User talk:RoyBoy: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 23:22, 11 November 2007 editSevera (talk \| contribs)15,365 edits →Template:Dominionism: New section.← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:10, 12 November 2007 edit undoZer0431 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers2,955 edits →Re: Triumphant return?: new sectionNext edit →
Line 474:		Line 474:
	\|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" \| Thank you for your continued work on ]. Your tireless effort to follow through on suggestions made during the past reviews has successfully guided the article toward ] status. -] (<small>]</small>) 23:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)		\|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" \| Thank you for your continued work on ]. Your tireless effort to follow through on suggestions made during the past reviews has successfully guided the article toward ] status. -] (<small>]</small>) 23:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
	\|}		\|}

			== Re: Triumphant return? ==

			Remember the comment you left on RickK's page in June '05? Well, he's back! I'll be back with the link in a flash.

Revision as of 00:10, 12 November 2007

What the heck is this gonna do? RoyBoy 05:03, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

RoyBoy Archives
2004 New user, Abortion, BR, Amorrow 2005 New admin, RC Patrol Barnstar, RfA's 2005 Signpost, BRION, WikiWatch, Monobook 2006 Gastrich, Anon blocks, Feat&Admin

24 December 2024

News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform"

Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything

Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject

In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case

From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?

Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality

Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Misplaced Pages article intensifies

Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols

Traffic report: Was a long and dark December

Single page

This user is a
Cabal of One.

Courier

Sure :)

But I'm not clear what's the problem, or what you hope for. can you give me some more detail, please? Thanks! FT2 22:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you're after cleanup and making the Courier article more rounded or useful or less dry or something? Sounds fine by me. I'd like a bit longer briefing on it, so I know what I'm walking into? Maybe a description:

What you feel is lacking or what it should be like compared to what it is
What (if any) aspects are missing or misrepresented or just badly/boringly described
If there is any dispute or heated editing to watch out for
What problems you're having in your attempts to get it into that shape?

That'd help a lot :) FT2 22:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you visit the Courier article and start filling stuff in :)

Blank sections arent a good thing. FT2 18:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Anons

i'm confused 203.211.118.94 02:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I strongly reccomend you ban this IP address from editing- it's a school library, and nothing good can from it.

Message from BB

Hey, RoyBoy. This is Big Brother from newspeakdictionary.com. I am interested in becoming a wiki admin, and was wondering if you had any suggestions for me as to how best to go about requesting adminship. - Big Brother 1984 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Bout time you showed up around here. I see you've been picking up the pace of editing recently. These days there are plenty of admins, so the requirements are subtly higher than they use to be. Mainly you should do things that admins do, on a consistent basis and in a friendly manner. (by this I mean, janitor tasks like counter vandalism, and/or more boring stuff like categorizing, AfD's and other backlogs) Also invest yourself in some content disputes to understand and apply Wikipolicy in moving an article and discussion forward. Finally, don't seek adminship. If you've done these things for a few months; this not only increases your edit count but shows your commitment to Misplaced Pages; and someone will nominate you and/or you'll find adminship isn't a big deal.

Oh yeah, did I miss anything interesting at newspeak? - RoyBoy 800 02:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. The main reason I was interested in adminship was so I could have access to all of the extra "goodies" -- the little shortcuts for reverting vandals and want not. But I found a software program called VandalProof which sounds like it will pretty much give me the features I'm looking for. Now I just have to wait for approval to have access to the software. (But this process seems less stringent than requesting full-blown admin rights)

And as for the site, not too much has changed. We're getting more trolls and spammers these days, so I'm about ready to upgrade all of the old board regulars to moderator status to help me deal with them. Apart from that, I think you might be interested to know that I changed my mind about the subject we argued about the most (marriage). Even BB can sometimes change his mind. ^>^ (Although I still think polygamy will be soon to follow... but I don't see that as a bad thing either) - Big Brother 1984 15:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Star Trek images

I have started on a mission to boldly go where no one... Wait, plenty of people have.

Today I started on a quest to beef up the image pages of Star Trek and put in necessary fair use rationales to avoid the wrath of the "anti-fair use trolls" (ok, troll is too strong of a word) that remove images from episode lists. Furthermore, the rationales are needed to go to a featured list and I'd like to see some these episode lists get there!

Please see Image:STEncFarpoint.jpg and Image:STNakedNow.jpg for examples. I'd appreciate any help as there are hundreds upon hundreds of episode images to do! Cburnett 21:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Reality

Just to let you know, the current protected version of Reality still contains vandalism. — Swpb 04:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Why was the Talk Page for Reality protected as well? Is that really necessary? The great kawa 05:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

There is still vandalism on the Elephant page. It might be best to revert back to "15:39, 27 January 2007 Reboty" This is what was missed "Is believed to have been created by Stephen Tyrone Colbert." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jasonpford (talk • contribs).

Reality has become a commodity? Is that the vandalism that is supposed to happen on this page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.166.126.242 (talk • contribs).

User you cautioned earlier went on a tear - User talk:Andylu

Andylu vandalized a number of articles prior to your warning. Almost all the edits are vandalizations and have to be reversed. Ronbo76 00:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Burton as LaForge.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Burton as LaForge.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 07:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

ABC at Abortion

Hi, RoyBoy. You recently brought the "Breast cancer" section at Abortion up to speed with the main ABC article. However, I am concerned by the text "also known as the ABC link." In my opinion, this statement is far too conclusive, and would be like stating that the abortion-breast cancer hypothesis was "also known as the ABC myth." Please let me know what you think. Thanks. -Severa (!!!) 22:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Just realized that I reverted your changes when I was trying to revert an external link added one version before yours. I didn't intend to do that, and I apologize. -Severa (!!!) 23:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

What about "the hypothetical ABC link"? As a compromise? MastCell 06:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Good try, but no one refers to it as that. There unfortunately can't be a compromise on what it is known as, and referred to by pro-lifers. - Roy Boy 06:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The only alternative I can think of is moving ABC link to the Pro-life bias section; which is certainly an appropriate topic for the section that will be added soon, but listing aka's in the lead is standard for Wiki articles. So I think it should remain. - Roy Boy 06:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's referred to as the "ABC link" by pro-lifers, and it is, at this point, hypothetical, but I'll leave it up to you. I generally try to stay as far away from the abortion page as possible, for my own sanity. I can only handle a few controversies at a time. Good thing folks like you and Severa are willing to take on the subject. MastCell 18:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Mastcell. RoyBoy has done a great job with the ABC article. It's a stand-out in the abortion series, particularly because it handles a difficult subject fairly (and, more importantly, thoroughly), without shifting weight too much to one side. Perhaps an alternative solution would be to place the reference to the "ABC link" in the introduction within the context of who uses this term: "also refered to by supporters as the ABC link." A reference to pro-lifers would give the impression that acceptance of the ABC hypothesis is dependent upon opposition to abortion, which I don't think is the case, as it's entirely possible that a pro-choicer or a fence-sitter in the abortion debate could accept the ABC hypothesis on the basis of current or future scientific evidence. -Severa (!!!) 14:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Will do. - Roy Boy 16:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. Let me know if the GA nom goes through. Thanks! -Severa (!!!) 17:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Misplaced Pages. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 03:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Christian Feminism "vandalism"

Thanks for the kind advisory about removal of material. I feel very embarrassed, since I had no intent to do that. It was a careless error on my part. Sorry...75.18.97.182 01:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Request for Assistance (BB)

I'm having a little trouble with a rouge admin. I was working on a page, and this admin came along and deleted my work and immediately protected the page. His FIRST action was to protect the page, before even discussing the issue with me. And even after discussing this problem for almost an entire day, he is still refusing to remove the protect. I'm afraid that if I have to talk to this guy any more I'm going to lose my cool. You can view the history of this discussion here:

In short, I need to get the Linz sisters article unprotected so I can finish working on it, and I can't find anybody to help me. Help me Obi-Wan-RoyBoy, you're my only hope. ^>^ -- Big Brother 1984 01:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for restoring my page, jimfbleak 06:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing mine, too. I'm absolutely sure that the user in question, 64.149.158.94, edited previously under 64.13.35.113 and was blocked for up to a month. You may want to adjust the new ip's block accordingly. —Disavian (/_contribs) 02:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Why did you reverted my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.91.8.64 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Help needed at Heather Wilson

A new user is removing material without reason or consensus and making personal attacks. See Talk:Heather Wilson for details. C56C 23:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you give a warning about this new users redirect WPBio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)C56C 22:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Evolution Controversy

Your input would be appreciated at Talk:Evolution#Controversy (2) and Talk:Evolution/WIP. Thanks! Gnixon 18:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Abortion categorization

Hi, RoyBoy. I saw that you created Category:Abortion debate recently — why didn't I think of that before? D'oh! However, there are still some unresolved issues regarding the categorization system applied to abortion-related articles. I was wondering if you could check out this active CfD debate? It's on the long-ish side, but, this has been going back and forth for a couple of weeks now, in one form or another. I'd like to resolve it and try to pull a workable categorization system from it. Maybe someone else weighing in could help to us to reach a solution. Thanks! -Severa (!!!) 03:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Anon feedback

I am concerned. On visiting the English version of Misplaced Pages and searching, I found a "new message" link. I have never seen this before. After clicking on it, I find that it looks as if I have been accused of changing a Misplaced Pages article. I think the article I was accused of changing was "Cold Mountain". I have not visited that article, nor have my wife or duaghter. We three are the only ones who have had access to computers in this house for several weeks, so the accusation (and the accuser) are wrong. I have changed pages before, but only on the "talk" pages, where I identify what I think may be grammatical or arithmetic errors, and never the "Cold Mountain" article, or even its talk page. I use sbcglobal as my ISP, and it is likely that I get a different IP address every time I establish a connection, though I have to admit that I don't know exactly how their system works. It could be that I am mistaken and that the message was not for me, though it upsets me that such unfounded accusations are made regarding me or that I or anyone who might know me might see them. While I admire Misplaced Pages greatly, this practice of making groundless accusations is disappointing and provocative. If Misplaced Pages or its agents are going to continue to make accusations on the public record that may be considered to be slander or libel, please consider where that might lead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.225.237.78 (talk • contribs).

My page

Hi. I quite like the semi-random appearance of the userboxes but, just to please you, I have moved the text down a bit so that it doesn't wrap around. Happy wikying.--Anthony.bradbury 23:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Has not been a problem either to any of my previous adoptees, nor to the 108 editors who voted in favour in my recent RfA. But you are entitled to your opinion, just as you are entitled, if you wish to talk, to go to my talk page rather than my user page. A thought - what definition of display are you set at?--Anthony.bradbury 23:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Curiously, on my home screen, and on a few others I have used to look at my user-page, it looks perfectly ok. The boxes are arranged in two rows, with the babel-boxes in a separate block on the right-hand side, and the text wholly clear of the userboxes at the bottom of the screen. Must be some type of OS incompatibility, I guess.--Anthony.bradbury 13:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

OK fine. So long as it stays much the same at my end, I'm happy with anything that makes life easier for the world at large.--Anthony.bradbury 14:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

As you guaranteed, no change at my end. Cheers.--Anthony.bradbury 14:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SpanishArmada_Isle_of_Wight.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SpanishArmada_Isle_of_Wight.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 Misplaced Pages 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.

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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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. Selket 23:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The Apprentice UK

Hello, RoyBoy and thank you for your contributions on articles related to The Apprentice UK. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject The Apprentice UK, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of The Apprentice UK and related articles on Misplaced Pages.

If you would like to help out and participate, please come over and visit us here for more information. Thanks! Dalejenkins 19:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Anon apology

Sorry RyoBoy for my delete. There was a bug in my lifesaver, so i was mad. lol. it wont happen again! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.164.239.2 (talk • contribs).

Billy Ego arbitration case

Thank you for your input in the Workshop of the Billy Ego-Sandstein arbitration case. However, the case closed several days ago, so the Workshop really should not be edited any more. You can find the final decision at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Billy Ego-Sandstein. Newyorkbrad 23:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

macroevolution discussion

why didnt dinosaurs develop speech and intelligence?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.234.155 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Could this be the answer?? ... dave souza, talk 23:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

RoyBoy, I notice that you're posting replies to User talk:68.109.234.155. If you hadn't noticed, he'll never reply back to you, because he has been permanently banned as a sockpuppet. Anyways, your answers are so good, maybe they need to be moved to this talk page! Orangemarlin 23:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost

Thanks for the kind words, I'll have two more articles in the coming Monday's Signpost. -Phoenix 02:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Colbert - Wiki Situation (Jul 31 2006).png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Colbert - Wiki Situation (Jul 31 2006).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hoop Dreams.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hoop Dreams.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 19:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Death

I notice that you recently deleted the discussion page section on "death" regarding the first paragraph of the abortion article. I have no problem with that deletion of yours, but I do have a related question that popped into my head when I noticed your deletion.

The deleted section says that "death" is a word preferred by pro-life advocates (yet is accurate), whereas "termination" is predominantly used elsewhere and is preferred by pro-choice advocates (and is accurate). Can't the same be said for the word "mother," which is a word preferred by pro-life advocates for a pregnant woman, and yet is accurate? Why then is there a concerted effort at Misplaced Pages to delete the word "mother" wherever it describes a pregnant woman, and to use the word "woman" instead? Can't the word "mother" be used once?

Thanks in advance for any info.Ferrylodge 00:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply at my talk page. You referred to the Answers.com page for "mother." As you know, that page starts with definitions 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d. However, you seem to be treating those four definitions as if they were joined by the word "and" instead of the word "or." Actually, the latter is understood, because 1a and 1c are not consistent. In other words, a person who satisfies any one of 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d falls within this definition.

You can verify this by consulting other dictionaries, or alternatively I could provide links for you. I do appreciate your willingness to consider this point.

As far as bringing this up at the abortion talk page, can we wait until you and I have finished trying to persuade each other? I really have not had good experiences at the abortion article and I really don't want to get sucked into it again. Cheers.

P.S. Is it proper etiquette for me to reply here or at my talk page?Ferrylodge 01:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

ABC hypothesis

Hi, RoyBoy. I have just started an Article Improvement Drive for WikiProject Abortion, and thought that Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis would make an excellent nomination for the Improvement Drive's first collaboration, as it is, in my opinion, already very close to GA or FA status. Please feel free to visit the nomination. I think, if we can get people motivated, it might help work out some of the concerns that came up recently over the GA nomination. Let me know what you think. Cheers! -Severa (!!!) 01:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright. Let me know if and when you decide to renominate the article for GA as I will definitely lend it my support. I'll choose another article for my own personal nominee for the Article Improvement Drive. Thanks again for helping to build such a strong article! -Severa (!!!) 03:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I would appreciate any help that you might be able to lend to the WikiProject. It would be nice get more people involved in the project, but I daresay it's difficult getting people motivated about abortion — unless it's toward expressing and advocating their thoughts on it. :-) -Severa (!!!) 03:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, an editor recently rewrote the Abortion debate article from top to bottom, and they added a section on "U.S. judicial involvement," which I felt was too limited in geographical scope for an article intended to summarise the debate on a global scale. I moved this section to the talk page, but I have some reservations about this editorial decision, and would appreciate your input, if you have the time. Thanks. -Severa (!!!) 03:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:BladeRunner Voigt-Kampff machine.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:BladeRunner Voigt-Kampff machine.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 14:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:ST-VOY The Swarm.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ST-VOY The Swarm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Non-free use disputed for Image:ST-TNG I, Borg (Brig).jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ST-TNG I, Borg (Brig).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Re: your question on User talk:Naconkantari

Hi. I saw on User talk:Naconkantari that your concerned about some of that admin's recent image deletions. Please read Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/FURG#Naconkantari's deletions. This was just the result of a misunderstanding, and he is willing to restore the images, it'll just take some time.--Fyre2387 22:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Loose Change

I've left some suggestions for Loose Change on the talk page. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 05:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Researching Misplaced Pages Online Survey

We are conducting research into the role of social norms in online communication. This research is funded by the European Union and is being undertaken by a coalition of European Universities (see http://emil.istc.cnr.it/?q=node/8). The research is designed to help us understand how social norms interact with the technology that supports online collaboration. We have selected 35 Misplaced Pages articles flagged as controversial for study. We are analysing the interactions on the discussion pages and are also seeking additional input from contributors to those discussions.

As a participant in the recent discussion about a controversial topic - Abortion, I would be very grateful if you could follow the link to a simple questionnaire. This should take only 2 minutes to complete.

http://survey.soc.surrey.ac.uk//public/survey.php?name=wiki_norms

Bugs-Bunny Bunny 16:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BladeRunner Sun.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BladeRunner Sun.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 Misplaced Pages 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages 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. Ilse @ 21:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Similar images

I saw you already started to work on this by adding {{Non-free media rationale}} (or accidently substituting it) for some images. If you need help let me know. – Ilse @ 21:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:BladeRunner Fancher and Peoples.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BladeRunner Fancher and Peoples.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Ilse @ 10:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Abortion article

There's some discussion here about the accuracy of the first paragraph of the abortion article, and you're invited to participate.Ferrylodge 19:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:BladeRunner Esper Edition CD 2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BladeRunner Esper Edition CD 2.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Ilse @ 20:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Private Island Sock Puppetry

Dear RoyBoy, further to my last regarding the Sock Puppet used by my competitor to add themselves to Misplaced Pages, here is the proof, and interested parties can email me directly for more detailed proof.

Who really is Mark Amherst??

The following person has been making posts, claiming they own an island, and using the forum to promote their blog, which is a thinly veiled promotion for companies selling islands…

Mark John Amhers Amherst Island, Long Lake, Grand Traverse County, Traverse City, Michigan

www.privateislandsblog.com

I did some checking and my Coldwell Banker affiliate who lives in Long Lake told me...

WROTE: “I happen to live on the north end of Long Lake and in fact boated around the islands just last night. There are 5 islands on Long Lake. They are named Brush, Picnic, Oleson Fox, and South. None show ownership under the name of Amherst. The township records do not show any property owner with the name of Amherst anywhere in the township.”

I also received this email from the Town Planner of Long Lake Township….

".. Mr. Morrison, there are five islands in the Long Lake Township all of which are owned by the Olsen Foundation or the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy. If you would like to see if Mr. Amherst or the Amherst family owned an island at one time you may want to get in touch with the Grand Traverse County Equalization Dept. and see if they can run a land search for you. I hope this is helpful."

So I called the County personally and guess what?

They said no one known by the name of Amherst, and no Amherst island, and nobody called Amherst owns any island in Long Lake. They are all owned by the Olsen Foundation and the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy.

So why is this person posing as an island owner, and who are they really?

Simple, it is a sock puppet used by my competitor posing as a non-commercial hobby blog. In fact the prominant links at the top of the page easily proove the motivation and possible identity.

As per my discussion with RoyBoy I am adding my blog back to the "Private Islands" page, and if an edit war is started again that the page be locked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Islomaniac (talk • contribs)

Private Islands

Dear RoyBoy, well my parasite has once again started the edit war on the Private Islands page as I predicted.

I have replaced the link to my blog.

It is almost certain that buy tommorow he will remove it.

Cheyenne

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Islomaniac (talk • contribs)

Thank you!

I'm just getting my feet wet in Misplaced Pages, and am surprised and pleased that anyone notices me creeping around removing extraneous apostrophes and changing "effect" to "affect". Cheers! (I also salute your taste in movies)Orbicular 04:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Intelligent design FAR

Intelligent design has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Themes in Blade Runner

You might be interested by this discussion: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Themes in Blade Runner--Victor falk 07:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration committee

~~Hey, Roy. Looks like Selmo didn't tell you, but you've been listed (with me) in an ArbCom request over Loose Change. Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Qarnos~~

He has removed it.

-- Qarnos 20:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:ChemicalGalaxy Stewart 2004.jpg

Image:ChemicalGalaxy Stewart 2004.jpg The image you uploaded was overwritten, and there doesn't seem to be a new fairuse permission given for the new image. The new image was previously uploaded and deleted because of lack of fairuse, see User talk:Wenczek. It's also misnamed as the new image is the 2006 version of Chemical Galaxy, while your original is the 2004 version. All in all, I'd like to fix up the Chemical Galaxy article to contain both... I think a revert is in order for this image? 132.205.93.63 03:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:BladeRunner_Bradbury.jpg

I have tagged Image:BladeRunner_Bradbury.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 05:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ST-TNG Unification Part 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ST-TNG Unification Part 2.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. Ejfetters 02:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Misplaced Pages:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jon_Stewart_in_2000_and_2005.jpg

I have tagged Image:Jon_Stewart_in_2000_and_2005.jpg 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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 04:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

RE:WikiProjects

Hey there RoyBoy. Thanks for your comments regarding my userpage, I plan on changing it soon, and that is why I have not eliminated the <br>. Sorry, if it a inconvience. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 23:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Loose Change (Screening flyer).jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Loose Change (Screening flyer).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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages 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 after seven 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 07:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you =

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thank you for the enormous amount of help you have given to wikifying, formatting and copyediting Cirque du Soleil in the final push to get it to GA status. It has been a rough couple of weeks but it has finally paid off. Trusilver 16:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thank you very much. - Roy Boy 17:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Origin of Consciousness - Book Cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Origin of Consciousness - Book Cover.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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

RoyBoy, I replaced the image you found on the net with a photo of my copy of the book. I left your text there. I think the fact that the book cover came from someone's website was the problem in meeting Fair Use requirements. KeithJonsn 07:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Cannabutter

Cannabutter, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Cannabutter satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and the Misplaced Pages deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Cannabutter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Cannabutter during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ⇒ SWATJester 15:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Origin of Consciousness - Book Cover.jpg

ABC hypothesis GA nomination

User:Wikipedical recently placed {{GANominee}} on Talk:Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis. Is there some official process that must be gone through to confirm the article's GA status? It's unclear from the template. Cheers! -Severa (!!!) 09:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Gigli (poster).jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Gigli (poster).jpg. I noticed that 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 Misplaced Pages:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —An gr 16:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gigli (poster).jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gigli (poster).jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. —An gr 16:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Punctuation

I take your point. Tricky one. We have an end of a quoted sentence occurring at the end of the sentence in which it's quoted. .". would look stupid, but to me, the sentence looked unterminated. A suitable compromise might be to put it in a block quote. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 01:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant. Looks a whole lot better for it. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 02:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Please do not delete content from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to User:Keepsdrawn101/sandbox. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keepsdrawn101 (talk • contribs)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Chemical Galaxy II.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chemical Galaxy II.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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages 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 09:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TheScore logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TheScore logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:Dominionism

As you participated in the prior TfD, I thought you would be interested that it has been proposed for deletion once again. You can find the discussion here. SkierRMH 02:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Origin of Consciousness - Book Cover.jpg

World Freedom Day

RoyBoy, my faithful Wiki-comrade! Here's wishing you a most delightful and joyous World Freedom Day! Love, Yeanold Viskersenn 19:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Dominionism

Hi RoyBoy. The Template:Dominionism TfD, on which you commented, has been closed with no consensus (default to keep). Although the TfD debate touched on several issues regarding the form the infobox should now take, much seems unresolved. I invite you to participate in further discussion on this topic. Thank you. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 05:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

ABC article

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thank you for your continued work on Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis. Your tireless effort to follow through on suggestions made during the past reviews has successfully guided the article toward GA status. -Severa (!!!) 23:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Triumphant return?

Remember the comment you left on RickK's page in June '05? Well, he's back! I'll be back with the link in a flash.