User talk:Ajerimez

Welcome!

Welcome! (We can't say that loud/big enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page.

We're so glad you're here! If you need help or just want to say hello, click here and leave a message! [1] -- Phgao 02:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Softimage3D 392.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Softimage3D 392.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed the Fair Use Rational for you. Look at the image page to see how this is done --lucericr (talk) 18:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Softimage Artists.gif[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Softimage Artists.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:45, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Softimage Dinosaur.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Softimage Dinosaur.gif. 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Softimage Artists.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Softimage Artists.gif. 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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. VegitaU 18:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Image:Softimage3D 392.png, you will be blocked from editing. VegitaU 19:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive uploads.
The next time you upload an inappropriate image, such as Image:Softimage Artists.gif, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. I know this image isn't yours, so don't claim it uder GFDL tags. It comes from here. This is your ONLY warning! VegitaU 19:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for knowing violations of the Wikipedia copyright policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. - Philippe | Talk 19:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Soft3DLogo.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Soft3DLogo.png. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia 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 15:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Softimage Dinosaur.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Softimage Dinosaur.gif. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia 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 15:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alias Eclipse[edit]

The article Alias Eclipse has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks sources, seems to fail notability guidelines

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chzz ► 14:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Alias Eclipse[edit]

I have nominated Alias Eclipse, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alias Eclipse. 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. Chzz ► 14:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Chzz. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further to your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alias Eclipse, your behaviour continues to be disruptive and against the policy of No personal attacks. Please desist, thanks. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone your four proposed deletions as violations of the WP:POINT guideline. If you continue with this disruption, I will have to block you. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may not have heard of the Boothill Foottappers (I hadn't either) - but they are notable according to Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion because they have had a charted release (see WP:BAND). Red cunt hair has got 7 references included - showing that the phrase is in use. Both of those meet the criteria for inclusion. As it stands, Alias Eclipse does not - unless you can provide references from reliable sources that show that this is a notable piece of software (and as I mentioned on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alias Eclipse, Google Scholar/Books/News searches returned no significant hits (if any), and Google Web search did not return any reliable sourced hits).

I'm not sure what your connection with the software is, but the Notability Criteria are not met by this as the article stands - and people have looked for sources of information - I know that I certainly did. I would suggest that you re-read WP:NOTABILITY, as that shows what is needed to make this article acceptable on Wikipedia.

I would also like to re-iterate that Wikipedia has a policy of No Personal Attacks: Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks do not help make a point; they only hurt the Wikipedia community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to blocks.. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 16:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below.

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

What am I being blocked for? For undoing the vandalism that Chzz did to my Softimage

Decline reason:

You were blocked for this personal attack, something you had been warned about multiple times. Please reread WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL Mfield (Oi!) 22:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

For disruptive editing as the block template explains. Calling a good-faith contributor's edits 'vandalism' is a significant failure to assume good faith, and edit warring is unacceptable. Further, questioning somebody's mental health is a personal attack. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Julian and Mfield, you need to take a look at the discussion history for the Alias Eclipse page before you make decisions like this. Chzz (for whatever reason) tried to delete my legitimate Alias Eclipse article, which started a big argument about whether the article was notable or not. He ultimately lost and the article was allowed to remain, at which point he began mercilessly cutting content that I had contributed to the Softimage|3D article months ago. If anything, you should be blocking HIM, not me, because he's the one who is vandalizing out of spite. I was merely restoring the page to its prior condition, and I was not the only one to undo Chzz's edits. I cannot assume "good faith" on the part of Chzz here, rather, it is quite obvious that he was acting in bad faith and for personal reasons. Ajerimez (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I echo the declined unblock rationale by Mfield as well as Juliancolton's block rationale. (I was about to decline your unblock request with the following commentary.) The contributions by User:Chzz were attempts at cleanup and were clearly not vandalism. I also stand by the blocking administrator's other block rationale in that you were clearly engaging in harassment of other editors as well as deliberately trying to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point (see [2], [3], [4], and [5]).

While I'm at it, it is not your article. Once you hit that "save page" button, it becomes the community's article and can be edited in any way as fit within the approptiate guidelines and policies. It clearly says below that button: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." MuZemike 22:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, further disruption [6], [7], [8], and [9]. That is clear stalking as well as harassment. MuZemike 22:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stalking? Harassment? What do you call it when Chzz deletes my contributions to the Softimage|3D page out of spite? Hypocrisy and favoritism seem to run rampant on this website.

Again, by assuming Chzz's actions were taken out of spite is not appropriate. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ajerimez, thanks for your contribution to the Softimage|3D article. With regards to the cleanups, there is nothing that can be done, as there were problems with the article in relation to Wikipedia guidelines. To recap, everything that's written has to be sourced by something else, it cannot be an original commentary, but rather a recap of other sources. Also, the list of features of the product should be about the notability of the product, or some historical perspective, or otherwise have a "notable" reason to be there. The external link to a brochure is good; if people want to see the list of features, they can go there. But there is a wikipedia guideline specifically against feature lists, dump of facts, shopping guide-ish pages. In other words, the page should answer the question, "what is Softimage|3D and why should we care"? Big picture stuff. For example: "Color Models" in the "Matter module" is not significant. (Or if it is, it isn't explained.) The list of productions made with Softimage|3D (not by you) was also largely deleted. None of those are sourced, therefore they could conceivably be false, and their individual significance is not explained. I hope this helps. In essence, we need to write Wikipedia article defensively. A challenge can come at any time. lucericr (talk) 05:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your reasoned explanation of the edits, Lucericr, but it is still troubling that Chzz chose to enforce Wikipedia's policies for personal rather than objective reasons (and please, no more inane references to WP:AGF or the like; it is perfectly obvious why Chzz felt motivated to decimate my contributions to the Soft3D page). It is becoming abundantly clear that this web site's objectivity is compromised by a small group of privileged admins, some of whom manipulate policy and selectively enforce standards to their own personal tastes. So much for the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit." If you really want to claim that your policies are enforced fairly, then I challenge one of you to edit the Softimage XSI page in the same way Chzz edited the Soft3D page. The XSI page, not written by me, contains similar unreferenced descriptive passages and "laundry-lists" of features, yet Chzz, remarkably, felt no need to correct its flaws. Either way, I don't have time to get involved in protracted arguments with teenagers every time I contribute to this site. As a third-year law student I have better things to do than convince Wikipedia to bestow upon me dubious the honor of retaining the information that I provide to it free of charge. Ajerimez (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sympathizes. Of all the billions of articles on Wikipedia with faults, I have no clue why these couple of niche software pages came under scrutiny. Canada tag perhaps? The text was unceremoniously deleted instead of flagged ^{[citation needed]}, which seems crazy. It only works because these articles are low-traffic. (Try to 'correct' a harry potter or starwars article in that manner!) Ultimately, we'll have to find another place to document VFX software history, because it is very difficult on Wikipedia, with its irrational fear of copyright, obsession with replacing historical information with recent development, drive-by vandalism, bots, etc. lucericr (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Softimage3D 392.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Softimage3D 392.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Softimage 3D 3.8 - Software Package.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Softimage 3D 3.8 - Software Package.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Ajerimez. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Ajerimez. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]