|
User talk:Cbrown1023/Archive 10
        Newsletter timeHey, how are you doing? Are you still up for sending out the newsletter? I still need to develop a few more stories and finish some final updates before it's ready. By the way, could you please comment over at WP:Films talk page about a proposed roll call for the project? If you have any potential task forces in mind you think would be beneficial to start for the project, it would be great if you could include them as we're trying to see what the majority of our members want. We're also discussing the possibility of including coordinators within the project. I'll be sending out a roll call message in the next week or two, so I may need your services again with your bot. --Nehrams2020 18:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
August 2007 WP:FILMS NewsletterThe August 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mailing List - FYIHi Casey, I read your mailing list post here, and while I agree with you that this perennial disruptor was deservedly banned, the channel ops are wrong. AFAIK at least one of the bot attacks was actually a user who is ironically enough been here for years, and remains in good standing. FV is a troll, albeit one with very little technical skills (e.g. not using a proxy), let's not give him credit for the recreational activities of others. Using a crappy script with chatzilla to flood and use of bots are very different skill levels as you know. This screenshot he took is more his speed rather than using clones. Sorry for messaging you here, I'm a reader not a contributor to the mailing list. --MichaelLinnear 00:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
new Film bannerOkay, so I've done a bit of tweaking on User:Girolamo Savonarola/banner and added a proper usage guide. Also got some positive feedback at the WP Films talk page. Would you mind taking another look? Is it ready to replace the current banner? Can you do that for me (since it's protected)? Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 03:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC) BrownBot for roll callOn the WP:Films talk page, we've been having a discussion over having a roll call for all members within the project to determine if they are still active within the project. Would you be willing to use BrownBot to send out the roll call message to all members within the project? If not, I can do it with AWB. It shouldn't be for another couple of days, as we're trying to determine if there is anything else we want to ask all of the members to do or vote for (such as potential task forces, merging of projects, or the creation of coordinator positions). Let me know if you're interested. --Nehrams2020 23:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI - September 2007The September 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 09:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC) The changes you just made introduce a lot of space above and below the template, which is now present on 33,000 pages. --MZMcBride 01:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Fair use imagesBut I have been going to these images adding lines in the image description regarding the source, why the image is non-free, why it is needed, where it is used, etc., yet my hours of efforts to restore these images to their pages were all made useless since I did not use a template. I also had quite an issue with the images being removed from all of the pages before they were officially deleted, unlike other images that Betacommand tags, usually placing a red flag (turning the image into a thumb warning when the image will be deleted if action isn't taken) asking Wikipedians to add a reasoning for fair use. I wish my efforts weren't viewed as an attempt to curb copyright laws, nor an attempt to "disrupt" Wikipedia. My goal is to put an end to disruptions on Wikipedia, something I usually focus my efforts on being the AT&T/Bell articles, especially with IP vandals. Please do not view my efforts to remove tags and adding fair use rationales without templates as being "disruptive". I now will need to spend yet another 2 hours adding templates to the images to at least guarantee that they won't be removed. KansasCity 04:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Courtesy blanking - thank youThanks for taking care of that. I fully understood the anon's reasons, but I also realized that without some sort of request from him/her (as you can see from the page history), RC patrollers would simply continue to restore it and warn the editor in question. I only warned the editor one time, preferring not to resort to getting them blocked, as that wouldn't serve any purpose except to frustrate them further, so that's why I posted on the talk page, to get the editor to formally request a courtesy blanking. So thank you for solving the problem and blanking the page, I'm sure they appreciate it! Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 15:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Films roll call
Captain America (2009 Film)Does Captain America (2009 Film) meet WP:NF? I'm thinking it does but I'm not real sure. -WarthogDemon 21:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC) :)It wasn't a test on the rutgers page, I was doing vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.162.199 (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Deletion reviewAn editor has asked for a deletion review of Kevin Jonas. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Wait!An arbitrator (Jpgordon) just wrote this morning at the bottom of the proposed decision talkpage that the COFS case closes tomorrow. Maybe better to wait one more day? Newyorkbrad 16:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Nehrams2020 RfA ThanksPhilippine Normal UniversityHi, you're the last administrator to delete Philippine Normal University and the article is currently protected. May I request that you redirect the page to Philippine Normal University-Manila? --Jojit fb 09:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Clerk assistance neededHi, I need assistance regarding Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren/Evidence#Baseless_accusations: a case study. Uncompressed, the log is almost 90 kilobytes in size. How should I proceed? ΔιγυρενΕμπροσ! 05:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
"Inappropriate" link on the Trinity College, Dublin pageHi, You sent me a message on September 26 accusing me of "add[ing] inappropriate external links" to the Trinity College, Dublin page. I added one link (singular). Would you mind telling me what it was about that particular link that made it "inappropriate" to you? Thanks, Patrick Kelly patrickkelly0204@eircom.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.120.12 (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
So we are agreed: it was one external link. External sites do not have to have neutral points of view. One cannot be neutral about everything, e.g. can one be neutral about the Holocaust? The external site to which the link was provided may "attack the school" but it does NOT attack its "students" and I deeply resent you saying that. What you call "other things" may be "attack[ed]" but is that in itself really sufficient reason to keep removing the link? I might add that the only reason the June 2, 1888 High Court of Ireland judgement is referred to on the Trinity College page is because I introduced that information (and that link) to the page. (Trinity College's people, of course, later 'adapted' what I had said about the judgement.) Ever heard of freedom of speech? All points of view should be heard. Obviously, the College authorities have been in touch with you. Why not just admit that and say that what you did you did at their behest? Patrick (patrickkelly0204@eircom.net) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.120.197 (talk) 22:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I was under the impression (evidently mistaken) that Wikipedia is a public resource and not beholden to or in thrall of private or special interests.
So what if Trinity College does not want the information known? It should be known.
At their instruction you are preventing it from being known.
They asked for the link to be removed - but you are the one who removed it. The responsibility is yours. And you can't offer any explanation as to why - except to say that they asked for it to be done.
That, in itself, appears to have been more than sufficient - in your eyes, at any rate. As Oliver Wendel Holmes, a US Supreme Court Justice, once said: "...the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market... That at any rate is the theory of our Constitution". Why not put the link back up and let people judge for themselves?
Or do you regard the people who use Wikipedia as incapable of judging things for themselves - to the extent that you have to make the judgement for them...? A summary judgement, made at the behest of others, inexplicable and from which there is no appeal or review. You can't even explain the basis for it, or point to anything specifically "inappropriate" in the content of the linked site. Do you have a supervisor or something who I can talk to about this? Patrick (patrickkelly0204@eircom.net) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.51.198 (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Hi again, Can you send me a copy of the e-mail or message the College authorities sent you asking for the link to be removed? I'd like to find out how they justified and phrased their request to you. As it concerns my link, and comments adversely on me, I think I have a right to see it - so that I can respond. Patrick (patrickkelly0204@eircom.net) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.51.198 (talk) 22:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Can I paste all this into the Trinity College, Dublin 'talk page' at least? To let those with an interest see what's going on, and the unreasonable (and unreasoned) censorship being imposed? Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 01:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
