Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Malber (talk | contribs) at 20:52, 8 August 2007 (→[] please stop wikistalking me on commons.: rply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:CheckedPuppeteer

User:Malber/user header3

Charles Manson

"A war to arise from tension over racial relations between blacks and whites" and "a war to arise from racial tensions between blacks and whites" are not the same thing.

Image copyright problem with Image:Amalogo.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Amalogo.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 05:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Block reset

I have reset your block due to your use of the account User:Vodak to evade it. WjBscribe 17:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Asshole. —Malber (talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Please remain civil at all times; personal attacks benefit nobody, and are harmful to the encyclopedia. Anthøny 17:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Needlessly blocking an established and productive editor without cause is more harmful to the encyclopedia. —Malber (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

Malber (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Extension of block is needless punitive persecution by User:WJBscribe employing wikilawering. Block was placed on an individual Will is in a personal dispute with. Original block was to prevent vandalism which was excessive in itself due to the nature of the alleged vandalism. Verification of checkuser is invalid because I edit from behind a corporate proxy. User:Deskana should be recused from this issue due to the personal involvement of this user. Extension of block is punitive based on opposition to an admin candidate that Will nominated. Request that original block period of one month be reinstated.

Decline reason:

Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Malber confirms that you were using a sockpuppet abusively. Block is entirely appropriate. — Yamla 18:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Where was there evidence of alleged abuse? Where is the evidence that Vodak and I are not separate people? (Note: User:Yamla has been in a dispute with Malber in the past.) —Malber (talk • contribs) 18:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The evidence from the checkuser is quite damning. Whether Vodak is a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet is a moot point at this stage: the fact remains that you're gaming the system. Even if you are editing from a corporate proxy, I don't think you can seriously claim that Vodak's similar editing pattern, the fact that he's active only when your account is blocked and the fact that he's using the same IP are just coincidences. The block is entirely appropriate in light of your extensive block log and repeated personal attacks. Pascal.Tesson 18:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Where is the evidence of a similar editing pattern? —Malber (talk • contribs) 18:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Mainly interest in the Harry Potter articles and questions asked on RfA. Note also that Vodak's first edits are typical of sockpuppet accounts: participation in ANI on third edit, second edit is to monobook.js and so on. In itself this does not mean much but compounded with the checkuser results and the time of activity of Vodak, sockpuppetry or at the very least meatpuppetry is established beyond doubt. Pascal.Tesson 18:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

If the Vodak issue is moot, why do you use it as your rationale? —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

All this has done has forced my resolve to remove myself from the project. I've already taken the steps to have my image contributions removed from here and commons. —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

You can say goodbye at any time, just hit "log out". I don't see where this has anything to do with deleting your contributions, tho. Friday (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I claim copyright on all my contributions across all Wikimedia projects and revoke GFDL/CC licenses. What brings you to this discussion? —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe Rama has already explained to you on Commons that the release of text and images under the GNU Free Documentation License is irrevocable. WjBscribe 19:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I do not relinquish copyright protection with GFDL and can enforce it at any time. Besides, the bots have been proven to be very efficient. —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely certain what this will accomplish beyond a sense of revenge. As far as the similar edit patterns go, I should note also that there are striking similarities in the edit summaries of Vodak and yourself. Pascal.Tesson 19:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

User:WJBscribe please stop wikistalking me on commons.

Please. They're my pictures, not yours. —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Please Malber, try to act reasonable. WJBscribe, Rama and myself are all simply trying to explain that you cannot revoke the release of images under a free license and we're editing Commons accordingly. Pascal.Tesson 20:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It's unclear how the blocking admin at commons became aware of this issue except by irc. No matter, the same can be accomplished a week from now after the block is gone. I'll just be more quiet about it. —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you read my post on your commons talk page. -- Cat 20:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I would reply and explain the legal ramifications for the foundation, but at that point I would be accused of making a legal threat and banned. —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

User:WJBscribe deleted my userpage at commons. Seriously, why the fuck are you stalking me? —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Malber, he's not. Please calm down. --Deskana (banana) 20:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

You wouldn't call going to commons and reverting all my edits and deleting my user page there just a little bit vindictive? —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)