Wikimania 2006

Firstly, enjoy your Wikibreak; come back clear-headed and ready to edit! Second, I noticed you live in New England, and are a DJ (awesome!), and wondered if you've heard of Wikimania 2006, which is happening right here in our fair city of Boston. I know it's a few hours' drive from where you are, but if you could participate in IRC chats, or volunteer to help with Wikimania, we'd really appreciate it. I enjoy working with you, and look forward to seeing you in the future. Happy wikibreak, Mysekurity 02:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I love the userpage! 02:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

St. John's College High School

Fantastic work on the St. John's College High School article, it looks wonderful! Bahn Mi 21:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Images

Thank you for the additions of pictures of the Bendix and Thompson tropies! KillerChihuahua 13:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I dispute your unsourced assertion that you ever sit on your "lazy ass"! If you expect such controversial claims to remain unchallenged, you should not use such a recognizable sig! No one even has to check your contribs to see that is a deliberately false and misleading statement. I am deeply disappointed in you for attempting to push this unsupported minority POV. KillerChihuahua 13:17, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my ugly user page! I really appreciate it. I had tried to make it look nice, but I just couldn't figure it out! Thanks!Reggaedelgado 19:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

ALF, now with added ALF

Here's a barnstar for converting me to ascii and HTML they are fantastic, thanks. I spent three hours this week trying to find just an ascii version, so I am delighted to have these in user space. Big smile on my face now, thanks. --Alf 11:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Love Don't Copy That Floppy

Funny shit, I wish I still had one of the posters (the one with a swashbuckling floppy) that they sent out to universities during that campaign so I could up it to commons. Also, excellent work on the many aspects of warez (it's refreshing to see well written articles by people who have a clue). Nice userpage, too, 'cept the whole spiel about being conservative ;-P (at least you aren't a GWB fanboy). --Dragon695 18:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Alkivar-003-TWEAKED.jpg

I have a question about the above mentioned picture. You state it was taken by Utopium Photography, yet you claim to be the copyright holder. If this picture was not taken by you, but you are the subject the photographer has to release the copyright to you. Just like wedding photos, the married couple do not hold any copyrights, or infact any rights to the photos. Mike _{(T C)} 23:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Dude... you have absolutely no idea what the hell your talking about. In the US, works for hire cannot be registered for copyright by the creator. See this pdf:

Under the 1976 Copyright Act as amended (title 17 of the United States Code), a work is protected by copyright from the time it is created in a fixed form. In other words, when a work is written down or otherwise set into tangible form, the copyright immediately becomes the property of the author who created it. Only the author or those deriving their rights from the author can rightfully claim copyright.

Although the general rule is that the person who creates a work is the author of that work, there is an exception to that principle: the copyright law defines a category of works called “works made for hire.” If a work is “made for hire,” the employer, and not the employee, is considered the author. The employer may be a firm, an organization, or an individual.

Note the section in bold. Nuff said.  ALKIVAR™ 19:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool

Cool userpage you've got! Gerard Foley 01:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Paul Oakenfold

I agree that the way I worded it, it sounded like he mixed his own records. I sat there for a few minutes trying to peice together a sentence that would be both grammatically correct and convey the correct message. "Not only did Oakenfold produce records, but he also mixed them." A few too many modifiers. The words but and also are both redundant but without them the sentence is screwed. Perhaps, "Oakenfold even mixed the records he produced for others" or something of the ilk? drumguy - speak? 02:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

By the way, wonderful userpage. Did you develop it or did you copmod a template? drumguy - speak? 02:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I subst'd some of the templates... and modified them to match the theme (the GFDL only and the Userpage templates) the rest I developed by hand. I'd be glad to give you any help you need developing one of your own if you'd like.  ALKIVAR™ 21:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

young orphaned images

I think you were the one who asked a little while ago for a report of young orphaned images? Here it is. Let me know if any tweaks are needed. --Interiot 23:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Gorgeous Userpage!

Yours is the nicest userpage I've seen, in browsing several hundred. Nice work! Waitak 10:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Excellent User Page Award

Any chance of some help?

I'm a bit disapointed by my photo of a print, it was under glass, no lighting, so the flash is a problem, I tried to photoshop out as much as I could but I wondered if you had a program that could level out the background white as it gets real grey away from the centre. pretty please? :) --Alf 22:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I did my best to level out the flash, I also corrected the angular distortion so the frame around the sketch looks square now. I also reduced it to greyscale as color needlessly increased the file size for this image. If this is not what you wanted feel free to revert my changes.  ALKIVAR™ 22:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

You run a fast and efficient ship there Alkivar :) I've just been appreciating it high res and zoomed in, that's a great improvement. Thanks. --Alf 23:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

RECENT

Burpee's Seedy Theatrical Company

Thank you for defining criteria with which I could construct an argument for the preservation of the Burpee’s Seedy Article. I have posted some references, as per your request, and also presented some ideas awaiting response. I would be greatly appreciative if you would have the time to look over my responses in Misplaced Pages:Deletion Review and provide more constructive feedback. No discussion has occurred since I posted a second attempt to defend the article on Saturday, October 7th and I am worried that the issue will pass without further discussion. Thank you for your time! DMcDonaldII 06:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Question

I began an article yesterday on DJ Joshua Ryan. I felt this was justified by the fact that 3 other pages on Misplaced Pages (where i originally got the idea that there should be a page for him Eric Emm), by the fact that he released numerous singles and albums on legitimate labels, and also that he had Top 40 singles, even if in the UK. I will admit that the "stub" i began wasn't very good- but it was deleted within an hour, and I was reassured by the person who deleted it, that even if I made it "better', it would be deleted again. Here's my problem with this: I have made some anonymous edits to Misplaced Pages, but this was my first attempt at Writing an actual article. I didn't choose something random, but something/one referred to in other Misplaced Pages articles, and, I thought, too, a person with a lot more notability than some other articles here. But when deleted, I was told that not onnly did the article not "assert" the noteability of the person, but that, even if re-written with these things better asserted it WOULD BE DELETED again. In my opinion, this is not very encouraging to people trying to get into Misplaced Pages, on top of the fact that I think at least a "case" of notability can be made. I wanted to ask you if I was way off base as you seem to be into this kind of music.Cranky19 19:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Case of notability is quite easy to make as he's currently licensed to Sony Music Entertainment, Palm Pictures, Ministry of Sound and Moonshine. I have undeleted the article and included information to back claim to notability. Alabamaboy's actions in this case are most certainly incorrect in this case. I am sorry you have been treated this way... administrators should know better than to bite the newcomers.  ALKIVAR™ 01:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks dude! People like you keep this place jammin'.Cranky19 14:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

But and Butt

You've spelt 'butt' wrong on your website, you've put 'which i've finally got off my lazy but to do'. Just felt I should point that out. :) Sergeant Snopake 15:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Atlantic Records

Good call on the protection. Depending on the shelf life of the video, it might be weeks before it can be unprotected. --Maxamegalon2000 01:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Distance 1200 or 12,000

You wrote:

• Keep... I personally know one patient who flew 1200 miles for surgery by this guy.  ALKIVAR™ 03:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• I note that: Did you mean 12,000 miles? Maine to Oregon is about 3,000 miles. So 1200 miles would be ??Chicago-Phoenix??, which is probably average for a surgeon with patients from all over the world. He certainly would have patients from 12,000 to 15,000 miles away who receive his unique handiwork. (emailing me is okay) Thanks for helping keep that bit of information in the uberpedia. Janniejdoe 10:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I meant precicely what I said. 1200, 1-2-0-0 miles.  ALKIVAR™ 20:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The Halo's RfA

WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006

The September 2006 issue of the Military history 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 - 18:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Your sig

Please remove the image from your signature per WP:SIG. Thank you.  Jorcoga  00:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Categories for deletion

Hi Alkivar, I notice that you closed the Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 September 27#Template:Birth date and age nomination with the comment "no strong argument was put forth for its deletion, obvious consensus is to keep", and I agree the majority wanted to keep it. I have no objection to that because if it's a numbers game/vote then true enough the majority who chose to comment wanted to keep it. I'm just trying to understand how this works, because it seems to me that nobody put forward any case to keep it. It was all just "I find it useful", "what's wrong with it?" and "what does it hurt?" which is no argument at all. If just one person had said "I find it useful because.....", I wouldn't have felt so frustrated, but even after I pointed out that nobody had tried to explain the usefulness of it, three more people replied with "It's useful", "as above" and "a lot of people can't do math" - and weak as that reason was, it was the closest anyone came to making an argument for keeping it. On the instruction page Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion it says "Anyone can join the discussion, but please give a reason when saying what you think should be done with the template. Please explain how, in your opinion, the template does not meet the criteria above. Comments such as "I like it," or "I find it useful," while potentially true, generally do not fulfill this requirement." (my italics). So when people make bland, unsupported statements such as "I find it useful" and leave it at that, why is their comment given equal weight? I accept being outnumbered, but I just don't understand why there would be a guideline about how to conduct the discussion but not backed up with any incentive for people to abide by it. It also seems to contradict Misplaced Pages:Straw polls which says "Misplaced Pages is not a democracy, and, in general, voting is evil. Decisions should be made by consensus decision making rather than a strict majority rule." I can't see that the discussion reached a consensus because it wasn't really discussed. Only a few people, myself included, attempted to comment deeper than a simple "keep", "delete" and it really got down to "majority rules". I haven't taken part in many of these situations, so I don't understand. I'm assuming that it's partly the "hit and run" mentality of discussions like this. ie someone makes a comment and moves on, and never bothers to return to the discussion to reply to any comments, and even though they might have been swayed to change their mind after reading other comments, they don't return, so their initial comment remains. I was hoping because you've been more involved than me, you could help clarify it for me. Thanks Rossrs 10:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

No source image

Image:Brailletop.jpg has no source and will be deleted in 7 days. YellowDot 15:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:CUTE

What was with it, it was clearly a draft. You didn't even leave a cute delete summary. Can't we have an article on notability of cute things... even if it just lightens things up :) - do we have to go to DRV :o -- Tawker 05:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break dude... I deleted an obvious BJAODN entry... get over it.  ALKIVAR™ 05:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Me.... BJAODN..... I wouldn't say it was a BAD joke, it got a lol out of half the channel, that hardly makes it a BAD joke. But whatever, I'll give you a kit-kat bar instead :) -- Tawker 18:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The channel would lol over a guy stubbing his toe on youtube... catering to the lowest common denominator is not a good idea for wiki.  ALKIVAR™ 18:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I posted a link in -admins and no, people didn't lol about it. That was a BADJON :) -- Tawker 20:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rscproclamation.jpg

You've tagged this image as PD, but it includes no source, and only works of the US Federal government are automatically PD; local and state governments have their own individual policies. It needs proper source information and a non-deprecated tag. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 23:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The photograph of the original document is my own... its PD.  ALKIVAR™ 01:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Left

Hamedog has left. I am back now --Hamedog_Talk| 04:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Please explain deletion of Project Runway Biographies

Greetings Alkivar, If I'm understanding the log correctly, you single-handedly deleted the articles Project Runway contestants Laura Bennett, Ulrike Herzner and Kayne Gillaspie as well as possibly other contestants that I don't recall. I don't understand this process. Neither of these articles were tagged for deletion or went through a community discussion process. Further, Bennett and other Project Runway contestant survived an Articles for Deletion vote earlier in the run on Season 3. based on the argument was made at that time that other equally notable reality show contestants and/or Project Runway finalists have articles on Misplaced Pages. Please explain how/why you deleted these articles without any community input. Thank you. Crunch 12:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Bigjake

You may want to review many of the recent discussions on AN/I, while its not preffered that users blank their pages, its not against any policy either. --NuclearZer0 02:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

It has always been against policy to remove warning notices... anything else is safe to remove, which is exactly what I stated on his talk page.  ALKIVAR™ 02:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

It is not I ask you again to see AN/I or ask another admin. This has come up on AN/I repeatedly this last week so any frequent AN/I admin can explain to you that you are incorrect. --NuclearZer0 11:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thats because people forget that the policy page was changed outside of process see this diff. Policy that was voted on by consensus still shows removing notices is inappropriate. I've been an admin longer than you've been an editor on wiki. I will overlook the fact you were unaware of the change because it only happened the 3rd day you were editing wikipedia. Do not try to educate me to policy, i'm pretty damn familiar with it.  ALKIVAR™ 17:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikitruth DRV

Usually once an article has been restored and sent to AfD we close the DRV to avoid parallel discussions. Is there a reason why you reverted this? ~ trialsanderrors 19:05, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Transparency issues... We need to keep this one 100% public so the media cant use it as proof we squash criticism of wikipedia. Unfortunately because Wikitruth has such a close relationship to at least one media hack, we have to give a bit of leeway here. It's yet more proof why the speedy deletion was a bad idea really.  ALKIVAR™ 19:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Well that's what this page is for: Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October). If you want to keep it more transparent you should probably move it into its project and close with MfD tags like this one: Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit, but since it's been overturned I don't actually see the need for it. ~ trialsanderrors 19:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Dsc04082.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dsc04082.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 16:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Candy Ravers.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Candy Ravers.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 16:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA: Malber

Thank you for your vote of support in my recent nomination for adminship, even though it was unsucessful. I was glad at least one person was able to see though the AfD's as not being in bad faith. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 14:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Project Runway designers' articles on DRV

I just wanted to inform you that I'm questioning your actions of deletion of three articles at WP:DRV (see the log for today, 10/9). Please feel free to comment. -- Kicking222 17:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Google Sightseeing on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Google Sightseeing. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Thryduulf 18:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Your signature

Hello. Please remove the image from your signature per WP:SIG. I see that you have been asked before, please comply. — Nearly Headless Nick 15:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)