I moved your comments to Archive 2. Also, I put famous people from Sherwood Park. That doesn't necessarily mean they have to be born there. Take John V. Hicks for instance. He wasn't born in Prince Albert, but he did live there. fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 3:10PM (UTC)

I should tell you that Archive 2 is dedicated to sports. fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 3:11PM (UTC)

I found what I was looking for. While I was creating the Telus Cup (formerly Air Canada Cup) page I was looking for NHL alumni who have played in the Telus Cup. This is a link to a page which has a lot of NHL alumni that played in the Air Canada Cup. Click here. Now when you scroll down to the H section. You will see that Ken Hitchcock is listed as being from Sherwood Park. fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 4:00PM (UTC)

I also found a profile of him that says he is from Edmonton. Click here. Could this be conflicting? fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 4:05PM (UTC)

Tom Cruise info removal

Excuse me, but you recently deleted my information that I added to Tom Cruise, because you thought of it as vandalism. However, all things i said ARE true. Tom Cruise IS 5'7", those jokes i mentioned ARE real, from mind of mencia, and he most certainly isnt a ninja. So please, put these FACTS back on.--unsigned comments from Soccermike (talk)

I have no idea who or what mencia is but the jokes are inappropriate at that point in the article. As to the height, you forgot to cite this information. Read WP:CITE to learn how to cite. As to him being a ninja, I agree. But virtually nobody is a ninja and we simply don't need that added to each article. He is also, for example, not a zebra but again, that fact doesn't need to be added to the article. --Yamla 21:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

My Archives

I do allow people to talk on my archives. Just don't make a new heading if there is one already there. Just make a new subheading. fishhead2100 May 5, 2006 3:14PM (UTC)

Hey, Is this ok?

Title says it all... I just want you to check the Tom Cruise page to make sure what I put was ok.

Sorry, no. The fact that some television show makes jokes about his height is simply not relevant. It is not particularly notable. In addition, the citation you provided for his height is not reliable. Please remove this information or find a more reliable source. Thanks. --Yamla 21:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Ase500

I need your help. I'd really appreciate it if you could warn Ase500 for continuing to replace vandalism that I was reverting. I'm being threatened with being blocked myself by someone who has not looked at the history and who doesn't seem to care, while Ase500 is getting away with vandalism and with violating 3RR.

This was his edit to Wal-Mart, which started this: While it is easy to see how critics may come to this conclution, Wal-Mart did have plans to close this store prior to the union vote. Infact the union vote was a last ditch effort by associates to keep the store open.

It violates NPOV, it's misspelled, and given that he has violated 3RR action should be taken. 3RR does not mean to not revert vandalism, which I did. Now all his talk page has is a warning for violating 3RR and a second for removing the tag. As it stands, they've made it look like I'm equally wrong as him, while according the the 3RR rule I've done nothing wrong. Kamikaze Highlander 08:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd really like your opinion in the situation. None of the other moderators seem to care that his edit violated npov and deserved to be removed, that he was pov-pushing or that, had I reported his 3RR he might have been blocked. Since the issue has been resolved, I'd like it if someone could remove my section of the 3RR page and the warnings from my talk page, since they give the impression that I did something wrong, while his talk page only suggests that he commited a minor infraction. Pov-pushing and adding misspelled opinions without sources, and getting into an edit war to keep that kind of statement should be considered far worse than trying to remove them. Kamikaze Highlander 17:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings

Hello. I've come via a posting on the village pump, and on reviewing the edits, I have to agree that the edit you gave a vandalism warning for does not look like vandalism to me. Uncited, proably incorrect, but no indication from contribution history that it was not made in good faith. So, while it was probably a mistake, but mistakes aren't vandalism. I would point out that your reply calling the edit "complete crap"[1] was not very civil. As good faith editors can rightly get demoralised by being labeled vandals, I would suggest that the best thing for you to do would be to retract the warning, and please be careful in future not to bite good faith mistakes. Regards, MartinRe 13:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I appreciate your comment on Akidd dublin's talk page, that is over and above what I'd expect. I'm sure you're well meaning, and I know I'm just as fustrated with vandalism as I am, and I'm sorry if I sounded harsh. I think your apology was great, everyone makes mistakes (admins and editors alike). All, the best, and hope you're well. MartinRe 22:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes i add politics, and it is O.K. to demand the removal of it. I do not edit here with promotion intention. However sometimes i run in danger of forest fires, because i do bite articles/sections which display/promote, other, well politics. I do not understand everything myself. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 14:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I had noticed that you had posted a vandalism warning on a users talk page after editing the House and Robert Sean Leonard article. The Robert Sean Leonard article was brought to my attention via my watchlist. I do consider what the user was doing to the Robert Sean Leonard article vandalism. However, what is the difference between vandalism and experimenting? -Diabolos

Link Removed

"The links you added to the page Spore (game) have been removed. Please do not add commercial links—or links to your own private websites—to Wikipedia."
The link I added was neither commercial or personal, but a free web and downloadable game bearing a fair bit of resemblance to what has been shown of the first stage of the game, Spore. I thought might be of as much interest to others interested in Spore, as it was to me.

3LW

Yamal On the 3LW myspace the have a song called "Do You Ever" from there new album that could also be a possible single. Just if u wanted to add it. thank for reading this have a good day. JLUV

Red hair (your comment add to my talk)

I believe many people relate queer to gai, but it is not very related (if at all). My interpretation was "looks ginger", in a meaning of way of "unserious and queer". People producing edits could use a dictionary. i have removed agressive info. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 19:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• This comment by Adkidd dublin is not English. The interpretation of "looks ginger" as "unserious and queer" indicates a fundamental lack of understanding of the English language. It's not just wrong, it's ludicrously wrong, like saying "my dog has square wheels". Likewise, "striptease" is not "completely gai", it is utterly NOT "gai" (or "gay"). The suggestion to "use a dictionary" is laughable coming from someone who has demonstrated no understanding of English usage or idiom at all. I don't know how to proceed with this; see his comments on my talk page as well. I would appreciate a word or two of advice. Fnarf999 00:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

It is called "word clearing". It is not laughable. This dog has square wheels and looks like a spider: Old Mother Hubbard. Gai means sexually flavoured activity for entertainment purpose. I do not need to use this words at all. If i see it, it is annoying.

What basis do you have for asserting that this is what Gai means? I can find no reference in several dictionaries and google does not seem to back you up. As to the rest of that paragraph, could you please rewrite it? It makes no sense to me. --Yamla 18:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments, however I dont know where are you coming from; people can misunderstand this as harassment (using dictionary=laughable), and you do not really know if it is asked for. If it belongs here.

I don't know how to proceed with this; see his comments on my talk page as well. I would appreciate a word or two of advice. - don't bother to delete unwanted info. i make ..., because there are Ghits for baking oven.

• Please look. I do not want to make a point, or to disrupt. Probably it is better to stop now. I do not edit articles, where this word (ga-i) occurs. I just thought it is not connected to hair color (which i like personally). I use electronic dictionaries myself. The rhyme about that dog is not addressing anyone. It is not offensive. Can we stop it. I have searched the web for "baking oven". Probably Fnarf999 has done this too- before doing Afd for baking_oven. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 19:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

admin

Just a request that you add yourself to the category:Wikipedia administrators (i don't know if it's required?) or otherwise clarify the "nominated" message on your userpage. And thanks for the help reverting the icebergradio linkspammer :) -Quiddity 19:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Not

I'm Not Trying to be Funny. I really do not know what the copying status is. And when you upload it it says This image might be copyrighted. And that's what I chose. Tcatron565 5:30 08, May 2006 (CST)

Re: Toronto98

Hey, I'm at my wit's end over this Toronto98 person. They keep inserting really ugly porn starlet pics into formerly tasteful articles like nudity, breast, and kiss. The images keep getting deleted for lack of copyright info, but then they add more. User Lalalulu is doing the same, might be the same person for all I know. This is ruining the credibility of these articles as encyclopedic.

Is there some process at Wikipedia for when someone keeps uploading inappropriate and copyrighted images? Would that be handled by Wikimedia? Thanks, Kasreyn 00:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

My warning

I got three warnings for the same editing trip, im done, and I realize it is wrong now.

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires.

Very funny, 82.198.250.5, but that's a lie. --Yamla 14:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not delete it? It's not legitimate, and its only purpose is to prejudice people against you when they see your talk page. Kasreyn 19:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to be conservative in what I leave on my talk page. Besides, I was kind of entertained by this one. --Yamla 19:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh.

Get a load of this.

I was just trying to make a point about consistency in descriptive standards, and I got a paranoid screed. My question is, what IS considered best usage on Wikipedia? I can't find mention of this issue in the MOS. Kasreyn 20:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly suspect (though I could be wrong) the problem here is that "Jew" is both a religion and a race, or at least is often considered as one or the other. It's quite reasonable to describe me as a "British-Canadian" (or would if I actually got off my behind and applied for Canadian citizenship). I'm quite comfortable at describing first-generation immigrants that way (and am myself a first-generation immigrant). It is less clear in the case of Jewish people, however. While it may well be relevant to discuss their religion, it is more difficult when using the term in a racial (not racist) manner. Certainly, it'd be reasonable to describe a person as 'Israeli-American'. I'm much less comfortable describing second- (and more-) generation people this way. Someone who's great grandparents came from Germany can't really be described as 'German-American' in my opinion. In this case, though, I just let it stand though I would never add something like that myself. Okay, so what about this particular case? Really, the best answer is whether Mr. Savage describes himself as Jewish-American. If he doesn't, we probably shouldn't use the term. It's debateable, however, as it is definitely significant that Mr. Savage identifies himself as Jewish. It may have something to do with liberals, democrats, and republicans. Personally, I'm just happy to live in Canada.  :) --Yamla 20:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Lucky. A friend of mine who's a trucker recently described what it was like hauling some freight to Canada. On his way into Canada, the Canadian border guards were friendly. On his way back into the U.S., though, he was bullied and harassed by border guards with way too little training and way too much power. I'd envy you, but then I remember that through the magic of XM radio, you folks up in the frozen north have to put up with our talk radio dreck, too.

Eh. I guess you're right, though. If Weiner is so determined to hide his Jewish ancestry from his fine new friends in the blame-Jews crowd, then I'll let it go. I have to admit that I rarely do more than fix vandalism in articles devoted to him and other shrill purveyors of hatred. I don't trust myself to be entirely neutral when discussing such people. Cheers, Kasreyn 23:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Naan Kadavul

I've asked this user to agree not to blank his talk page. If he agrees do you wish to unblock him? ForestH2

I wasn't the one who blocked him. He was blocked for forging signatures on an RfA. Please see my follow-up comments on his talk page. --Yamla 22:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That's horrible. How long is he blocked? I guess he wanted supports....That's really bad. ForestH2

He's blocked indefinitely. Really, this should probably go to a request for arbitration or something.  :) I'm unconvinced that an indefinite block was warranted but I'm probably far too liberal on that topic. --Yamla 22:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: User:Naan Kadavul

I wonder if the guy can be educated? Seems kinda unlikely to me, but perhaps I'm in a harsh mood. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

music videos

• why is it forbidden to add music video links ,many people have never seen some music vidoes ,and wikipedia is a encyclopedia for everything and for music videos ,too i think ,

then you have to delete all links cause they ´re all spam Benutzer:Pucki 11.May.2006 (CEST)Central Europe

They are indeed spam. The links I have given you above will help you understand why they are spam and I strongly suggest you read them. Particularly, WP:NOT, WP:EL, and Wikipedia:Spam. Wikipedia is not a link farm. --Yamla 20:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

this discussion is not related to wikipedia

i am considering to remove the complete talkin which fnarf999 is involved. this is getting nowhere. i do not have to keep unwanted personal writing. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 13:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)~ I wuold like to remove his writing. He proofable violates several policies at other places. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 13:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you do have to keep fnarf999's comments. You cannot simply remove his comments. What you may do is archive this entire page (I can help you do this if you wish). This would mean moving all comments from this page to an archive page, clearing this page, and putting a link from this page back to the archive page. Do not simply remove fnarf999's comments. --Yamla 13:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

fnarf999 contribution to akidd_dublin taklk page

I do not want him to put his personal opinion (which does not really anymore talk about an article) to my userpage. Do i have to keep unrelated talk? I am giong to archieve it then. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 14:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I have already answered this question. You must keep his comments on your discussion page, or move all comments to an archive page. This comments to you are relevant to your significant problems with the English language. --Yamla 14:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

what now

Because i found it uncanny to have a geographic location connected to an user name, i am going to abandon it now. I find the user talk embarassing, and not-well-educated teenie-like. I had it in mind forehand, but now i am going to realize it. I do not have to suggest articles for Afd. Neither to scroll people's contribution. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 15:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying. What do you mean when you say "not-well-educated teenie-like"? And do you mean "before" when you say "forehand"? I think you are saying that you are going to abandon this user and start a new user. That's fine, that is your right. However, you may be happier editing Wikipedia in your native language as I fear that the same problems are going to show up in the new user account. Another alternative if you wish is that we could take this matter to arbitration. This would allow you to state your case and allow a group of neutral people to give their opinions. I can explain this in more detail if you would like. --Yamla 15:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

not-well-educated teenie-like -> When i see weak english superstition, i am trying to make it better, and not to produce long, long writing. I have now started a new user.

I'm sorry, that still does not make sense. --Yamla 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I did not knew red-head people are so picky. I thought the article in disrepair before i arrived. I am not willing to take charge on me. My current english is not that bad. If you believe arbitration makes sense, i do not know how-to, where, why-because-of. Someone clearly misbehaved. If he is going to edit matsuri etc., it may figure an incident (because no understanding of the article itself). When i write that i like red-head people, does it help? Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 15:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not have red hair, this is not the source of our disagreement. Our disagreement seems to be that you think your English skills are good, I think your English skills aren't good. You can read about the RfA (arbitration) at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. The goal of this would be to get other, neutral people involved to comment on whether I am being unfair to you, or whether your English skills really aren't very good. That is, whether I should just stop bothering you, or whether you should stop making edits (or make different kinds of edits). I can give you more information if you wish. --Yamla 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

P!nk

Yamla ...the chart is U.S. Hot Dance Club Play , no U.S. Hot Dance Airplay...and then is 21 NO 13!!!! you don't see right and can blocked me...oh god! is crazy! IS 21!!!!!!!!!!!!! --unsigned comments from Hookerj (talk)

Please don't worry. We have a dispute on content. I will not block you while we are discussing this. Please note, though, that the chart shows "U.S. Hot Dance", not U.S. Hot Dance Club Play. Should this heading be corrected, perhaps? --Yamla 15:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Babelfish/Arbitration etc.

Are you saying that you are using software like Babelfish to translate from your native language to English? This would certainly explain the serious grammatical mistakes and difficulty in understanding what you write. If so, please stop. Babelfish is not particularly good at translating. If you need to rely on this or similar software, please refrain from editing the English version of Wikipedia. If instead you are writing everything yourself (without the use of translation software), I still claim that your skills in English aren't good enough. But this is probably opinion that could be clarified by arbitration. --Yamla 15:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

No. I am not doing this. I am not using ... to edit wikipedia. I am using it for various other languages. "Please know it forehand"¹ is a result i thought understandable within the context of genuine, native english. It is not enlish, however. The engines produce a lot of interesting formulations. It has nothing to do with my work on english language. I have read numerous biographies and programming manuals in english. I can understand television etc. I do not see it full of mistakes as of 2006. ¹I do not use it within articles. It has various meanings.

I dont want people to use any tiny link for a follow up of this. People please keep the writing three lines. I am not willing to debug my personal past here on wikipedia. Akidd_dublin has been abandoned. I had it in mind for weeks because weak ID. Now i had a reason. I never even displayed what Fnarf999 is working on. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 16:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I want to get rid of fnarf999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fnarf999#User_subpage He showed good will to be friendly.
However he should not police me. He is new here. I do not know how to put this to arbitration.
His user talk (talking about me) has nothing to do with wikipedia. I believe it is used for harassing links to an unrelated user account.
He is stating your ID (Yamla) within a "Cabal" case.
I do not want him building a gateway to my new page.
The purpose was to get rid of him, even if his speech has improved lately.
I do not exclude he plays a distraction game.
Probably he does more damage than good. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 19:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe you are saying that you want arbitration. I do not believe I am the right person to arbitrate here. You can bring the matter to arbitration yourself by reading Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. However, I will start the arbitration proceedings tomorrow (too busy with work today), unless you tell me otherwise. I will list the goal of arbitration to be:

• To determine whether other people also feel your English skills are lacking
• If so, what to do about this situation as it relates to the Wikipedia
• If not, how we can help you get a clean start here

The purpose of arbitration is to resolve conflicts. The purpose is not to attack you (or to attack me or Fnarf999). As I said, I'll start this tomorrow unless you want me to stay out of it (or unless you start it sooner). --Yamla 19:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I have put this to village pump/miscellaneuos. I believe it is a bad example - what wikipedia is not. my blog is not full of mistakes. my blog is not full of grammar mistakes. it gets deleted after 7 days, and that's good.

OTHER PEOPLE CAN SEE THIS and avoid to discuss that way. Nothing for ungood. This discussion does not belong here. I do not want links to my new account. Fnarf999 and others should try a personal blog. I do not get personal at my blog. anyone can read it. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WIKIPEDIA. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 19:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Another question!

Sorry to bother you again, but something odd just happened. An editor with whom I'd had a mildly pointed discussion attempted to edit my reply on his talk page to reverse the intended meaning of my words, essentially attempting to paint me as a self-admitted bigot. I've reverted his edit to his talk page, but now that I think of it, do I even have the right to do that? Is he allowed to put false words in my mouth on his talk page, or could that be considered a form of personal attack (or even vandalism)? If he continues to replace my statements with fabrications, what are my options? Can I remove my comments entirely from his talk page, or would that be vandalism?

This has got me creeped out a bit. The only reason I noticed it was because for some reason his talk page was still on my watchlist. For all I know, others could be doing this whose talk pages I no longer watch. What am I supposed to do about this sort of character assassination? Kasreyn 00:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Please reply on this talk page only, if he's watching my page I don't want him tipped off, or to start harassing you, too! Kasreyn 00:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

If he's really watching, he may be monitoring everything that you post. So he may see this anyway. But nobody has the right to change what you have written as signed comments on a discussion page (for an article or for a user). Although I rarely do so, it is an instantly blockable offence. It wouldn't take many instances of this for me to strongly consider a permanent block (though this would never happen for an anonymous IP). I'll often just issue a stern warning the first time I see it, though. The vandals are often simply children who don't know how to behave. As to whether you have the right to revert changes made to your words, you most certainly do. It's worth following up with a statement along the lines of: "Changing other people's signed comments is considered vandalism and many admins will block on sight. Please do not do this again. It is dishonest and easy to track down." Note that WP:OWN tends to imply that people can change what you right but the difference here is someone is essentially trying to fraudulently claim you have written something other than what you did. Stay away from legal threats, though; those are also an instantly banable offence. As to the more general problem, that your comments could have been changed on numerous other pages, this is certainly true. Most of the time (in my experience), the changes aren't particularly well done. And there's always the edit history. Still, it's kind of a pain that this can happen. --Yamla 03:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Kasreyn, please feel free to remove this entire section (your comments and my comments) if this makes you more comfortable. Alternatively, I can archive this talk page again if you prefer. I'm just as happy leaving the comments here, but hey. --Yamla 03:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! I didn't expect such speedy and decisive action. Hmm, I don't oppose removing this section if you want to, but I don't really think it's important any more - being blocked, he can only edit his own talk page, right? Or is he only blocked from main space? Let's just leave this here, in any case. I'll also give WP:OWN a reread and try to learn more. Cheers, Kasreyn 03:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe he can only edit his page. I don't actually know for certain, though. He may be able to edit your talk page as well, for example, but I don't believe that's the case. --Yamla 04:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Look out

Puckmv's going to make Wikipedia "Fair and balanced" ¬_¬ Here we go again. Kasreyn 05:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised you waste your breath. Politician818 seems confused as to why I haven't replied to his endless attempts at conversation on my talk page. His attitude, and puck's, are enough to know they aren't worth my time. By replying, all you're doing is becoming the target of more attacks. You've disagreed with them, therefore you're now a liberal conspirator like me; nothing you say will be believed. It's best to not even waste the time. Cheers, Kasreyn 14:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

209.221.73.5 (talk · contribs)

Looks like this IP you blocked for a week before is back and vandalizing pages again: [2] [3] [4]. Feel free to deal with him. Thanks, -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 16:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Ciara

Why was the information I included to Ciara's article REMOVED? This is unfair. It is correct. Every time I add information to an article, I'm always putting wrong information. --unsigned comments from Charmed36 (talk)

As I pointed out to you, you must cite your additions. --Yamla 19:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Punk Rocker

Why did you say I added nonsense to the Emma Watson page on 5th May, when I thought that the information I added was perfectly valid. {{Punk Rocker 16:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)}}

As I noted in the edit comment, you are claiming that the provided citation notes her favourite fashion designers. It does not. --Yamla 16:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I GOT MY INFORMATION FROM A VALID SOURCE! IT WAS AN INTERVIEW WITH EMMA IN A MAGAZINE. SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE LIKES HIP HOP MUSIC. {{Punk Rocker 20:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)}} By the way, why didn't you give me a 3rd level warning.{{Punk Rocker 20:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)}}

Well, you can read WP:CITE to learn how to include a citation for this information. I did not give you a test3 because you had already received four prior warnings, some from me and some from User:RadioKirk. --Yamla 20:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Reply to message you left me

Hi Yamla, I got your message about the Hilary Duff edit. I saw the page had been vandalised and so I went to the wikipedia page to learn how to revert pages to their pre-vandalised state. I followed the instructions and, as far as I can tell, I reverted the page. I'm not sure what happened to lead to your accusation of vandalism. That was not my intent. I would appreciate it if you would rescind my warning. Thanks. --unsigned comments from 162.83.244.94 (talk)

This appears to be the case. I have removed the warning I left on your page. I suspected the vandal had simply switched to another IP address and was continuing vandalising. I see that this was not the case and that you were trying to revert the vandalism. I'm sorry for leaping to conclusions. Thanks for your efforts! --Yamla 18:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

slapshot10

I am very curious... why do you consider Planet Students a spam message when it: (1) is completely free for students, (2) was built by students, (3) is intended and does save students thousands of dollars? Why for example is [5] on UofC page allowed? Did I post our link poorly? Please explain. Slapshot10 20:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Please read WP:EL and WP:SPAM. I cannot comment on [6] as I did not see that link being added. It is entirely possible that that link should be removed as well. --Yamla 21:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

I believe this user (User talk:205.127.250.70) is a vandal. He/She has posted one comment, yet it's content is a clear attempt at vandalism. Furthermore, in his/her "talk", he/she said, "YOU ARE A FATTY" when I stated he/she was a vandal. MichaelZ526 21:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

JasonBourne2007

EWS23 and I have had an ongoing discussion regarding the House, MD wiki. Please make note of that before you revert my changes, which we agreed are acceptable for the wiki article. Please feel free to join our discussion on the House, MD article under article discussion. Thank you!

Sorry, Jason. I spend most of my time here removing vandalism and link spam and sometimes mistake appropriate edits. Won't happen again (well, not to you hopefully). --Yamla 20:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Yamla. It's not a problem at all! If you ever need a MD medical professionals opinion on a wiki article, feel free to message me! JasonBourne2007 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

70.251.128.3 (talk · contribs)

We received a complaint via OTRS (Ticket number 2006051210001527) that you blocked a user at this IP. It is, in all likelihood, a dynamic IP address, and the user is no longer blocked. However, after reviewing the user contributions and your block log, it seems that the IP address made a number of contributions prior to May 11, and then you warned, warned again, and then blocked for copyright violation (1 month!!!!!) without providing the user an opportunity to respond to your warnings.

I have unblocked the IP address. Please be a bit more careful. Bastique▼^parler _voir 18:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I thought we took copyright violation seriously. The user had an opportunity to respond to my claims of vandalism (or blanking) (second set of vandalism occurred after the first warning, I think you are getting confused by the time zones), but was blocked due to blatant copyright infringement, not due to vandalism. Given that the user appeared to be a blatant vandal also committing blatant copyright infringement, the block seemed reasonable at the time. Additionally, my understanding is that sbcglobal (the user's ISP) gives out IP addresses on very long leases (that is, the IP was semi-static and unlikely to change in motnhs). I will enforce shorter blocks in the future, however, even for users like this one with no productive contributions. --Yamla 18:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Nude celebrities

Thanks for the comments, though I fully expect my changes to be reverted any second now. tregoweth 22:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Zennie

Greetings. There's nothing wrong with adding an external link to one's site if -- and only if -- that link adds value to the content. I think there's also a kind of knee-jerk desire to -- one the part of some "policers" -- harm those who have websites of their own. Remember, blogs contribute to the communication of information on various aspects of society. Please do not threaten to have one banned for adding content -- even if it benefits that person's blog. It goes against the nature of the Internet and in the sprit of that perspective such action will be met with an equal reaction, thus banning the policer. It's a little much, your reaction. People commonly go from one site to the other; it's not appropriate or sound to get upset about this common online dynamic. --unsigned comments from Zennie (talk)

Sorry, the sites you are adding are inappropriate for Wikipedia. This has already been pointed out to you. I suggest you reread WP:EL and WP:SPAM. --Yamla 16:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yamia, your interpretation of the Wikiepedia rules is wrong and off-base. Not including a "commericial" website means you would have to elminate 90 percent of the links installed in this system, including very relevant links to -- for example -- a MySpace page. That's a commercial link. I suggest some training in Internet history and function, because you're not understanding of how this works and therefore present a danger to others - Zennie

A great many of the links on Wikipedia are irrelevant. However, commercial websites are appropriate in many circumstances. A link to Microsoft's website is entirely appropriate on Microsoft, for example. Similarly, a link to Wil Wheaton's MySpace page (if he has one) is appropriate on his page. However, these are special cases. Please read WP:EL to understand what is and is not appropriate. The fact that links are appropriate on the Internet at large does not imply that they are appropriate on the Wikipedia. --Yamla 16:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Again, I ask that you stop this rather pavolvian habit. It's damanging the free flow of information online. Moreover, you do this not in the sprit of Wikipedia's design, but in the need to satistfy only your view of the World. That's not right or good. --unsigned comments from Zennie

Please read WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a link repository. Also, please note that new comments go to the bottom of my discussion page. Thanks. --Yamla 16:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

In response: Unless Zennie continues to post inappropriate links after your additional warnings and subsequent discussion, I would consider the matter closed. Up to you on the RfC, but it doesn't seem like a major conflict other than just dueling opinions on Talk space. If it ends up to be an edit-war, then that's a horse of another color. Nevertheless, I'll post another reminder of the policy on Zennie's talk page. (on the GU FDL issue, I have no opinion) --mtz206 18:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I haven't intervened regarding the GFDL issue, so there's not much I can offer the RfC. --mtz206 (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for this while I was away: [7]. --mtz206 20:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Apple Intel transition

um, why did you revert the changes? in article Apple Intel transition? Windows and Windowsing systems and Microsoft Windows are three diffrent things.--Mayz 01:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I reverted your changes because, with the possible exception of the first case, it was obvious from the context what was being referred to. Note, for example, that you have a windowing system, not a Windowsing system. --Yamla 01:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

well, i actually dont see any harm in specifying what it is being talked about, even if you think that the context is clear! by the way , didnt change Windows XP to Microsoft Windows XP because i thought that the name and the context was self explaining! i ask you to revert your revert or at least revert selectively if you please (and if you see fit). sorry for the bad english but its not my mother tongue, and by the way, just for the fun of it, try reading the sentences with the windows as if they reffered to windows in houses and cars :) --Mayz 02:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Reply to the message you sent me

Ummm...every timne I try to do something, it's always deleted. Lot of other artist have song lists. How come P!nk can't?

At the time you added the song list and the time you left this message, that page did not exist. That's why it was removed. So long as you properly cite the song list and format it suitably for Wikipedia, the song list would be an appropriate addition. At the moment, of course, that page needs considerable work. But once again, the reason I reverted your addition was that the page simply didn't exist at the time. --Yamla 18:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Well, I kind finished it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_P%21nk_Songs- Hill03

Good Job Genius

Another scathing remark from a moron who doesn't understand what a dynamic ip is. Next time keep your comments to users and don't go off the deep end with your egotistical cynicism. -Random IP (71.125.149.140, talk)

Peas picture deleted quickly

Why was the BEP photo deleted so quickly? The "warning" template you added noted it would be deleted in a week. It seems to have been deleted immediately, though. Also, MANY other artists' pages include promotional photos (See Eminem for instance, among other groups and acts) so why wasn't the uploader simply allowed to include the {{Promophoto}} template to answer the Copyvio challenge you made against it? Not a huge issue here. It wasn't me who used the picture. I'm just wondering. Nhprman 22:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The {{Promophoto}} tag was incorrect. The copyright violation was blatant, the uploader even claimed that the picture was scanned in from a magazine. Thus, I believed it qualified under WP:Copyvio for speedy deletion. Do you think I was incorrect? Do you think even though the copyvio was blatant, we should have left it in place for seven days? (That's a serious question, I could be wrong that copyvios should be dealt with immediately if they are blatant). --Yamla 23:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

You are probably right. Thanks for the clarification. I didn't catch the user's earlier comments and it appeared as if it was a staged promotional photo. Nhprman 02:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

PROD

Hi, just to let you know I prodded The Terror Mansion article by User:70% because it was written by a vandal user. (Incidentally it is written in an unencyclopedic style.) Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk to me 16:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Monica Bellucci information

You've asked me to site my sources for the information that I've posted on the Monica Bellucci Wiki listing... well, my reference to her Agnosticism comes from a quote available on one of the pages that I added as a link. And I added the link expressly for the purpose of varification of that quote. By removing the link, you removed my verifycation. The two sites that I added are not commercial nor are they my personal sites. Whereas the iMDB is a commercial site, charging for some of their services and embedding a broad range of commerical advertisements in their pages.

This Agnosticism quote has also been posted on an iMDB discussion forum. It shouldn't be too hard to find. The thread is called Monica and Religion and the original poster of the quote posted under the username Ilana04.

Also, as I said, the quote is repeated on a fansite for Ms Bellucci at [8]. This is the best I can do to verify this quote, as it most likely appeared in a magazine published outside the US, and I don't know the publication or the date.

As to verifying my reference to her posing nude in protest of the Italian laws against in-vitro vetilization, that information comes from several articles in magazines to which Ms Bellucci has given interviews, including the original magazine she posed for- the Italian edition of Vanity Fair in June of 2004.

I don't know if this can be varified on line, or via the internet, but the issue of the magazine did exist in print at that time.

This was also referenced in an interview that Monica gave to Film magazine in tendem with the release of her film, The Brothers Grimm.

There was also a reference to this on a website called contactmusic.com in their news section, dated for June 8, 2004.

I have all of this information right here at my fingertips, in printed form, but I do not have any internet links as I don't have my printer set to display headers and footers and it has been some time since I printed the articles.

As to her appearng nude in films, I make those references because I have seen the films. The nude calendars a referenced on her Biography page in the trivia section on iMDB. There is also a site that has scanned images of each page of the calendars- Monica Bellucci Utopiax

I did not post any varifycation of my information within the aritcle itself because I felt it would look too cluttered and have an adversarial feel about it, as if I were trying to rebuff anyone who read the article and say "here's the proof... so there !!"

I realize you will, most likely, remove the information that I have added because I cannot give you varifycation of that information that you can easily verify on your computer. But I have not posted anything untrue about Ms Bellucci. I can prove all of it, but only via printed hard copies of internet articles that have most likely been removed from the net, or from magazines that I have in print-form.

--NilaLaniera 20:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the followup. IMDB is not a particularly reliable source of information and most certainly, fansites such as the one you list above are insufficient for WP:CITE. I'm sure the vast majority of your information is correct, nevertheless. If you could please readd the information from reliable and verifiable sources, cited appropriately, I'd appreciate it. --Yamla 21:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Full responses to this on User talk:NilaLaniera. --Yamla 23:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Macbook Pro "Vandalism"

I changed the Macbook Pro article as the specifications of it has changed. It is no longer 1.83 / 2.0 / 2.16

The 1.83 model has been discontinued AS WRITTEN IN THE MACBOOK ARTICLE.

You can double check these changes by checking here: http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/0.RSLID?mco=925997E8&nclm=MacBookPro

Thankyou. --unsigned comments from 220.233.76.24 (talk)

Yes, but the article is describing the MacBook Pro in general, not only the current edition of it. For that reason, the information that it was available with a 1.83 Ghz CPU needs to remain. --Yamla 23:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Cheerleading

Why were 66.82.9.87's edits reverted? It seems to me that a slightly more thorough discussion of cheerleaders' stereotypical status as "sex symbols" would be more NPOV than the blunt statement "Cheerleaders are often viewed as sex symbols." 66.82.9.87's edits might not have been the best writing in the world, but it is NOT "nonsense." Eric Qel-Droma 19:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Inherently point-of-view. The backbone of the sports team? "...supercedes the sexual overtones"? It may be true, but I have seen no evidence that this is how they are generally perceived, and some of my friends are cheerleaders. That change could certainly stay if cited appropriately but it just didn't ring true. I've never heard anyone describe cheerleaders as the backbone of the sports team, for example. --Yamla 19:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I concede that the "backbone" line is pretty useless. I'm even willing to concede that "supercedes the sexual overtones" isn't properly cited--I don't know the precise citing rules (although I do appreciate the link in your message above). However, giving 66.82.9.87 a warning for vandalism? That seems extreme, especially after I took the time to read the vandalism page. Bad edits don't automatically equal vandalism, do they? I'm sure that 66.82.9.87 was editing in good faith. Eric Qel-Droma 13:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it looked just like petty vandalism. If you prefer, though, I'll clear the warning from that page. Let me know. --Yamla 13:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That would be great. I think that these edits (on Cheerleading, anyway) are more of an NPOV violation than actual vandalism. I guess my main complaint is that the writing was deemed "nonsense". If the warning had been something more like "This is an NPOV problem" or "Your work needs to be cited", then I wouldn't have a bit of a problem with it. Anyway, thanks. Eric Qel-Droma 13:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Although that IP address has a history of vandalism, that particular problem was a NPOV violation, as you point out. --Yamla 13:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Just Letting You Know

I saw on the 3LW site that the CD is goming out on August, 15th so I'am just letting you know I might change it. please dont get mad thank you for reading this.(UTC)

I'm so confused

How did I vandalize pages? What did I do to Liv Tyler's article. WHAT? Shamir1 03:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

In what way is Liv Tyler Native American? She may be as much as one eighth (though possibly considerably less) Native American but that doesn't make her Native American. --Yamla 03:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

You said: In what way is Liv Tyler Native American? She may be as much as one eighth (though possibly considerably less) Native American but that doesn't make her Native American

Umm, I would NOT call that vandalizing pages, first of all. Secondly, take a look at the other actors in . Very few of them are full or even half. That category is just for actors with Native American somewhere in their blood whether it be 1/2, 1/4, 1/8... Just like under Irish-American actors, many are 1/2 or 1/4, but unfortunately there are more Americans who trace their roots to Ireland than in the Americas. That is why even actors who have a slight amount of Native American or American Indian heritage, if it is mentionable and has been, there is no reason why they should not be listed in that category along with the others. Shamir1 04:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Even Liv Tyler doesn't identify herself as Native American. Nevertheless, while I firmly disagree, I'll let your edits stand. --Yamla 04:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I've gotten in arguments over this before, and in general I think Wikipedia needs stronger standards on listing ethnicity of people. A lot of the ethnicities people add tend to be unsourced. But two in particular cause thorny issues, being Native American and Jewish ethnicity. For some reason, many people in America seem to fixate upon claiming Native American ancestry for themselves, usually based on a family legend that some great-grandmother was Native American. Vine Deloria, Jr.'s excellent book Custer Died for Your Sins puts forward a credible explanation of this cultural phenomenon, I highly recommend it. The other ethnicity that can cause issues is Judaism, because there is a great deal of disagreement over whether it is a religion or an ethnicity, and also because to some people it has become a loaded term. Do you know of any page that covers Wiki guidelines on including tags relating to ethnicity? Because so far I've been approaching it by the seat of my pants. Kasreyn 09:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Licensing and my deleted images

Hello Yamla, Thank you so much for your helpfulness! I have changed some details in my disouted image profile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Scarlettj_vogue0405.jpg) attaching the fair use rationale for the file. I hope that it will be acceptable. Sorry about now having added it before but I think I simply missed this part when reading the text in the box under the image. Regarding my deleted scannings, another user had warned me that they weren't of low-resolution so I removed them. Please forgive me if I have caused you any inconvenience or trouble, I am new in this place but I will be more careful next time. Thanks again. Best wishes from ErikaG 21:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Paris Hilton Fansite

Wikipedia allows one fansite link for a page. therefore im putting www.hiltonfan.com for Paris Hilton as external link. thanks. Grace Kalenda 03:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

No. WP:EL says, "On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such." hiltonfan is a relatively new fansite and can hardly be considered a major fansite. Additionally, Paris Hilton doesn't really have many fansites. Finally, that information is in the "Occasionally acceptable links" section. The site is inappropriate. Do not add it back. --Yamla 03:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Another question

Hi, it's me again. I just want to ask if I put the fair use rationale for my image on this page /http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Scarlettj_vogue0405.jpg/ in the right place because I haven't seen the fair use rationale in other users' image profiles. Thanks in advance. ErikaG 18:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, the problem with this particular image is that it is not appropriate to use simply to illustrate the person. It can only be used to illustrate the publication of the magazine. In this particular case, it would be reasonable to use this in the Scarlett Johansson article if there's discussion about that particular Vogue magazine. You'd probably get by if you noted that Ms. Johansson has modelled for a number of magazines, appearing on the front cover of many including Vogue. This is a tricky matter made harder because the use of another magazine cover in the Naomi Campell article is almost certainly not fair-use. --Yamla 18:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Angelina Jolie

I thought magazine covers were acceptable? Chubdub 01:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Magazine covers are legitimate (provided you provide a detailed fair-use rationale, provided the title is clearly visible, etc.) but that image was clearly not a magzine cover (or if so, had the title removed, though I think I remember the magazine and it had an entirely different cover). --Yamla 01:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Could it count as promotional material then? And why do you believe that the lower back tattoo article needs to be deleted? Chubdub 01:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

No, most definitely not. It did not come from a promotional kit. It's a clear copyright violation. It's just a scan of an inner page of a magazine. As to why the lower back tattoo article should be deleted (and I only prod'ed it, not marked it for deletion) is explained therein... I don't think it is notable when we already have an article on tattoos. --Yamla 01:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Very well. But I am against your decision to "prod'ed" the Lower back tattoo, because the main tattoo article does not go into detail, nor does it provide pop culture references (a section that I plan on expanding in the near future). Chubdub 01:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe the tattoo article could easily incorporate all of the information in the lower back tattoo article. However, you have convinced me that this is not clearcut, and you have made a productive start on the article itself. I'll remove the prod and leave you to develop the article. If later nominated for deletion, I will reevaluate and vote accordingly. --Yamla 01:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience. I will tag the article for clean up until I get a chance to edit and expand it. And in terms of licensing, what catgorey would this image fall under? It has been featured in several publications, so I assume it must be under public domain. But then again, I know very little when it comes to copy right laws. Chubdub 01:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Given that the page you list blatantly violates copyright on a number of other pictures included therein, I strongly suggest you don't incorporate that image. However, leaving aside the web page's blatant copyright violations, the page itself claims to be "Copyright 2004 Jason Tweed and Sunfyre.com, All Rights Reserved.". That means (if true, which is clearly not the case) that the image would be copyrighted and in this case, no fair-use justification could be provided. "Promotional" can only be used if it came from a promotional kit (basically). Copyright and fair use is a bitch. Much of what gets used on Wikipedia is a violation, unfortunately. --Yamla 02:02, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Damn. Oh well, I'm at least glad I notified you before I wasted my time uploading another image. Thanks for your help Chubdub 02:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

severina

hi yamla, i recently came accross the severina vickovic article and IMO the last paragraph is POV and rather badly written. i ve tried to fix some things up but an anon would revert. i would like to know your opinion on the matter. you might find it useful to have a look at the discussion pg first. best--Greece666 23:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been busy and forgot to respond to this one. I'll keep a closer eye on that article in the near future. --Yamla 02:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

thx for your reply yamla--Greece666 02:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:Fair use

You placed a notice about Image:Brazilinvasion7.png. I have had the image deleted and put a text box in its place for the article. Thank you for pointing out. Regards, --Andy123 talk 12:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

THANKS FOR DELETING EXTERNAL LINKS

THANKS FOR DELETING EXTERNAL LINKS FROM MARIA SHARAPOVA PAGE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND REMEMBER: DO NOT DELETING MY LINKS. ALL OF THEM ARE APPROPRIATE. REMEMBER IT! --unsigned comments from Gooverup (talk)

THANKS FOR DELETING EXTERNAL LINKS

THANKS FOR DELETING EXTERNAL LINKS FROM MARIA SHARAPOVA PAGE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND REMEMBER: DO NOT DELETING MY LINKS. ALL OF THEM ARE APPROPRIATE. REMEMBER IT! gooverup 15:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop posting duplicate messages on my talk page. --Yamla 15:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

A link on Nude celebrities on the Internet to a site WITH PORN IS MUCH INAPPROPRIATE. I'M TALKING ABOUT The Case Files of the Fake Detective YOU UNDERSTAND ME CLEARLY? I DELETE THIS LINK. DO NOT REVERT IT AGAIN! gooverup 15:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

That web site is specifically appropriate to the whole subject of celebrity fakes. It has, for example, been covered in Wired Magazine. --Yamla 15:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

You're pathetic

Don't ever send me another message. Also, Yamla, please look up the definition of vandalism, idiot. Freak. Seriously, you're pathetic. Oh, you're harrassing me, btw. --unsigned comments from 75.2.177.121 (talk)

Vandalism warning was appropriate, your vandalism was reverted by three separate people. --Yamla 16:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Nude celebrities on the Internet and WP:3RR

You've already passed WP:3RR I suggest you stop and try engaging in discussion, further activity could result in you being blocked form editing. --pgk^(talk) 17:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if you check, you'll find that I have not broken 3RR. I have made at most three reverts and in fact, the reverts were not to the same version of the article as I added a warning note about partial nudity. Furthermore, I have tried to engage Gooverup in discussion. Additionally, I am not the only person reverting Gooverup's changes. --Yamla 17:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

My mistake you've made 3 reverts. If you are the only one reverting or not is irrelevant, the rule is to prevent disruption due to edit warring, so trying to engage the other editor is the correct thing to do. I have also warned him. --pgk^(talk) 17:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand that and actually had planned to stop reverting for 24 hours. As to not being the only one reverting, I mention this because I believe my reversions would qualify as reverting vandalism, though obviously this is not clear-cut. Best for me to bow out for at least 24 hours which is what I'll do. --Yamla 18:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah Poliwiki

Hey wtf I was trying to fix that website (wilmer valderrama) you should then fix that for me, he actually lived in venezuela since he was 3 years old (he later moved to miami), whatever (check that out in any website).

"Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Wilmer Valderrama. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox."

I recommend you to take the time to write the warning message instead of copying and pasting the same sentence.

You should get a real job. --unsigned comments from 200.8.22.154 (200.8.22.154|talk)

You changed his place of birth. This is simply not true. He was born in Miami, Florida. This information is readily available from hundreds of sites on the Internet. --Yamla 17:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Significant problems Respond

But these movies im making are real movies! And YouTube is the only source to release my movies! And I already released Chocolate's Web! This is YOUR last warning. --IKR1 07:20, 27 May 2006 (PT)

Your movies aren't notable and are almost certain to be deleted. --Yamla 03:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

This dosent make any sense! Im trying to spread the word of my movies and the're up for deletion? What makes you so special to delete my films?--IKR1 11:50, 28 May 2006 (PT)

First, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Wikipedia is WP:NOT to be used for advertising. Secondly, as has also been repeatedly pointed out to you, your films are simply not notable. Additionally, they are blatant copyright infringements of the original movies. Finally, anyone can nominate any page for deletion. Of course, if you do so without justification, you'll be blocked. But as you can see, the common consensus is that these pages are not worthy of Wikipedia articles. Please go and read WP:NOT and WP:N. One final note, if you really are 11 years old, you are violating YouTube's conditions of use as well. --Yamla 18:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Unwarranted warning

You gave me a warning and i wasnt even rude? Do you like Fawlty Towers? I love the bit where Fawlty says "You stupid stuck up toffy-nosed half-witted upperclass pile of puss!". Don't you? Anyway, thats off the point. Dont get my intentions wrong, I was just quoting one my favourite sitcom lines. thats all. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.117.210 (talk • contribs)

This user was warned because of the personal attack made in these edits. --Yamla 16:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I assure you, you got it completely wrong...that was not my intention. Oh, i just thought of another great movie quote from Hostel which goes "you fucking bitch". I forget who said it, but it was a great scene. do you like the film, have you seen it? --from Edgovan20 (talk) NO! it was NOT a personal attack. Ok...get it right!! I was just talking about one of my favourite movies. Dont edit what i say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgovan20 (talk • contribs)

I have never edited any of your signed comments, only noted who said them. And to prevent confusion, no more quotes from movies in such a way as could be interpreted as a personal attack. They are either entirely pointless (a non-sequitur) or thinly-veiled personal attacks. --Yamla 17:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

How is it pointless? Its engaging a social conversation. I think you have given me another warning, and it is completely unwarranted. You may interpret what I say as being a personal attact, but you cant know for sure. You didnt tell me I wasnt allowed to have a conversation with you about my favourite movies, but if you feel that strongly about it then I wont. And yet, without any irrefutable or even substancial evidence I think you have given me another warning. I have the right to be innocent until proven guilty, i should think. Also, do you have a job, you seem to always be here. --ed

Yellowcard

Hi, there! I saw that you've contributed to the Yellowcard page. I've been working hard all weekend to get it into an encyclopedia-worthy article, and I think we're almost there!

There's a short list of things that still need some work at the bottom of the talk page. If you could take a look at it, maybe add more things to do, or clean up whatever you see needs work, I would sure appreciate it.

Thanks for your help. Have an awesome day! Cathryn 09:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Gooverup

Thanks for the heads up. I was under the belief that removing warnings was vandalism, but apparently I was mistaken. Thanks again. IrishGuy 16:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yamla...gruesome being

This nigga think he hard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerealnigg (talk • contribs)

Prod of Rough Science Boys: The Movie

Although the page is deleted (Rough Science Boys: The Movie) so I can't use diffs, you incorrectly replaced a removed Prod tag, then erroneously warned the remover.

The way that Prod works, is that if anyone (especially the article's creator) removes the Prod then no one can replace it, other means must be used. The remover is under no obligation to fix-up the article. Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia:Proposed deletion, cheers, Commander Keane 07:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. I'll just nominate the article for deletion in the future. --Yamla 14:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The image being used for the entry, Karima Adebibe

Thanks for your message. I'll be honest with you, i haven't been using Wikipedia long, and I haven't got a clue what you were talking about in the message you sent me regarding image rights, etc. If you think it will be a problem, please feel free to remove the image or replace it with another one.

Bollywood Saga

Fair enough. - Reaverdrop (talk/nl/wp:space) 16:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

IKR1

I've sent him a message, focusing on one of his articles in particular (Chocolate's Web). I basically said I'm willing to help him, if he can establish that the movie is notable. Which is true: if the article meets the criteria, I'm all for keeping it up and expanding it. I suspect the reviews/support don't exist to support notability, though, but maybe I played a card explaining why the rule is there and that no, you can't advertise your movie here, but you can have an article about it after it becomes famous.

Although, I do have to say that I'd be mortified if anybody dragged out "The Day of the Rubber Chicken"—which I wrote in 8th or 9th grade—and did a critical analysis of it, so I'm rather happy it doesn't and never will have an article. :) —C.Fred (talk) 23:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

...and rubber chickens

Do you find it as curious as I do that after my talk message to try to help IKR1, he invoked a rubber chicken in his latest addition? Given that it's something that I brought up in my comment to him, it just seems more than a coincidence.... —C.Fred (talk) 17:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's taken indirect shots at me in the past. At least this shows he is probably reading the messages we leave him. I ended up blocking him for 24 hours today for his behaviour. I was sad, though, as his edit immediately beforehand looked to be a good quality addition. Maybe once all these non-notable articles are deleted, IKR1 will become a quality editor. --Yamla 17:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: African American

Opps! I just read that message,sorry but I always correct it.But, Wikipedia says "FEEL FREE TO EDIT A PAGE".If you can explain your explanation PLEASE, write back to me on my disscusion page.Thanks!

P.S.no offence.really.

Gemini531 01:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Revision deletion

I saw your note on ANI about needing to delete personal information, and from looking at the oversight log, it doesn't look like it was done. If you'll point out the revision that needs to be removed, either on my talk page or by email, I'll pull it from the history. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 08:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Fairuse

Can you stop messing with my user page please?If there is a problem,please e-mail me and I will surely fix it or act you about the problem.Thanks AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR TELLING ME THE PROBLEMS.sORRY,i HAVE THE CAPS ON.

Gemini531 21:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It does not belong to you, but I will just tell you about the problem in the future rather than correcting it and then telling you. --Yamla 21:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't argee.If we both look at the TOP of our page,across it says "(your username here), my talk, my preferences ,my watchlist, my contributions and log out". You see it, I see it every user sees it, we're done.In the last messages, I tried to stay nice, but you are getting on MY nerves.I have sensetive nerves so can you please stop any e-mails? Don't mean to be mail but that's how I roll.Peace out,A-town.

P.S., Just trying to prove my point and also make it easy for you.

Gemini531 22:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you are wrong. Please check WP:OWN, as previously requested, which is the official policy. While you may own your contributions, you do not own the userpage itself. --Yamla 22:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please note that I believe I have never e-mailed you to the best of my knowledge. I have, of course, left messages on your discussion page as I am allowed to do, but that is entirely different from emailing you. --Yamla 22:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:African American

Why can't I change it to African American if it's true?Prove that!

P.S. Every since I changed one thing that was right,you tried to pick a fight and change it.Please just let the moderators and editor change it.Just to prove THAT point, I'll put it on the discussion page on the topic 'African American'.check it out in about 5-10 minutes.Be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemini531 (talk • contribs)

You can change it to African American but as I have asked you before, please link to African American. Please do not link to United States. It is misleading. As to the rest of your comment here in the P.S., I'm sorry but I cannot understand your English. --Yamla 22:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please point me directly to your comments. I have been monitoring African American and your contributions for several hours and it appears that you have not added this discussion. --Yamla 02:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Who the fuck cares if you have been monoring?and i also don't care about the violations. like I'm afaid of you.I can make a new account and i don't fucking care if irt's the rule. You can report me.gay bitch

Gemini531 22:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

RE:Images

I plan to do so. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me}Who's the boss? 23:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I will be in a need of some more guidance. Apparently I have 144 image uploads (though the counter still disfunctions), from those I have major uploads from the following categories:

• Company Logos: Do we need other rationale than the logo-tag if it is used in the own wikipage of the company?
• Album/single/DVD covers: Do we need other rationale than the whatevercover-tag if it is used in the own wikipage of the company? If they are used within the artist's page then what is the generally accepted reason of use? In case of Image:Da Brat.jpg I'm about to change it into a screenshot. See next point.
• Screenshots: Ok I want to clear that up with a commonly used rationale disclaimer. Are Image:Bilal.jpg and Image:Sean paul.jpg rationales fair enough?
• Posters: Is the promotional-tag enough? Can it be only used for the material advertised, or anything that is represented in the artwork? For example for an "Album coming out dd-mm-yy" promo poster fits the requirements to be put into the artist's article or solely for the album or neither or both?
• If you wish I can collect the orphaned images (that I don't want to use anymore) for you for deletion. So what do you think? Lajbi ^{Holla @ me}Who's the boss? 13:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

PS.:What is the official status of MySpace images?

Images question

Apparently the user Bluebanta has 100% image deletion... or something like that. Should the article Battle Angel Alita be reverted to before his image changes regardless of actual legality? Showdown 06:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

3rr

Hi. Thanks for helping out on 3RR... always a lot to do. You asked someone to check re User:Rtvl73... I just did, fine. You also asked if 12h was too much for a first offence... tricky question. I give anywhere from a warning (if no one else has) to 3h to 8h to 12h to 24h for a first offence, based on whim, caprice, how severe, whether good faith or not... its hard to tell William M. Connolley 21:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Rtvl73

Back from his block, he has changed the wording at least once (there is an IP edit with the same precise revert). He has not come to the talk page. -- Jeff3000 22:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: African American

Check out the african American page.And i understand you hate black people!

Gemini531 22:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)