|
User talk:Mhking/Archive 5
Violation of Wikipedia TermsNote: Anyone who modifies the format of my page will be subject to Wikipedia's Spam Policy. The page is now under the watch of Wikipedia. Also, a note to Mhking, you have been officially reported to Wikipedia. An Wikipedia:edit war is not the appropriate way to conduct yourself on Wikipedia. May I also direct everyone to reading the Three-Revert Rule, which allows you to be banned for a minimum of 24-hours for reverting more than three times in the form of vandalism. Meleniumshane90 (talk) 01:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I give uphello, I'm sorry about sending you guys so many images. All I was trying to do was improve wikipedia a little. I will not be sending over so many images from now on and you can go ahead and delete all of the Images that I have on wikipedia right now, if you wanted to. User:GMButtrill08 and User:G-mon, I have two names because I was trying to change my first user name(GMButtrill08). 5:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC) Barnstar
Your NPWatcher ApplicationDear Mhking, Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher. Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 18:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Oh, it's you Mhking? Everything all right? Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 18:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC) dead link on god warrior page... last changeInstead of marking something "dead link", just remove the link, and note in the description that you are doing so for that reason. --Mhking 19:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
>>thanks for info, how do i remove this "new message"?, it keeps appearing at the top of my screen and i cant find any info anywhere how to get rid of this thanks Kelsey Olson entryIf you are counter-vandalism, please explain how removing unsubstantiated information and cleaning up grammar on this entry merits your interference? This entry is not up to Wiki standards and your current attitude of maintenance towards it is conflict of interest. IMHO. AntiVanity 02:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC) user:Black bear is.coolI am sorry. I didn't know that.I will never do that again. What should I do? Speedy tag on Gale InternationalI think that the references in the article adequately demonstrate notability. --Eastmain 03:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC) Speedy Deletion of Kielbasa Posse?This gang is one of the few all-Polish organized crime outfits in American history. They are a major force in Philadelphia's modern underworld and listed as contacts of many other criminal organizations operating in the city. Thedeparted123 04:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC) Beat The Bank is Blank Pls Delete ASAPhello pls delete beat the bank article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spiddy (talk • contribs) 04:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC). Speedy Deletion of GelcoI created this page from Gelco trying to present a NPOV and the article was basically historical information, please indicate how I need to edit it to ensure it is not deleted. Gelco is over a hundred years old and has historical significance in their industry. --Voyageurit 18:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Gelco HangonPlease put Gelco with a hangon so I can add noteable and verifyable supporting documentation on the Gelco entry. This entry was historical about the evolution of the business process industry and is a valid article. --Voyageurit 01:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Dave Ramsey POV/NPOV EditsI can't see any substantial difference between my original edit and your slightly revised version, but I don't have a problem with the section as you now changed it to read. Thanks for just editing my contribution instead of deleting it. 70.254.91.108 16:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC) Dave Ramsey The sentence in question is absolutely POV; I have reworded it to remove the POV. I have no problem with the substantive content, but POV edits need to be addressed. --Mhking 20:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC) Pars OnlineHi there - Pars Online is an article I believe to be notable. Please check out the talk page there for my comments. --Commking 04:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
RE: Category NominationNot a problem - we've faced other nonsense before, including a couple of users with dozens of sockpuppets intent on vandalizing TV station articles. This is actually an easy one. Thank you for jumping on it. dhett (talk • contribs) 04:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 141.154.64.129I see no vandalism from: The images he/she are replacing in those articles are indeed valid images. Please clarify why you need this person blocked if you refile on WP:AIV. -- Netsnipe ► 16:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC) Fast PatrolHey, fast patroling you're doing there! You're beating be about 30% of the time in speed of db-tagging. :-) Coren 00:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC) You helped choose Ludwig van Beethoven as this week's WP:ACID winner— Pious7TalkContribs 10:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Edit removalDear Mhking, I DID NOT remove any "to-be-deleted" criteria. Rather, I followed the protocol sent to me in a message for starting a DISCUSSION section to accompany my page, "Canadian Toilet Cartel". After the posting thereof, another editor removed the distinction and replaced it with its current disclaimers and warnings. These "DISCUSSION" instructions were the instructions sent in the message because of a possible immediate deletion due to a designation of the page as "nonsense". The page is my first attempt and also a very important one to me, as it deals with organized crime. Organized crime is one area of fascination for me. In trying to improve the page, I am continually updating it and adding citations in order to conform to wikipedia specifications. Thank you for your concern. Sincerely, Leon Re:VA tech messYeah, this whole ordeal is getting out of hand. It's so wonderful that people are able to collaborate together on an article that is really not half bad (except for that it's humongous!) but when people start doing stupid stuff, like making pages that are either redundant of material already on the root page, or are totally not worth making a page of at all, it just makes more work for others. But whatever. We all know it happens every time something big happens. Had you not AfD'd that article, I probably would have done so myself. └Jared┘┌talk┐ 03:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Deletion CommentI am afraid that whether you agree with my tone or comments or not, you have no right to delete my comments. I made a valid point and did not insult anyone directly even if i went of on a slight tangent at the general state of things causings people irrational arguments. Please refrain from deleting my comments in the future! --Jimmi Hugh 06:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Deletion PolicyDo you know if there is a way Adminisrators can delete a topic without waiting for the 5 day discussion, given that all the keeps in the discussion do not have anything todo with policy? --Jimmi Hugh 19:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
puzzled by your messageDear Mr. King, I honestly do not think I was vandalizing the Sun-times page although we may disagree on what is factual and what is in dispute. But I noticed that a lot of people seem to share my thoughts. So please do not forcifully impose your own understanding on others-- please be more democratic and open minded. -- Berkeley, CA I have no idea how it is spam, my website is just as much of a fansite as anything else on there.--MasterKit 01:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC) Thanks for restoring links on NANPAThanks for restoring those two links. I just assumed that there was a separate article for area codes (where those links would be more at home), but chasing that down brought me around to NANPA again. -- JHunterJ 16:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC) I'm scared...Please don't hurt me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.152.171.250 (talk) 02:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC). USRD Newsletter - Issue 6
Personal AttacksCare to back them up? I have not done anything wrong. Or ever vandlised wikipeda. Your post shows a perfect example of the mentatly of the editors ie if they dont like something that somebody has done then it must be vandlism and WP:POINT DXRAW 22:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3RR You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. DXRAW 23:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Chicago Sun-TimesHello Michael. Thanks for your message. Having a look at the article and those related, there does appear to be some single-account editing going on, and very likely some sock puppetry. I tend to agree with your take on the situation, but would rather the AfD on Inaccurate media reports of the Virginia Tech massacre be resolved before removing it completely. So I have reformated the article and added a slightly edited version under the notable stories section. Rockpocket 00:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Inaccurate media reports of the Virginia Tech massacreSeems to be relevant enough to be included in this article,maybe under the title criticism for Chicago Sun-Times--Ksyrie 03:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Your comment on my talk pageNow that I understand speedy deletion, I see your point. However creating pages from IPs is banned and I can't see how that's any more dangerous than allowing new accounts to do it. The way, the truth, and the light 13:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
It is not necessary to reply on others' talk pages for that reason; that's what the watchlist is for. Again, my point was that treating differently IPs and new accounts doesn't make sense. The way, the truth, and the light 14:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Your comment on my talk pagewell about the bushmaster knock-off that your saying the external links are spam.. i dont understand that.. all im trying to do is say where i got most of my information.. sorry if thats not aloud. BKO THECANADIAN 18:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Also i dont understand how the links im posting is inapropriate since it related to where u can get information about my topic.. but its alright , i dont really care just i dont want people thinking that i wrote all my information when alot of it comes from different sources. its not 100% me and i though u had to link to the sites where u got your info. RE:BloonsOk, just wanted to see if the page was makeable. LazyLaces 18:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC) User: It's Magik! vandalismThis user is continuing to vandalise pages: [[1]] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.230.5.9 (talk) 21:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC). User: Youngidealist, Three Revert Rule
HeroClix PagesFirst of all, you targeted these pages for deletion without trying to discuss this with anyone involved on the pages. So all the rules you stated that I should follow, you did not even follow yourself. If you had at least looked at the discussion threads, you would have found that we had more information regarding the sets, but were then targeted for deletion for having too many links (in order to cross-reference the figures with the comic counterparts). The information provided would help someone understand the game, the sets and the characters. However, as per the suggestions by other editors, the pages were paired down to the lists. Rather than submitting a CfD for a topic which you have no interest in, you should have discussed it first on the Main Page's (HeroClix) discussion page. I see NO entry there. This step IS the first to be taken PRIOR to putting up a CfD. As an editor, you could have made suggestions for making the pages better and bring them up to the standard that wikipedia is striving to achieve for their readership. Most of these pages go back FIVE (5) years without a CfD. Also, we are not daily editors on wikipedia. When I get new information, I post it to wikipedia. Therefore, it was most important that you did post to the dicussion thread FIRST. Finally, I will apologize for the CfD on the stations. I did look through all your content and do think that your radio station boxes are nothing more than advertising since you list their content categories and then have links the the station's web sites. First Lensman 22:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC) You helped choose Government as this week's WP:ACID winnerDiez2 00:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC) You can't face the truthThe things I added in the V-Tech shooting article were FACTS and were in NO-WAY picking a side. They mainly described how there's facts about the whole event that don't make any sense and makes it look so damn unreal... most of the newspaper got their information from blogs of witnesses, mine were from credible magazines/police and witnesses reports. You probably are as corrupted as the ones that try to hide the truth to everyone. Face the facts, that whole event as it is described by the medias don't even make sense. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.159.130.9 (talk) 03:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC). USer pageThanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC) Removal of trivia section on Go Diego GoHi Mhking. I looked at the edit history of this article a little while ago, as its on my watchlist (it has been getting vandalised a lot recently) and I notice you have removed the trivia section. I have no objection to this at all, but would you mind if I integrate some of the trivia into the article itself, as the trivia heading suggested? It will obviously work better in the article than in a seperate section in my opinion. Thanks. Thor Malmjursson 14:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC) Talk with the 'flow USRD Newsletter - Issue 7
W.Northpolei am currently still writing/editing this article, please wait till its completion before you decide to delete. ps: i'm from ga too (glennville)[[User:Supreme2k1| 2007 SorryMhking, sorry about the Ender's Game article . I can never find anything good to write. All the articles I want to write have already been written. Any ideas on how to think of a good article? Thanks
Re: Red Faction, External Links and DiscussionAt your earliest convenience I would like to draw your attention to the discussion topic I started in the Red Faction article. Thank you. Hapa Hanu 17:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC) Hello, Mhking. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:Marathon Man2.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Mhking/Archive 3. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 20:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC) Edits to Yolanda KingHi, I have a question. On this edit, you say that she died at Dexter King's house. Are you a member of the family and can you e-mail me proof that you are, because the fact that she died at a different place than a person reports on the news is original research. Thanks. Real96 01:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 8
Enchanted ForestI came to your site to inquire as to why you marked my unbiased article for speedy deletion, but after reading some other comments, I can clearly see the pattern that you follow. Can you explain why, after the article was marked for speedy deletion and I re-edited it to include references and historical documentation, you marked my article again and included a warning that would ban my further posts to Wikipedia? I have nothing but good intentions in participating in this project but you react by deleting pages without any specific or evidentary explanation. I find this particularly distasteful and request a detailed explanation for your actions. Jjm10 01:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Enchanted ForestPhil/Mhking - I see what you are saying; my tone was harsh, and I apologize. I am relatively new to editing Wikipedia and felt that I had correctly cited references and had a site deleted too quickly. I did not correctly place the request to dispute the deletion, which led to further confusion. I intend to read up on the procedures and participate in a meaningful way. I apologize again to both of you for my rudeness. Jjm10 01:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC) McEachern AlumnusHey, Ben Hubers is pretty significant in Georgia distance running, such that he probably merits a place on the alumni list. fish 02:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC) I didn't put Hubers back on the McEachern page, but he's still deserving of a spot there. fish 01:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC) I understand; thanks for the clarification. fish 19:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Cbsdaytime.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Cbsdaytime.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 9
WYIN EDITSThis is in response to your continued edits of WYIN. All of my revisions are factual based on verifyable working knowledge of that particular topic. I see you were a former resident of Gary and now live in Gerogia. Well when you move back and actually physically can see that the changes made were false, let me know...I would be more than happy to debate those edits with you... I just saw your profile in Gary, Indiana. I bet you did that all by yourself. I can also tell you love to hear yourself talk don't you. I bet you read this out loud in your best "James Earl Jones" voice just because you miss the sound of your own voice... So what is that you do exactly? After reading your page, it sounds like editing Wikipedia is the highlight of your day... http://www.lakeshoreptv.com/res/pdf/Web-Storm-damage.pdf Image:Espnu_fc.gifI have tagged Image:Espnu_fc.gif as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 13:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Do not delete the current schedule from the List Of Programs Broadcast By American Broadcasting Company page!!!Delete the current schedule from the List of programs broadcast by American Broadcasting Company page again, and the editors in charge will have you permanently blocked. AdamDeanHall 23:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC) Anon vandalThanks for helping corral vandalism by User:71.187.56.223. Mdotley 23:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 10
I listed this article for AfD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DirecTV HD channels. I also had to do a massive revert on List of DirecTV channels. I'll keep a better eye on the article for a while. --Son 21:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC) (formerly Myselfalso) An important letterDear roads editor, You may have noticed some changes at WP:USRD lately. Some of them, like the cleanup templates and the stub templates, have been astounding and great. Unfortunately, others have been disturbing. This has become evidenced by the departure of a few prominent editors at USRD, a few RFC's, and much fighting among USRD editors. After the second RFC, many of us found the opportunity to take a step away from Wikipedia for a while--as a self-imposed wikibreak, or possibly on vacation. The result of such introspection was that many of us were placing ourselves in a "walled garden" and on a self-imposed pedestal of authority over the roads department. Also, we were being hostile to a few users who were not agreeing with us. In fact, IRC has been the main incarnation of this "walled garden." Decisions have been made there to conduct grudges and prejudices against a few valued USRD users with poor justification. For this, we have come to apologize. We have come to ask your forgiveness. In addition to this, we hope to work as one USRD team from now on and to encourage cooperation instead of the promotion of interests. All users are welcome to collaborate on IRC, the newsletter, or anywhere else at USRD. In the future, please feel free to approach us about any issues you may have. Regards,
16:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 11
Wikimania in Atlanta! Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day! P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 05:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
THIS OPPRESSIVE PERSON DEFAMED METhis is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to List of DirecTV channels, you will be blocked from editing. --Mhking 05:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC) MY RESPONSE I WAS ASKED TO MOVE IT TO DIRECTV CHANNEL PAGE SO HOW IS THAT VANDALIZING IT HUH ?? YOU ARE DEFAMAING ME BY CLAIMING I VANDALIZED IT - I GUESS THE OPPRESSIVE BROADCASTER DOES NOT LIKE FACTS USRD Newsletter - Issue 12
Image source problem with Image:Beyond2000.jpg This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Beyond2000.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged. As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 16:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 13
Fair use disputed for Image:Mhkingapril3.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Mhkingapril3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC) USRD Inactivity check and news reportHello, Mhking. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:
Ariel Not for speedy deletion pleaseI'm still writing it! Give me a little bit of time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantum Jim (talk • contribs) 04:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Speedy deletion of See-through frogJust a heads-up -- I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on the article See-through frog, as this seems to be real. I also added references, a category, and all that fun stuff. --Fabrictramp 22:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 14
boo1210May I please have the article Spencer Shay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boo1210 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Pelageya KhanovaHi! Just to let you know, I've put my reasons for creating the page on the talk page of the article... ~Pentangle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pentangle (talk • contribs) 13:55, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Hi MhkingHello. I just wanted to ask you, how does one start a wiki-based site, (such as Galactiwiki, Pilkipedia, Lostpedia, etc.), and is it free? I would love to know. Thanks. Seabird
Ah LouisYour attempt to speedily delete the Ah Louis page is patently stupid. Couldn't you wait even fifteen minutes following the creation of a new article in order to see what progress might be made to it? No, not you... you waited mere seconds to jump all over a new article. You must be so proud of yourself. —XSG 01:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC) List of Directv Channels and Fox Business NetworkI only add things that are in fact coming. The Starz Comedy and Kids and Family are not there and they have been up for months. They are only in HD. The standards should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mu69 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Raisin' Hell ArticleThen perhaps instead of deleting the article, you could advise me of what I need to add to verify it. That would be great —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raisinhell (talk • contribs) 05:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC) WUPA editsThis isn't really vandalism, it is a content dispute. I have absolutely no idea what this relates to since I have never watched cable TV, but you can't really describe the addition of inforation, even if it is completely incorrect, as vandalism. Perhaps try explaining to the editor on their userpage why they are wrong? Tim Vickers 23:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC) USRD Newsletter - Issue 15
October 2007
RE4:Do not delete my biographyNotability? Well i had to write it as ill have the most accurate information, unless you want me to get someone really slow at typing and tell them everything to write. But nonetheless it is a important page to gaming society, like the page of Pure Pwnage or someone like Fatal1ty, hope you understand. Alfarjamie Re: It still adds more information to your database, i don't think something like 50 cent Should be reaching the notability requirements but he does. Alfarjamie Re2: If you need a example of notability, just search Alfarjamie in google, you will get a lot of results, 800+ and ALL me. Re3: Why not just leave the page there though.. I mean, people could just wiki my name and find out about me rather than just contacting me basically all day asking about me.. Re4: Delete my profile then, ill just host it on another site and give thier site more views.. Larry Miller comment, from anonHi Mhking; an anon accidentally posted a comment on my talk page intended for you. Here it is: --Spangineerws (háblame) 23:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC) Larry MillerI'm sort of new to wikipedia. this is actually my first interaction with other posters so to speak and I had to look around for a while before i found a way to post a message to Mhking. I hope you'll pardon me if I'm posting this on the wrong page and that I'll be pointed in the right direction. If this gets deleted I'd like at least to have some sort of feedback. Wikipedia is a crucial part of tomorrow's world (and today's !!) and if some might argue that in of itself, this is not yet the case, by virtue of the precedent it sets for information sharing and meaningful debate it certainly is. Even though i might be willing to admit i got carried away while editing Larry Miller's article, I don't think, considering his "delicate" (I wouldn't want you stop reading just yet) utterances, that calling them (not him) "racist" is a violation in any way of wikipedia's standards or guidelines. When dealing with white-supremacists, for example, such as Hitler, I couldn't help but notice that no one shied away from using the words "racist" or "anti-Semite". But on to Larry Miller... I made 3 changes to the Larry Miller article: added "bigot", my bad. end of story. From this point on I will no longer speak of this edit as I believe there is nothing more to say about it. When speaking of your "re-edits" elsewhere in this message I speak only of the other two instances in which I intervened to edit the article. Namely when... I added "category: anti-Arabism" and added "racist" as an ADJECTIVE (not a noun as in "a racist") referring to his so-called "traditional conservative positions" i.e. point of view (what follows is the excerpt in question)
[Larry] Miller also writes a regular political-humor column in The Weekly Standard, generally taking traditional conservative positions on a variety of issues: * "The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: there are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention." And regarding Palestinians who want their own state: * Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death." [End of excerpt]
As far as "category: anti-arabism" goes, it is by no means a concept, a term, a category or an article that I made up. there is an article on it on wikipedia. It is defined on your site as follows: "Anti-Arabism is a term that refers to prejudice or hostility against people of Arabic origin." Bearing in mind that some schools of thought consider Palestinians to be of "Arab origin" and that any person of normal intelligence would find in Mr Miller's remarks both "prejudice" and "hostility", I think that it was more than justified to link a living, breathing example of anti-Arabism to the "anti-Arabism" article, it helps to explain / understand the concept as well as contributing to the de-orphanisation of both articles. So your deletion of this edit in particular is completely unjustified. This particular edit in no manner whatsoever constituted, as you put it, "adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles.." (by the by, it was just the one article). It should not have been touched. I invite you then to take a look at the bigger picture. I think if anyone made any sort of comment to this effect in reference to Israel or to Jewish people in general, no one would think twice about describing them as "anti-semitic". I thus think that Mr Miller's comments should be appropriately labeled as both "racist" and "anti-Arab. Just as "anti-semitic" cracks are, by definition, "racist" so are Mr. Miller's anti-Arab remarks. It is that simple. Double standards are a major hindrance to objectivity. I recognise that in any ideology, in any point of view there is a level of subjectivity, however I believe that in Mr Miller's case or at least in this case the brand of subjectivity evinced in his comments has an accurate name, i.e. "racism". And isn't accuracy what Wikipedia is all about? I am convinced Mhking, that wikipedia is of paramount importance, it is a site I love and have the utmost respect for. Furthermore, I think that your work and that of your colleagues in wiki-quality control is essential part of Wikipedia. Nonetheless, I feel that that you were somewhat rash to act in the "cleaning" of the article. Though I do grant you, as stated above, that part of your re-editing efforts were justified, I feel you were too quick to simply undo all my edits (namely concerning the entries "racist" and "category: anti-Arabism") instead of stepping back a second, taking a good look at the bigger picture and realising that there is, indeed, a problem.
Now that I have explained to you why I made some of the changes I did, I take advantage of this opportunity to let you know that I will make three further edits to the article, knowing of course that they will be automatically available to you for scrutiny. These edits are quite simple really, you could have made them, but in your zeal to purge tha article of my edits, didn't. I am going to add the word "controversial" to the article's opening sentence so that it will read: "Lawrence J. Miller (born October 15, 1953) is a "controversial" American stand-up comedian and actor who frequently portrays..." Furthermore I will add it to the sentence that leads up to his clearly racist comments on Palestinians. The aforementioned sentence will read as follows:
Because of the importance of being consistent, I will add "controversial" to the "Larry Miller disambiguation" page as well so that it will read "controversial columnist". My third and final change to the article will be adding, once again, the "category: anti-Arabism" to the bottom of the page's cross-reference section. I believe I have sufficiently made my case for this and, as well as for the other edits that I will carry out, if you don't agree, I hope you will seek your colleagues' opinion on the matter instead of simply blocking my account like you threatened to, thus "adding (or deleting!!) commentary" based on "your personal analysis in articles.." My analysis is based on facts that are cold and hard enough to be considered wiki-facts and thus, my changes (the ones I am about to make) should stand. If you do not agree with me, however, instead of summarily and unilaterally deleting them, at the very least they should be up for discussion including me and the rest of the wiki-community. Wikipedia belongs to us all not just to those who patrol it. If autocratical editing becomes commonplace, it will be Wikipedia that will suffer the most from it. Wikipedia is a promising project with a bright future. A future that depends on monitors such as you. Will wikipedia be an unbiased source of information or is it destined to reproduce the same double-standards of mainstream Amercian media?
Thank you for your time Mhking. I look forward to reading your reply. until then, keep up the good work ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pr3 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mhkingapril3.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Mhkingapril3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC) inappropriate warning on my talk pageYou recently placed a warning on my talk page concerning vandalism! This was in no way vandalism (more a hit on the wrong TW button). When noticed that I mistakenly removed the SD tag on the newly created vandal article, I was about to correct it. But since you already readded the tag, I was unable to do so. UserDoe 23:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks......for reverting that vandalism on my talk page. I was busy wearing out the block button, and you showed up right when I needed some help. :) east.718 at 06:36, 11/12/2007 USRD Newsletter - Issue 16
Digital Entertainment Network EditsThe only person vandalizing this article is you and the other individuals who rewrote it and butchered it. It is now totally unreadable and has blatanlty incorrect and incomplete information. The recent changes to the article seem to concentrate on the sleazy aspects of DEN and much of the information is wrong. Our company owns the trademark rights to The Digital Entertaiment Network and was involved in a trademark dispute with the DEN. Since we own the trademark name which is the title of the article (The fact that 'the' is not there is irrelevant. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office does not see a distinction) our information belongs at the top of the page. The information I posted is factual and verifiable and is not an advertisement. The small write-up about the website is merely a description of what it does. If you wish to escalate the matter with wikipedia I will be more than happy to formulate a response. Please do not delete the information again or I will report you to wikipedia as vandalzing the article. Ralph Press Tdenusa (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC) Digital Entertainment Network Edits 2What this article is about in regards to Digital Entertainment Network is strictly your opinion as to what it should be about. The only reason information about our trademark ownership and dispute with DEN regarding it is not mentioned is because the authors of the article did not do their homework. It's interesting to note that opinions expressed in the article such as 'After a substantial amount of hype, the site itself turned out to be rather conventional for the time' you have not complained about, but the factual information I have provided which directly relates to both DEN and my company seems to bug you. Please do not bother having your friends on Wikipedia also send me bogus threats. If you honestly believe that the information I have posted is in violation of Wikipedia guidelines I suggest you file a formal complaint with them. I fully plan to reinstate my edits. In the event you remove them again, I will file a formal complaint with Wikipedia and we will have them decide who is right. Ralph Press Tdenusa (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC) False vandalism accusationsThe link is that Gary Indiana is in the Pandora's Box documentary. The designers of Gary were recruited by the soviets to build a Russian town, and the Russian town was designed along similar lines to Gary. If you don't know the difference between a content dispute and vandalism, which apparently you don't, then I would recommend you don't use the vandalism tag, except in clear-cut cases, particularly for well established editors.WolfKeeper (talk) 17:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Article For DeletionThe article Alejandro Pérez should not be deleted. Perez has been recognized by individuals and organizations for his efforts in improving education; mainly at Comstock Elementary School. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hempfel (talk • contribs) 02:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC) I removed the speedy tags from this article because I think it really does TRY to assert the notability. Feel free to tag it with a prod tag, if you like. Joyous! | Talk 04:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC) HelloWell, I was pleasantly surprised to see your moniker warning the same guy that I did about some drag strip. I, as wysiwyg, remember reading articles on your ping list at another popular website. Hope all is well and keep up the good work! —Travistalk 03:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC) A7 on Pevsner v. CommissionerHi, I don't think that Pevsner v. Commissioner qualified for CSD:A7, but rather needs an intro. It doesn't offer much context but should not be speedily deleted in my opinion. If you disagree, please message me or write on the the talk page of the article. You may have not noticed all of the information lower on in the page, and made a mistake. I know I've done it many times. Thanks. Alexbrewer{talk} 05:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC) "The Harry Situation" at List of television series cancelled before airing an episodeConsidering that the "star" of the show was "Harry Johnson" and it deals with sex, I think it was more "prank vandalism" than "unsourced series". -- azumanga (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
We both reported a user for vandalism...but our reports were reverted by a bot saying the user was blocked for an hour. There is nothing on the user's talk page (User talk:67.68.14.148) that says he was blocked. Do you have any idea wtf happened? Stewy5714talk 02:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC) messagehey you left me a message and i have no idea how to respond. wikipedia is really confusing to get around Lilmizmagic4 (talk) 03:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC) replyi got the information from the source i posted. its not exact copy, but thats why i cited the book because that's where i read about it. This was a class assignment for me so i'm new to this and not really sure what i was doing. i wouldn't contribute here if it hadn't been a requirement for a course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilmizmagic4 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Company entriesHi there You deleted my entry about a company. Okay. But what about all the other articles about companies? What's the difference there? Bye, Isniela —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isniela (talk • contribs) 15:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC) False vandalism accusationsIf you don't know the difference between a content dispute and vandalism, which apparently you don't, then I would recommend you don't use the vandalism tag, except in clear-cut cases, particularly for well established editors. Get a life, go out and lose your virginity for once. fucking michelle malkin fan with a god-complex! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.128.219 (talk) 04:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC) HelloHi Mike. It's nice to meet another user who's in his 40s (I'm 47), and I can see that you, too, have a wide variety of interests. Feel free to wipe this message after you've read it. I honestly don't want to undermine your efforts on fixing the pages of other users, and you convey enough of a sense of authority with the younger editors to do well with them. However, the program guide admonition is intended for current material, so to avoid the "Coming this Christmas to Nickelodeon" type of promotion. If you want to call in administrators, that's fine, but let's not get into an edit war. Best wishes. Mandsford (talk) 23:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Eric Costello posted the following on my talk page, as a response to both of us, so I'll pass it along: >> I'd direct your attention to this text from the WP:NOT guidelines. "Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business. For example, an article on a radio station generally should not list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, current schedules, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules) may be acceptable. Furthermore, the Talk pages associated with an article are for talking about the article, not for conducting the business of the topic of the article. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages." (emphasis mine) Note the specific reference to annual US network television schedules, which would be a close parallel to this, the annual schedules of NBC Red during a historic period, 1926-1952. These schedules would not, obviously, list upcoming events, current promotions, or current schedules. I would argue that the WP:NOT guidelines have a specific carve-out for the kind of thing NBC Red had. Eric O. Costello (talk) 01:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mandsford" << Mandsford (talk) 01:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Television Without PityLast week, I added links to Television Without Pity's episode recaps to the External Links sections of several specific pages. For example, I added a link to "Chuck episode recaps on Television Without Pity" to the "Chuck" page. I was then blocked for "spamming" and given several warnings by you and your colleagues, who referred to TWOP as a fan site or my personal blog. Television Without Pity is not a blog or a fan site. It is a professionally run website that provides in-depth episode recaps for popular shows. It is owned by NBC Universal. TWOP's competitors include TV.com, TVGuide.com, and AOL Television -- all of these sites have links in the External Links area on pages about specific shows. Why can't TWOP? Please advise. Thank you. --RonGrail 15:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
TWOP's reviews/recaps (i.e. what I was trying to add to the External Links) are written by professional writers who are paid for their work, just like TVGuide.com, TV.com, AOL Television, etc. The majority of the site's traffic is generated by its professional content. The site has a full-time staff based at NBC Universal's headquarters in New York, in addition to a roster of freelance professional writers. The site's user-generated content is segregated in a "Forums" section, which was not being linked to by me on Wikipedia. Please let me know if this helps change your mind. Both the business and editorial sides of TWOP consider TV.com, TVGuide.com, etc. to be competitors. It is unfair to be treated differently than them by Wikipedia, when all create the same kind of content in the same manner. --RonGrail 16:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Please have the decency to apologise for your false and hurtful allegationsPlease stop and think before criticising other user's contributions. I am doing this because at the moment the way the date formats work in Wikipedia is U.S. centric, in breach of the long standing policy that all variants of English have equality in Wikipedia. The redirects will allow people to use British English dates in auto-generated footnotes without creating red links. If you check you will note that such red links exist for most days in 2007, and for some dates in other years. They will proliferate in the future. I would ask you for an unreserved apology for falsely implying that this is not a constructive contribution to Wikipedia. LukeHoC (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![{\displaystyle Supreme2k1]]13:58,12May}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/7d13653788bb1adcc24a323b82eb7babbe39ceba)
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Ostia-Toilets.JPG&oldid=124967952){kind=link}
-2007-05-16T20:40:00.000Z-Image:Marathon_Man2.jpg){kind=link}
