Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Krome007 (talk | contribs) at 08:03, 6 February 2007 (→Harry Colquhoun). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User talk:Ryulong/Penguin

	Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics by using either the + tab or this link. Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). If you do not sign your comments, I may remove them entirely. Thank you.
	I thank everyone for their support and constructive criticism offered at my recent request for adminship. I hope that these few extra buttons and tabs will allow me to further improve the project.
	If I deleted a page that you've worked on, please view my deletion reason, and the deletion policy to understand why.

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion. --Ryūlóng

WeniWidiWiki

I've unprotected Wwws userpage, see my comment on User_talk:WeniWidiWiki. I don't want us to enter a wheel-war, and I suggest if you want to pursue this you post it on WP:AN/I for wider input. regards, dab (𒁳) 10:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My special status? I don't think so!

(Protected User:WeniWidiWiki: Several editors have expressed an opinion that your user page contains an improper message, including a former arbitrator )

Pleeeeeseee don't do that! One of things I really hated about being an arbitrator is that people accorded me special status because of it even when I was simply expressing opinions personally i.e. not on arbitration cases. The one thing I love about no longer being an arbitrator is that I can speak my mind freely without having to be on my best good girl behabviour all the time. By all means respect my opinions, but don't hold them above anyone elses because of a position I once held and wasn't particulaly good at anyway. |Cheers Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 16:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Vandalism

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Cbrown1023 talk 21:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

68.117.46.48

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page in response to my post at AIV. I noticed that another admin User:Chrislk02 removed the listing from AIV saying that the IP was acting in good faith. I questioned this and please note the detail that I posed on Chris's talk page User talk:Chrislk02#68.117.46.48. I then started to wonder how this person could possibly be an admin with this type of decision making, and found out that he wasn't per Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Chrislk02!!! Do you feel like performing an intervention or that any coaching is needed here? At the very least, should Chris be asked to refrain from making actions at AIV? --After Midnight 22:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, wait, now I see Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Chrislk02 2. I guess he was already reconsidered and promoted. I still feel that some coaching is needed here. If he's going to have the bit, I think he needs to be more dilligent. I'm all for jumping in like new admins tend to, but he needs a bit more seasoning, I think. --After Midnight 22:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I was going to remove him from the list, as well. The edit warring would have been an issue, but a block at this time would have been useless, as the edits were too old to require immediate intervention.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Right I have no quarrel with the decision not to block for the same reason you cite. I'm more concerned with the assertation by Chris who thinks that the IP is engaged in Good Faith editing. A block may not be useful, but I think that the IP does need to be recognized as a vandal, not as a good faith editor. --After Midnight 01:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Chris has responded on my talk page at the same time that I posted the above to you. I thnk that you probably can let this drop. Thanks for your attention. --After Midnight 01:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Alan & Denise

How was it possible that this article got deleted by db-bio, if Misplaced Pages:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles gives literally notability to every musician or ensemble, that has had a charted hit on any national music chart? Medium chart success was mentioned in the deleted version and is proved by the equivalent article in German Misplaced Pages. -- 84.178.25.44 22:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

It did not assert notability or back it up.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, deletion is not always permanent. If you (registered) can create an article that supports and asserts the individual's notability in a way that is easily visable to anyone who randomly finds the article, then it can be recreated.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

As the Deletion Log partly proves the deleted version gave already information on the duo's chart success. So their notabiliy was already easily visible to anyone. -- 84.178.25.44 22:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alan & Denise. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- 84.178.25.44 00:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion offered at deletion review is that you don't object to a listing at AFD. If you choose to overturn yourself and list at AFD, then we close the deletion review as "overturned by deleting admin", as the review is effective

Actually, I'm still thinking about it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hallway Hug

I don't understand what the problem is with the Hallway Hug article. It isn't nonsense, it actually means something to some people. Just because it may not appeal to you as interesting or informing doesn't mean this shouldn't be somewhere where people can find it. Quite a few are interested in this. There isn't much information in the article, but there isn't much about the subject that exhists. Why is this not worthy of being able to look up on the internet? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BambiGirl (talk • contribs) 04:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

It's pure nonsense. Misplaced Pages is not for things you make up in one day. It's only important to you and does not require mention on Misplaced Pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes

Hi, is it possible to search for a userbox using the search function? If not, can such a feature be added? Thanks. Smokizzy 04:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Go to WP:UBX, and no such feature will be added.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of MichaelHeaviside1.jpg picture from Michael Heaviside article

Hi

I'd like to query your reason for deleting the image. I posted a link to the original picture so you could see the source AND I a comment paraphrasing the source website that it was okay to use the image in other websites and sources provided they were available free of charge.

Here again is the link to the image:

http://www.durham.gov.uk/chp/usp.nsf/lookup/michaelheaviside1/$file/michaelheaviside1.jpg

Here is the link to the terms of usage for the image and content:

google

And here is the relevant sections of the copyright information for you:

You may use the content contained in this website for reproduction in connection with presentations, reports, printed material, and other similar uses which are publicly distributed or displayed free of charge, including advertisements, posters, catalogues, brochures, leaflets. You may also publicly display or demonstrate the website in unaltered form on a computer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dazzola (talk • contribs) 09:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

You uploaded it with the wrong copyright tag. I don't know why they have it in the system, but if you let only Misplaced Pages use it, that counts as a speedy deletion criteria, WP:CSD#I3. Check that out, and Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags to see what to reupload it under.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Additonally, you should never upload images off of a Google Search.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible Sockpuppetry

Call this a hunch, but Goldendoggy appears to be a sockpuppet. Flipping through the contribution history, the same types of pages are edited (GX, Naruto, Pokémon). The edits to GX episode articles seem to be nothing but deletion requests with that "I'm helping by removing vandal material w/ another account" feel, and some of the edit summaries this user has given include "it has been deciced to merge the page," where there is no evidence of any discussion of the sort whatsoever. The user also reverted the Jaden Yuki and Aster Phoenix pages to earlier versions when they still had card lists (it was decided by the community to remove them entirely), and uploads images from the same sources as you know who (with the same sourcing issues as well). --Benten 01:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit: It's obvious now. --Benten 01:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and blocked them for disruption. THe user was removing entries at WP:AIV (regarding themselves) as well as entries here and trying to hide their behavior. The block was for 24 hours. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Benten has expressed concern that 24 hours block is not long enough. I am not comfterable issuing a longer block as of now as i only blocked them for disruption. If you feel it is necessary, please issue a longer block. Thanks-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Hey Ryu. Just dropped by to mention that the puppet's talk page should be semi-protected to prevent her from continuing to use it as a source of spam (or, if your going to block her indefinitely, then that works too). --Benten 02:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked, it's obvious based on the AIV removal and the fact that she blanked this three times.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Yea, thanks for removing it. I wasent relaly sure what to do with that actually. I assumed it was just some form of disruption/trolling! Thanks for handeling the situation. I was not directly involved with much of it so, i tried to just handle it with what I was involved with. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 03:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Jesus as myth

Please have the courtesy to read the talk page before reverting - you will see there has been a big discussion about this and th consensus of the active editors is that the article has been hijacked over the last few months and oyr best chance for improvement is to back track. Between us we represent a fair spread of faiths or lack of them so this is no edit war.

Please review your revert. Sophia 08:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not see anything wrong with the article version, so long as it is well cited and referenced, which it appears to be. I looked at the talk page, saw the small discussion going on, and reverted based on that. This does not have as many inline citations and notes as the current one, and whereas I cannot at this exact time read through the entire article, I simply have a feeling that this is a WP:OWN issue. Let others comment on either version (WP:RFC may be a good route to get an outside opinion on the article) before unilaterally making massive changes to get rid of material that (it appears to me) you do not agree with.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

If you don't have time to read it you should not be involved. As someone who has read a lot of these theories is it not a good article and gives undue weight to really marginal and even discredited ideas. The in-line citations were to be covered this weekend by me - hopefully with help from others as it's easier to get help on live versions than on sandbox copies. The talk page has been active on this subject for several weeks with all sides of the debate expressing their dissatisfaction with the current version. I have reverted at this point as I now have a little time to work on it and everyone is in agreement with the idea. I am an athiest with strong leanings to the myth theories and have left this revert until the active christian editors have agreed to the idea - this is a starting point for improvement - not a revert to a definitive copy.

Anyway - this discussion should happen on the talk page. It is rude in the extreme to expect an editor to summarise for you a talk page discussion that you won't make the time to read and yet are prepared to act decisively on. Sophia 09:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't have time to read the article right now. I read the talk page (the latest discussion towards the bottom where it is suggested that your version be reinstated). If you look at my clock, you can see it's after 4 am where I am. When I wake up, I will look over the article versions and review my decision to revert it (I would like you to know that in the process of your removal, you practically removed enough content to start an entirely new article with).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, you can integrate information instead of removing it completely.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

You will find (when you make the time) that most of the material is elsewhere already see . It is inefficient in a database structure to replicate information - correct cross section referencing is essential. I must ask based on your responses so far - do you know anything about this subject? Sophia 09:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Omi.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Omi.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 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. Sandstein 13:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Jesus as myth

We have been discussing a move backwards to a previous version for weeks on the talk page and reached a general consensus to start back at a previous version. Is this a problem?--Filll 14:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't tell that from the discussion. I was only doing a reversion as an editor. Go ahead and undo it already.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Another Sentai Article split

Other than the the two seperate pages for Bakuryuu Sentai Abaranger there was also another article split done for Kyouryuu Sentai Zyuranger by seperating the Zyuranger info into a new article called Zyurangers which was done by a different user. However I jumped in and took care alot of cleaning up the new article and moved the page to The Zyurangers.

If you want to check it out and make any futher edits go right ahead but I did my part. Also the main page is now only 44 kilobytes long after all that is happened so it would matter to me if you decide whever or not you could put Bandora and her gang into their own seperate page as well. -Adv193 21:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

/b/

Give me five mintues to upload the pciture, all right?

My image, was a fiar use image, and p[hotographs are always citeable as a source. You jsut deleted it ebcause you dotn want to accept the addition, whicxh is an abuse of pwoer. Do not do it again.TheGreenFaerae

No, you uploaded it with the wrong rationale, and even then, you'd have to have a reason that the screenshot of second life should be used in the article on 4chan.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well i fixed the rational, and the reaosn ti should be sued is exp-alined by the cpation. Any other problems?TheGreenFaerae 23:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate protection

Please see WP:PPOL; This protection is inappropriate, especially considering you have personal involvement in that page, there is also no indication of edit warring/vandalism. Please un-protect and if you would like submit an RFPP, though I'd imagine it'd be declined as it's inappropriate protection. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 01:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Not to throw AGF out of the window, but are you stalking my logs or something? The information added is a spoiler for a series that does not air for three weeks that has no references whatsoever. I requested that Power Rangers: Operation Overdrive be protected, as the issues arose from that article's massive amounts of unsourceable spoilers.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

or maybe I'm trying to edit a page, like I usually do? It rarely gets edited, no vandalism has occurred, etc, no need for page protection thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 01:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

As I said, it is an issue with unsourced titles of which there are no references for.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

As such, I've lowered it to a semiprotection. And I have to wonder, why did you tag those two facts with {{cn}} as they are supported by the linked articles?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

EUI

LOL! I wonder if we need an WP:EUI page ... Antandrus (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

OMG there is one. I had no idea.  ::goes off to read it:: Antandrus (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

HBC AIV helperbot2 Block

Hello! Its Extranet here, operator of HBC AIV helperbot. As you have posted on my talk page, you seem to have blocked HBC AIV helperbot2. Could you possibly tell me why and link the problem if necessary so I and the bot creator can diagnose the problem. Thank you. Extranet 04:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I've posted this at HighInBC's talk.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Omi

I've done a first pass on the inline citations. If there are any other statements that seem POV or OR then they should be tagged and I will cite or remove as appropriate. Jay32183 04:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Question about WP:IFD

When there's been Afd discussion about an article, and it passes, the article is tagged so users will know that it has been discussed and passed. Does that not happen with Ifd? I ask because you removed some info from Image:Ejaculation sample.jpg, but I see no tag on the article linking to the Ifd discussion. Jeffpw 14:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Fred Burkle.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Fred Burkle.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 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 14:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #9

The February issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My user pages

I believe it should now be safe to unprotect my user and user talk pages. It's been a week and whoever they are, they haven't come back. :) Flyingtoaster1337 06:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've unsprotected the user talk, but I left move on. Do you want me to unprotect the user redirect?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll put something there shortly. Thanks! Flyingtoaster1337 07:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Evolution vandals

Whaddaya think -- should we full-protect the article? Or does it matter? They seem to have saved up a bunch of account names for use in this attack. NawlinWiki 22:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on RFCU right now. Trying to find someone to run it to kill the IP.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Plate tectonics - thanks

Thanks for the sprotect on Plate tectonics - much appreciated. Cheers Geologyguy 22:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

All IPs involved blocked for a month with {{schoolblock}}—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Penguins

Digging the penguins on your page...am not sure what or where they are from, but I might just have to steal them. OK, maybe not, but they are still cool :o) Rock on....SVRTVDude 04:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Benny Hill Image

You removed the speedy-delete tag from this image, but I was a little confused by the edit summary (not fair use, not speedy). Did you not intend to put that first "not", or are you contesting the fair use licensing rationale? Thanks, Jerry lavoie 05:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a speedy candidate.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Reversion

Although the user is username blocked, it isn't clear to me why this is necessary. JoshuaZ 06:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Newbie voting at an AFD is usually not noticed by the closing admin. Also, the speed at which AFD is found is also a bit odd.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

His other edits all seem fine. Why not just put a note that he's a new user? JoshuaZ 06:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

:/ A bit more work. But I'll rollback my rollbacks.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Harry Colquhoun

Do me a favour and dont alter pages that you dont know about. I used to work at Relish and would appreciate it if you didnt alter pages when I have entered factual information in them. Do you know Harry? I think not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krome007 (talk • contribs) 08:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

This is Misplaced Pages. The encyclopedia anyone can edit.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you also not delete images which I have obtained the rights to use. OK so anyone can edit but I thought the idea was to edit with factual information you monkey nut.