This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fmph (talk | contribs) at 21:37, 22 September 2011 (→Hong Kong meetup: +Ireland). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:37, 22 September 2011 by Fmph (talk | contribs) (→Hong Kong meetup: +Ireland)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)thank you from imboredalot! for:
|
This user is not active. |
linkies: cleanup tags RfA csd criteria monobook newbies needy cleanup ] request >1 year whitelist lame new users
 Archives | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thank you...
Thank you for your support
 |
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, , TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — |
Poll on Ireland article names
 | A poll has been set up at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration/Poll on Ireland article names. This is a formal vote regarding the naming of the Ireland and Republic of Ireland and possibly the Ireland (disambiguation) pages. The result of this poll will be binding on the affected article names for a period of two years. This poll arose from the Ireland article names case at the Arbitration Committee and the Ireland Collaboration Project. The order that the choices appear in the list has been generated randomly. Voting will end at 21:00 (UTC) of the evening of 13 September 2009 (that is 22:00 IST and BST). |
?
Why did you revert the comment I left on the National Anthem of England page?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.157.16 (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Alright no worries. 82.1.157.16 (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Chloe edney
Aww... 
Nice to see you back again, by the way (however long or short the stay is you're always welcome), kind regards, Spitfire 15:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Huatung Highway
Thanks for the removal of speedy-delete and insertion of under-construction tag. Boy, can't the bots give us a few minutes to kick start a new page nowadays? ;) Fred Hsu (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Copyvio problems at Irish School of Ecumenics
Hi FlyingToaster. I'm just letting you know that I have tagged Irish School of Ecumenics, an article you created, as a copyright violation. I'd appreciate if you could rewrite it. Thanks, Theleftorium 22:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Np, I'll do it after work. FlyingToaster 22:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Greetings
The following has been moved here by myself. It was originally posted on Giano's talk page. Giano removed it from his talk page and paste it to WP:AN. I am moving it from WP:AN to here. FlyingToaster 22:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
The following has been moved by me (Giano) from my talk as it is clearly meant for a wider audience than mu humble talk page - delete it of you want, just don't return to sender. Giano 22:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC) Hello, Giano. I don't believe we've ever spoken directly, until now. Perhaps speaking to you now is a bad idea, but especially if I'm going to leave forever, I feel like I need to know: why do you have such strong feelings towards me? I understand that you do not think highly of IRC, and that you don't think my work here is of high quality, and you didn't have a high opinion of my friend Neuro. But why is this personal to you? I'm not interested in arguing... I'm just curious. FlyingToaster 05:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Regarding your first point, it's not possible to be personal with something called a "Flying Toaster" which one has never met or even interacted, so let's kill that one stone dead. I am completely indifferent to whether you stay or leave. However, I am not completely indifferent to "your" work because much of it is not your work is it? I find it a disgrace, if not totally surprising, that a person who has so little knowledge of Misplaced Pages and its content's authenticity can garner tens of votes for their adminship off-site on IRC to such an extent that they can even win that Adminship. You only resigned your tools because, after you were exposed, an overwhelming number of people agreed with me. Even now, you seem to feel you have been wronged and have done little to redress you blatant breach of copyright law. Yes, law! We rightly don't do legal threats here, but even Wikipedians are subject to the law. Your editing and ignorance brought the project into disrepute; that, cannot be tolerated. As you waltz back here, you appear surprised and wounded not to be welcomed back and instantly promoted to Admin - I find that astounding. Regarding your friend Neuro, isn't he the person who had to apologise for libelling me on a the website of a highly respected national newspaper? - so I don't think we really need to go there - do we? I survive here because on occasions I am bloody useful to the project - when you can say honestly the same then I may feel more kindly disposed towards you. You might also like to note that one does not need Admins' tools to have power here. In fact, one can often be more powerful without the tools. Giano 08:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply. I did want to address a few of your points.
- I never asked anyone on IRC to vote for me. I assure you those logs would have surfaced if I did; there were several people looking for them.
- I had no idea about neuro's off-wiki comment when I nominated him for admin. He'd forgotten about it himself. When they came to light, he and I discussed them and decided he should withdraw. Had they come to light earlier, I would not have nominated him. I don't endorse that kind of behavior against anyone.
- I don't like writing articles much. People like you are incredible at it. I just liked taking care of backlogs, and that's all I wanted to do. If you'll look at my edit history, you'll see writing articles is an incredibly small portion of what I was doing. I was maintaining, not creating. I wanted better tools to fight backlogs, and knew I should at least get some practice writing articles before an RfA, so I tried a few. Parts of those were insufficiently paraphrased - an easily fixable problem - and now I'm basically being told I should retire my account in a black mark over it. If Peter Damian had brought article concerns to light a week before my RfA, I would've failed, learned, and passed in three months. Since they were brought up immediately after my RfA, people seem to think I can never again be in good standing, and even creating a new account is some form of treachery. And really, after people were trying to disturb my off-wiki life over this, is it really worth all the pain just to fight vandalism? I'm sure you can understand my frustration. A simple mistake over something I was doing only for practice means I can never do what I actually want to do, which is valuable to this project if you value its contents. As an article creator, at least you will always be able to do what you want to do, and you do it well.
- Anyway, you don't need to respond if you don't want. I just felt there was something unresolved with you, and I should give you the opportunity to tell me what it is directly. Sincerely, FlyingToaster 18:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hope you don't mind me dropping in here FT (and Giacomo), but I commend your civil reply here to Giano, who to my mind worded his comments to you here and on WP:AN more harshly than was necessary (though I do agree with the gist of his concerns). I also wanted to point out that I don't think most people were saying you "should retire account in a black mark over it," meaning, I assume, that you should retire it because you "can never again be in good standing." I think some, including me and also Durova, were saying you should move on to another account if you were still concerned about harassment stemming from the last incident. If that's not a major worry for you at this point I would strongly encourage you to continue editing as FlyingToaster, and this is what most others said as well. Only a couple people seemed to be saying you needed to start over with a new account because this one was sullied, and I think that was bad advice. The key messages I would take away from the AN thread if I were you (and obviously you don't need to listen to me) would be as follows: 1) An RfA would be necessary if you want to regain adminship, and the AN thread did rub some people the wrong way; 2) People definitely still want you to stay here as a contributor and encourage you to get back into the mix; 3) That should start with cleaning up any copyright problems on articles you created or expanded; 4) After x amount of time making good contributions and demonstrating that past problems have been remedied a number of people would be willing to consider supporting you again at RfA. Obviously there are some who will never be willing to offer support and will essentially oppose automatically, but a large number of others will be willing to give you a second chance. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 18:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- FT. I concur with BigTimePeace. There are a number of users who are deeply upset by off wiki discussions that then have ramifications on wiki, but that doesn't mean that all IRC users are contentious any more than everyone who posts at WR is. Until the copyvio business you were supported at RFA by a large enough majority to constitute consensus. Fix the copyvio stuff and you could make admin yet, but I'd suggest forgetting about RFA for a few months. As for Giano, you've offered an olive branch, no need to interact with him again if you don't want to. ϢereSpielChequers 22:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note, WereSpielChequers. I have no intention of contacting Giano again. FlyingToaster 23:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- FT. I concur with BigTimePeace. There are a number of users who are deeply upset by off wiki discussions that then have ramifications on wiki, but that doesn't mean that all IRC users are contentious any more than everyone who posts at WR is. Until the copyvio business you were supported at RFA by a large enough majority to constitute consensus. Fix the copyvio stuff and you could make admin yet, but I'd suggest forgetting about RFA for a few months. As for Giano, you've offered an olive branch, no need to interact with him again if you don't want to. ϢereSpielChequers 22:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hope you don't mind me dropping in here FT (and Giacomo), but I commend your civil reply here to Giano, who to my mind worded his comments to you here and on WP:AN more harshly than was necessary (though I do agree with the gist of his concerns). I also wanted to point out that I don't think most people were saying you "should retire account in a black mark over it," meaning, I assume, that you should retire it because you "can never again be in good standing." I think some, including me and also Durova, were saying you should move on to another account if you were still concerned about harassment stemming from the last incident. If that's not a major worry for you at this point I would strongly encourage you to continue editing as FlyingToaster, and this is what most others said as well. Only a couple people seemed to be saying you needed to start over with a new account because this one was sullied, and I think that was bad advice. The key messages I would take away from the AN thread if I were you (and obviously you don't need to listen to me) would be as follows: 1) An RfA would be necessary if you want to regain adminship, and the AN thread did rub some people the wrong way; 2) People definitely still want you to stay here as a contributor and encourage you to get back into the mix; 3) That should start with cleaning up any copyright problems on articles you created or expanded; 4) After x amount of time making good contributions and demonstrating that past problems have been remedied a number of people would be willing to consider supporting you again at RfA. Obviously there are some who will never be willing to offer support and will essentially oppose automatically, but a large number of others will be willing to give you a second chance. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 18:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster
To facilitate the review of your contributions for copyright problems, a contributor copyright investigation has been opened in your name. See Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster. MER-C 03:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Hope to see you
Just wanted you to know I read you message on your User page and from time to time I feel the same way, I hope to never see that dreaded "Last Straw". No matter what kind of people are here it's still a great place. Have a great day, hope to see you back ! Mlpearc MESSAGE 13:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Your draft of Irish School of Ecumenics
After reviewing the source article that came due to close today on WP:CP, I also noted that your userspace draft began as a direct copy of your infringing article. Your rewrite, in particular in its step-by-step approach, constitutes an unauthorized Derivative work of the original and remains a copyvio. On top of that, even in its draft state, the parts you had rewritten remain a close paraphrase of the sources.
The way you're going about this is, unfortunately, a surefire method to produce more of the same issues. To minimize the risks of perpetuating the problems, I've found it helps to start with acting as if copying and pasting did not exist in the first place. Reading your sources, then walk away doing something completely different for an hour or two, then summing these up in a new article is an approach that tends to produce text that is much more your own, and avoids turns of phrases or overall structure borrowed from the source. That being said, it becomes increasingly difficult to do so with every attempt.
I understand that this is disheartening. Alas, once an article has been identified as posing a copyright issue, there is little room left to produce borderline replacement text. The new effort has to be in the clear, and this was clearly not the case here. We do however appreciate the effort provided and are willing to help you with the cleanup effort to produce such in-the-clear content. MLauba (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- That really is the only way. I'm old enough to remember when the admonishment "do not write essays with scissors and paste" was meant literally - modern tools have only made it worse. The only way to avoid creating a derivative work is to treat all sources as if they are in library books, and you are making notes. Structure the article how you want to get the information across, then fit your notes into that structure without looking back at the source text (as if the book is still in the library). Only go back over the sources after you have done this, to make sure you haven't missed or misinterpreted, or incorrectly ascribed. Rewriting paragraph/section by paragraph/section is guaranteed to produce problems.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of Morgan "Bill" Evans
I have nominated Morgan "Bill" Evans, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Morgan "Bill" Evans. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of File:Argeseanu Gheorghe2.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:Argeseanu Gheorghe2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Grrr...
Damn, I just can't stop checking if you came back. --Sushiflinger (Goldblattster) (talk!) 01:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Harry Q. Bovik
Hello FlyingToaster, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created on April 2 2007, Harry Q. Bovik, has been marked for speedy deletion by User:V2Blast (page has mainspace links, and 29 edits). This has been done because the page is either pure vandalism or a blatant hoax (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:V2Blast. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of V2Blast (talk · contribs) 06:13, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Still thinking of you
Will she come back? You may not, and that's okay. I hope you are doing well and being good. TheSavageNorwegian 02:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Harry Q. Bovik for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Harry Q. Bovik, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Harry Q. Bovik until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Missing
I have added you to the list of missing Wikipedians. Feel free to remove yourself should you ever return to editing, of which you are more than welcome to do so. CT Cooper · talk 10:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
The Great American Wiknic
Hi there! In the past, you've expressed an interest in local meetups of Wikipedians. Well, here's your chance! On Saturday, June 25, we'll be joining Wikipedians in cities all over the country for the first annual Great American Wiknic -- the picnic that anyone can edit! We'll meet up at a park in SF -- hopefully in the sun -- all other details are still in deliberation!
If this sounds fun, please add your name to the list: Misplaced Pages:Meetup/San Francisco/Wiknic and add that page to your watchlist. (And of course, feel free to edit that page with your ideas, questions, etc.) I look forward to wiknicking with you! -Pete (talk) 00:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problem: Uterine orgasm
Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Uterine orgasm, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://books.google.com/books?id=ampGnXvEGLwC&dq=%22Uterine+orgasm%22&q=%22often+accompanied+by+physical+reactions+such+%22#v=onepage&q=rarely%20experienced%20by%20most%20women&f=false, http://www.abhisarika.com/SC/Glossary/Glossaryu.htm, and therefore to constitute a violation of Misplaced Pages's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Misplaced Pages, then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Uterine orgasm and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Uterine orgasm, in your email. See Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Uterine orgasm with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Uterine orgasm. See Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Misplaced Pages article layout. For more information on Misplaced Pages's policies, see Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Uterine orgasm saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages. Happy editing! Theleftorium 20:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Hong Kong meetup
You're invited to the next Hong Kong meetup on 19 August in Think Cafe, Causeway Bay. Please sign up to the meetup on the meta meetup page. Hope to see you there! Deryck C. 16:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Poll on ArbCom resolution - Ireland article names
There is a poll taking place here on whether or not to extend the ArbCom binding resolution, which says there may be no page move discussions for Ireland,Republic of Ireland or Ireland (disambiguation), for a further two years. Fmph (talk) 21:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC)