Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Glen (talk | contribs) at 10:59, 31 March 2006 (FYI). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Science of Survival (Talk)

I left a note for you at Science of Survival (talk) Spirit of Man 02:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Dianetics

Hi. While I understand why you did what you did in deleting the information that Spirit of Man (talk · contribs) (an inappropriate name if ever there was one) was trying to intimidate you into doing, nevertheless I think it's a bad precedent to give in to threats generally. So I've restored the edits and left a note taking responsibility for them. If SpiritofMan has a problem with that, he can talk to me, and you can wash your hands of this affair.

Good luck and don't stress. --Calton | Talk 08:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Carlton, if you have an issue with the "appropriateness" of a screen name, there is a venue available to you. Certain screen names are disallowed. Others are sometimes refused editing because they are inappropriate ("OhFuckU") might be such an example. If you have an issue with appropriateness, I point out, there are venues available to you Terryeo 20:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Categorization

Would you please try to remember, when you've created a new article on a Scientology-related subject, to put it somewhere in the Category:Scientology hierarchy? The template is good but it can't do all that the category system can. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Miscav1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Miscav1.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Longhair 02:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Katie Holmes

Greetings! You have edited the Katie Holmes page in the past. I've completely reworked the article and have posted it on WP:PR in the hopes of advancing it to WP:FAC. I would be grateful for your comments at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Katie Holmes. PedanticallySpeaking 18:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2

I've thought about this and cases such as yours are really really in the rarity, half of the purpose of the bot is to "demoralize" vandals letting them know that their vandalism will be reverted within 10 seconds, I will however change the edit summary to something slightly more neuteral, I think thats a fair compromise. I'm not sure about the "stupid bot" in your edit summary though, its pretty darned good at what it does and it doesn't like being called stupid :) -- Tawker 17:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Trouble With Tribbles Edit

I'm cross posting this from the Talk:The Trouble With Tribbles (TOS episode) page for your convenience - in case you're interested:

Regarding Wikipediatrix's edit, I recall from Gerrold's book (cited in the references section) that he'd originally intended to call them "Fuzzies" ("Furries"?) but that the name was somehow changed during script development. I seem to recall that he said the direction came from people on the show rather than Gerrold, but I can't remember if he said why the change was made (e.g. it might have just been "Tribbles just sounds better").

It'd take me a bit to dig up my old copy (damn Grad School and day job!), so if someone else just happens to have a copy and can definitively see if Gerrold indicates why the change was made, it'd be appreciated. Otherwise, I should get around to it some time during the next ice age. --KNHaw 18:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

personal attacks

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that you may be blocked for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thanks, ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 03:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from referring to my military service in places where it doesn't apply (like the Talk:SCUM Manifesto page). Please also stop referring to my within-policy edits to Dianetics as "Trolling". ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 03:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I was not referring to your military service, and had no idea that you were in the service until you just mentioned it. Your own signature contains a link to the "United States Armed Forces" WikiProject, and this is to what I was referring. Even so, referring to you as an "Armed Forces guy" cannot be construed as an "personal attack" except, perhaps, to the overly sensitive. I do consider much of your needlessly hostile posts to be "trolling" and will continue to refer to them as such. wikipediatrix 17:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh come on. It was on a talk page for SCUM Manifesto....that has nothing to do with the military. You don't know me, you don't know anything about my service, and unless you'd read my user page, you wouldn't know I was in the military, just a member of the wikiproject. It was obviously a bad-faith mentioning of my service that had absolutely no valid reason to be there.

Furthermore, while it may be disputed that that was a personal attack as opposed to incivility (which is no less against policy), calling me a troll on the Dianetics page clearly and undisputedly was a personal attack. You can backpedal all you want: but comments like "and will continue to refer to them as such" don't do much for other editors to assume good faith on your behalf. WP:DICK ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 18:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Even if what you say is true (and it isn't), your own conduct is, IMHO, far worse than mine. You be nice to me and I'll be nice to you. Period. wikipediatrix 18:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been watching Wikipediatrix for a while. If you want to start an RfC on her, I'd be willing to endorse it. --UNK 07:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

3rr

How am I cautioned to heed the 3RR on only my 2nd edit? Don't throw policy at me when I haven't violated it. Keep bothering me and I'm going to bring it up through DR. ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 06:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Do not delete talk page warnings

This from WP:VAND "Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism."

Also "users generally are permitted to remove outside comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are prohibited from removing."

also WP:TALK states "Furthermore WP:VAND states: Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism."

You've been warned once already about WP:OWNership of articles. Perhaps you should read the policy again to make sure you are clear on it. ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 06:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Warnings

Please do not remove warnings from your talk page and/or replace it with offensive content. Blanking your talk page will not remove the warnings from the page history. If you continue to blank your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. --негіднийлють 06:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Because of the above warning not being heeded, I have decided to lock your talk page. User:Zscout370 06:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly

Interestingly, I noticed that you recognized the editorial nature of the term "interestingly" in an article you recently edited. Would you be interested in helping to excise a few of several thousand other uses of this editorial term? Here's a list to work from: Google search for "interestingly" in Misplaced Pages 172.196.11.239 23:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Buckowensjapan.jpg

Just so you're aware, I've removed this pic from Buck Owens for the time being. Fair use laws demand that images represent the accompanying text; also, there is no rationale for the pic's "fair use" argument on the pic page. For pics that have survived fair use criteria and why, you may wish to check Lindsay Lohan. RadioKirk talk to me 04:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I've never encountered such highly exclusional criteria for an image on Misplaced Pages before... I thought having a pic of one of his Capitol albums illustrated the nearby text about his becoming a Capitol recording artist. Also, in my experience, pictures of products (including albums) are automatically "fair use", more so than more complicated gray areas that surround other types of images. I think the LP cover image is far more valid under "fair use" than the image at the top page that purports to be a "promotional postcard". wikipediatrix 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

That's primarily because admins are working harder now than before to crack down on what is fair use. Album covers, in particular, are watched very carefully because a large-enough resolution can be copied for the purpose of bootlegging music. See the discussion on this page—Carnildo and Rossrs can answer any additional questions you may have. RadioKirk talk to me 16:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with Carnildo's assertion that "as long as the image is high-resolution enough to be useful for us, it's high-resolution enough to infringe copyright". If this was true, there could never be any fair-use images on Misplaced Pages, ever. Furthermore, it is contradicted by the guidelines one is presented with when uploading an image on Misplaced Pages in the first place: "album cover" is the one of the fair use options specifically presented in the menu. No admin has, as of yet, complained about my upload of the image in the first place (and believe me, they're VERY quick to pounce on them if they find them suspicious), so why make an issue out of it if they aren't? wikipediatrix 16:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Because the people who are experts on the subject made an issue of it with me and, sometimes, a "wait for them to deal with it" tack is believed by other editors, as with me in this case, to be potentially harmful to the project (I'm looking out for Misplaced Pages, not against its editors). My suggestion at this point would be to discuss it further with Carnildo and/or other users/admins for whom this is an area of expertise. RadioKirk talk to me 17:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, as of yet, no admin has objected to the image I uploaded, and until someone does, I don't see what your problem is with it. All images entered into Misplaced Pages are scrutinized quickly - almost immediately - by these "experts" you speak of. I'm restoring the image until an admin specifically tells me it violates Fair Use, in which case the image should be removed from Misplaced Pages itself. wikipediatrix 17:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Admin assistance requested. Please understand I have Misplaced Pages's interests in mind as I pursue this. RadioKirk talk to me 17:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Though Wikipediatrix and I have had our differences, I was always under the impression that non-high res album covers are fair use. I'm not familiar enough with pictures to say what the cut-off point is, but since nobody's asserted infringement, I fail to see the harm in leaving it. ⇒ SWATJester Aim _Fire! 23:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Public nudity quotes

Is there a wikiproject that can be used to store related quotes on a topic? Dandelion1 22:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

FYI

User_talk:Tenebrous _{ĢĿ€Ñ §τοĿĿ€Ŗγč} 10:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)