User talk:Mdd4696/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Yahoo! ToS
I replied to your question on my talk page regarding Image:Lilewyn-yahoo-avatar.png and am currently awaiting a response from the copyright agent at Yahoo! I have applied all applicable Terms of Service links and have yet to find any that I can reasonably clarify the position, sadly. Avatars are, I beleive, a rather muddy middle ground inbetween user-created content (such as emails, which are obviously copyright the original author) and purely Yahoo!-owned properties. It's my belief that this sort of content has creative interest held both by the Avatar artist (in this case myself) as well as Yahoo! Inc., in which case I beleive I should be able to assert license.
In the case that either Yahoo! disagrees with my line of reasoning, I'm fully willing to replace it with a different piece of art (which I personally created) though I'd much prefer to keep the Yahoo! Avatar if possible.
Regardless, I've read your user page and have no intention of giving you a hard time about the situation. :D
If possible, I would ask that Wikimedia and its administration (that's you now! congrats btw!) allow me the time to clarify matters with Yahoo! before removing the content. It would be much appreciated.
Ja mata! ~Kylu (u|t) 04:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
- The nice people at Yahoo! are
obliviouslyobviously working so hard at finding an answer for me that they've yet to get back to me on this matter. Has anyone managed to wade through all the ToS information yet enough to determine the status of the picture in question, or would you prefer it just be replaced with something a little less grey-area? ~Kylu (u|t) 09:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's more a "paper doll" system, which is where the iffiness comes from. They supply basic pieces (hair shapes, eye shapes, other facial features) and you color them, add/change clothing and background similarly. Due to Yahoo!'s creative content in the finished work, I can only assume that while the individual artistic pieces are Yahoo!'s copyright, the user would retain the copyright on the compilation thereof. The ToSes don't really say anything about usage of this content outside of Yahoo! owned space, and the license is really rather vague on the matter also. I'm half tempted to link to it from talk:Yahoo! Avatars just to justify it as a screenshot under fair use! By the way, modified my userpage a little. Tell me whatcha think? ~Kylu (u|t) 05:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- Wow... it's... pink! I like the collapsing boxes though, I'll have to look and see how those work. BTW, I think your avatar would be considered a collage, which means Yahoo! would still maintain the original copyright. I found a good resource discussing collage and copyright. ~MDD4696 21:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- laughs* not fond of pink, huh? The boxes I'm using at the moment use the <div> tag, though if you peek over on my talkpage I've got a large pink bar across the top with [Show] or [Hide] in it that uses the {{hidden}} template. I blatantly stole the design using the <div> tags from User:Master of Puppets (who helped me with a few problems and put the pink commentbox in for me). Thanks for the collage link... I imagine you're right, though if possible I'd still like to finish the pic I've got planned before moving it (this way I can just rename and reupload the art). Poor User:Malo mentioned the avatar to me on IRC and after I told him I'd already planned on removing it, I think he felt guilty, like he'd insulted me or something. I tried to explain we'd already talked about it and it didn't bother me... ah well. I'm not much of a graphic designer, but I think I like my page layout, myself. I'm content with the userpage now. I've got some useful links on there, feel free to borrow any design use you'd like. You may be particularly interested in User:kylu/adminbar btw. Ja mata! ~Kylu (u|t) 02:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Closing Mediation Case
I guess so, seems we got nothing out of it. Too bad really. Ardenn 03:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
RfA
Thanks for the vicarious response! Yes, that is almost certainly the case- but it is always better to leave some sort of explanation on the relevent page- eg This Oppose vote was removed per WP:POINT see...etc etc etc. It's not a good idea for anyone- particularly an anon- to remove wholesale RfA votes without a very well-reasoned explanation, IMHO... Badgerpatrol 04:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm pretty biased here, I think you're probably right. Perhaps it would've been better if he had struck the votes and added a note. Eh, oh well. ~MDD4696 04:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Ardenn has advised me that he has no more grievances against me (link) after I asked him to please take a decisive action and move the mediation cases forward one way or the other (link), and thus I'm in my mind writing the mediation matters off and moving on. (Yes, I'm back, after some time off.)
I am thus withdrawing my participation from both mediation cases (yours and the one with Noosphere). However, at the risk of inflaming Ardenn (who I suspect may be watching my contributions, and I'd really rather he just leave me for God's sake alone), I appreciate your friendship during that affair, and please do not hesitate to bring me back in as a witness if my testimony will be of use.
Please feel free to zap this if you like, although you need not if you don't want to. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm glad to see that you're back--I think it was a learning experience for both of us. Keep your head up and you'll be fine, but don't forget that you can always create another account. ~MDD4696 02:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Vito Fossella
Did you erase the entry *24.168.108.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) User has ignored warnings and was previously blocked once for 24 hours. After block expired user continued to vandalize the same page, Vito Fossella. That user edited the page today. So why did you say there was "no recent activity"? JaimeTorres 20:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Blocks are preventative, not punitive. WP:AIV is for instances where an administrator's immediate attention is necessary to prevent furthur vandalism. Since it has been 9 hours since the IP last vandalized, no administrative action was necessary. ~MDD4696 20:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
If it is preventative and the person changes it every day after it is reverted shouldn't something be done? Are you saying that if I had gone online 9 hours earlier then administrative action would be necessary? I don't understand why that should matter. Why was the person blocked last time? Shouldn't the person be blocked before he/she changes the page again and not immediately after? JaimeTorres 01:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- If the person continuously vandalizes, yes, he can be blocked. However, this IP address has only had two vandalism sessions. Would a 24 or 31 hour block intersect with his next vandalism attempt? Perhaps, perhaps not. The reason we block after vandalism is because IP addresses can be shared, and we do not want to block users who happen to share an IP with the vandal. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Blocking policy.
- Should this IP address continue to vandalize sporadically, but you don't catch him in the act, leave a note on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and administrators will keep an eye on him. ~MDD4696 13:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! Yeah, at the time they were useful; I'd tweaked the code of {{sharedip}} to include a test if {{{1}}} was defined, and if it was, to place them in the category [[:Category:Shared IP/{{{1}}}]]. Unfortunately, there's a tendency to wikilink, or hyperlink, words that are passed as parameters, and which means that the Category call dies because it has wikimarkup in it. The only way round this was to go through and manually delete Wikimarkup from the parameter, which is a painful process. Around that time was the flurry of ParserFunctions, and I think that the categories just fell by the wayside.
As they currently sort via [[:Category:{{{PAGENAME}}}|{{{PAGENAME}}}]], and there isn't any likelihood of them being fixed any time soon, you could probably just delete them. :-) Thanks for bringing it to my attention, though! I've been meaning to look at writing an AWB script to parse it and replace it, so thank you for reminding me about it. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 01:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Deleting Image:Coolness.jpg
Hi, I am pretty sure this was a part of my reverting of vandalism by Adolf2000 (talk · contribs), (blocked by someone else). I don't feel strongly about it. If you think I was wrong, feel free to restore it, or let me know and I will be happy to do it for you. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 05:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Ranga Page
Hey i dont think its very cool that you deleted out page.. Everyone knows that Ranga is a slang word used to descibe people with red-hair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.241.134.248 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- The page hasn't been deleted, and actually I think it's only an Australian term. ~MDD4696 20:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for applying to use the .NET Bot Framework.Your request has been approved, and you should soon receive instructions as to accessing the source code of the framework. You have also been added to the Spam list for announcement emails regarding the framework. If you do not wish to receive these announcements, please feel free to remove yourself from this list. Messages sent will involve announcements of new versions, features and other important information. Thanks, and enjoy your use of the framework,Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C on behalf of Werdna648T/C\@ 15:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Archiving
Hi. Regarding your comment that "the proper way to archive discussions is to copy the text to a subpage": you are mistaken. See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page#Permanent link archives method. Note that this Wikipedia guideline is linked to from the template you were editing. The subpage and permalink techniques are both accepted, and {{Talkarchive}} needs to work for both (especially since it links to a description of both.)--Srleffler 00:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but this template must not be left "broken" in the interim. If you can't find a way to make it work until the bugfix is implemented, revert to a working version until the bug is fixed.--Srleffler 00:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
notability?
I wrote a reply to your question about the notability of some of the articles on Guantanamo detainees. -- Geo Swan 16:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Pic license
I see that you added a no-license tag to Image:Rwvrobins.jpg, Image:Hollies.jpg and Image:Hutton bradman.jpg. Please see their histories. I uploaded them and they may be deleted now. Tintin (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- OK. I wasn't sure what you meant by "maybe deleted". In the future you can just tag them with {{db|Reason}}. ~MDD4696 04:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Seeking Editor Review Commentary (If You Like)
Hi. In conjunction with my RfA (that you voted on), I have created an editor review, to give people a chance to comment as to ways in which I can branch out or alter my contributions to Wikipedia. An RfA seems to solely focus on how one's temperment and contributions relate to how they might handle administrative powers (and the consensus on that seems to be that I'm not quite ready); the editor review opens things up a little more to a larger focus, and I'd love to hear community feedback in the sense of that larger focus, too. If you feel you've already expressed yourself sufficiently when casting your vote, then by all means don't worry about it, but if any thoughts come to mind or if you'd like to expound upon any suggestions or commentary, it would be appreciated. In any case, I appreciated you taking the time to express your opinion on my RfA, and I thank you for that. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 19:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Myth (computer game)
You deleted the image? That image was aquired with permission of the people who took the screenshot (http://projectmagma.net/what/screens/steal-the-bacon.php - a copy of it). Some of the people from the Project Magma group I would call friends and they said I'm welcome to use it (a few months ago). It is a screenshot of a Bungie Software Corporation game that is currently owned by Take 2. Neither company has any problem with screenshots of this game being distributed. As an active member of thte Myth Community I know this for a fact and feel your deleting of it was not necessary. If you are also within the Myth Community and knows something I do not (or are infact in Magma) feel free to tell me - but as things stand I don't see what you did as having been necessary. Much discussion over whether to change the previous picture happened beforehand and several people agreed the one you took down did the job well.
(The Elfoid 18:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC))
- Are you talking about Image:Steal-the-bacon.jpg? I deleted that image because it was not tagged with a license after 7 days of being marked. It is your responsibility as the uploader to add the proper copyright tag, especially for fair use images such as screenshots, since if it ever comes down to it, you will be the one that has to defend the fair use claim. Game screenshots should be tagged with {{Game-screenshot}}.
- The image summary you provided: "Project Magma.net's GetMyth.com site. I'm a friend of theirs - they don't mind. Ask them about using it yourself tho. The game is copyright of Project Magma of ProjectMagma.net. Copyright of their sources is provided on their site - Myth II: Soulblighter screenshot from Myth II: Soulblighter by Bungie Software (www.bungie.net), Myth franchise now owned by Take2Interactive."
- This does not justify anything beyond a fair use claim. Project Magma.net can say whatever they want, but they own no rights to the image whatsoever. The copyright holder (Bungie Software or Take2Interactive) is the only organization which can grant permission for use of this game screenshot. ~MDD4696 21:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Since I'm not an expert on this (never done any other images before for Wikipedia) I'm not really sure what I'd have to do to get it put up, but I can guarante that Bungie/Take2 wouldn't respond to any e-mails because they don't care anymore. Project Magma are lisenced by MythDevelopers (who's lisence came from Take 2) to update and maintain the Myth trilogy. I believe for this reason it should be considered legal since it was a screenshot of a Project Magma-ed version of the game (Myth II v1.5.1, They've run the game for v1.3.2, v1.4 - 1.4.4 and v1.5 - v1.5.2). For this reason it would both improve the game's commercial value (if there was any) as it would show the graphical updates that few people are aware the game has received. Also it is worth you noting that Take2 no longer support the game at all - any requests for help are redirected to Project Magma. They have no care for its commercial value whatsoever.
What do I do now? It'd be neat if you can give me a hand in what to write (just the copyright tag with a regular description of source?!) and then it'd be done.
(The Elfoid 09:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC))
- I'm not sure what to do in this situation. My suggestion is to provide a concise explanation of the source of the image and on who you believe owns the copyright, and mark the image as {{Game-screenshot}}. Then, bring this up on a page like Wikipedia Talk:Fair use for others' opinions. (Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations would be a good place too, but few people monitor it). That's all the help I can really offer, especially since IANAL. Good luck! ~MDD4696 20:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
My Thanks
I wanted to drop a brief note on your talk page (one admittedly not written to you only, but nevertheless truly meant) to thank you for your vote in my Request for Adminship, which concluded this evening. Even though it was unsuccessful, it did make clear to me some areas in which I can improve my contributions to Wikipedia, both in terms of the areas in which I can participate and the manner in which I can participate. I do plan on, at some point in the future (although, I think, not the near future), attempting the process again, and I hope you will consider participating in that voting process as well. If you wish in the future to offer any constructive criticism to me, or if I may assist you with anything, I hope you will not hesitate to contact me. Thanks again. — WCityMike (T | C) ⇓ plz reply HERE (why?) ⇓ 04:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Sig Request
Do you think it could work without the highlight? — WCityMike (T | C) ↓ plz reply HERE (why?) ↓ 17:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- It is an improvement, but I really don't think the link to the Wikipedia page is necessary. It is each users individual choice to follow good Wikiquette. I believe the people you are targetting with the link haven't bothered to read Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, and won't be motivated by a link in someone's signature. If I can't convince you to shorten your sig, would you at least replace all of the underscores with spaces so that the text can break in the editing window? ~MDD4696 17:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Don't sweat it. I kind of already had noticed that it didn't do much. I'm retooling it a bit now. — WCityMike 17:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- A bit better, I imagine. Almost went minimalist and had the C in "WCityMike" be a link to contributions and the t in "WCityMike" be a link to my talk page, but the t is just too darn thin to be able to be clickable. So, we'll just go vanilla. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 18:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
My RFA
Staxringold talkcontribs 20:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits at Prem Rawat. Can you please explain the reason for the {{context}}? I think that the lead is pretty well formed for a biographical article. Your comments will be appreciated. Jossi 03:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Images
About pictures of a painter artist: the 2nd of june 2006, instead of{{Copyrighted Fair use}} {{Copyrighted Fair use}}authorisation released the 29th of may 2006 at 1h06 p.m. by e-mail to permissions@wikipedia.org, you wrote:
"This image is copyrighted. However, the copyright holder has irrevocably released all rights to it, allowing it to be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, used, modified, built upon, or otherwise exploited in any way by anyone for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, with or without attribution of the author, as if in the public domain."
We don't agree with your text. In fact, we propose:
This image is under fair use. To use it under commercial purpose, you must ask the agreement to this e-mail: mauriceboitelfriends@yahoo.fr —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jakado (talk • contribs) 14:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- I was trying to tag the images in accordance with what the uploader (Jgalt) and Inghem had tagged them. I'm slightly confused as to what license these images are under. Either permission has been granted to Wikipedia to use them, in which case they need to be tagged with {{Copyrighted}}, or they are under a claim of fair use, in which case they should be tagged with {{Fairusein}}. Since there is a note on the pages talking about permission being granted, I will tag them all as {{Copyrighted}}, but you'll need to fix them if this is not correct. All images must have a license tag. ~MDD4696 18:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Image Autotagger
I was just thinking of one improvement, no license and no source at the same time. It shouldn't be hard to code though, as {{subst:nldnsd}} should do the trick. Great tool, btw. --Rory096 05:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Heading spacing
I noticed in your edit of Finch (TTC) that you reformatted all the titles to put spaces between the = signs and the titles (from =title= to = title =). I'm curious if there is a purpose do your doing this. Adding spaces increases the filesize of articles (marginally in a reasonably sized article, but still increase for no reason), and it doesn't affect the article because spaces before and after the headings don't (seem to) affect how wikipedia renders headings. TheHYPO 20:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- The filesize thing has been discussed many times on WP:VPT -- let me assure you that the extra bandwidth and storage consumed for the spaces is so small (even if this were done for every article on Wikipedia) that there's really no difference from that perspective. And no, it does not affect the way headings are rendered. It doesn't even take make a measurable difference in processing time to generate the page.
- The only reason I add the spaces is because I (personally) think that it makes the headings much more legible when reading the wiki code. It's just my preference. I never make an edit to a page just to change the headings, but if I'm there making another edit, I occasionally add the spaces. You can do headings how you like, just don't edit and save a page solely to change them one way or another. ~MDD4696 21:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Lyre Lyre
I hate to say it, but: between the two of you that's one of the funniest edit summaries I've ever seen on WP :-)
chocolateboy 01:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
.... are (almost definitely) the same user. The first one was blocked by User:Shanel as an inappropriate user name (though I'm not entirely clear why); if you unblock either of them, I'd run it by Shanel first. Just a heads up.... JDoorjam Talk 03:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- I blocked given the fact that their first edit was to AN/I, which is a bit suspicious for a newbie. In fact, I think it's probably the AN/I troll.--Shanel § 03:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, personally I also think that a newbie could stumble across AN/I while trying to look for someone in authority to spout his ideas... I'm inclined to give him another chance, hopefully you don't mind. I've unblocked the second username and will watch it for a while. Any suspicious activity will result in a reblock. ~MDD4696 03:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
jc response
this is to respond to your query on the Justice Court This is more of a board to show all of the bad admins and users. This is not to block them. The multi structure system ensures that people do not use this board to settle edit wars. Geo.plrd 22:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
jc response 2
This will not be a hit list it will just show which admins and users cause problems so people can avoid tangling with them Geo.plrd 22:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- You can just reply on the project talk page; I'll see the messages there. ~MDD4696 22:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Are translations lyrics?
You removed links by user KinoKukushka that she made to http://russmus.net But as I pointed out on her talk page russmus.net contains translations, are they considerd lyrics? And transliterations as well? Also as a non russian speaker, have you ever tried to find lyrics for russian songs, most of the websites are in russian, and its quite a daunghting task. So I wouldn't consider links on english wikipedia page about russian bands, to russmus.net linkspam since.
Sorry to disrigard your message at the top of your talk page, But you havent replyed to my reply on that. Cheers Comrade james 22:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry about that. Well, I'm not entirely sure about the copyright status of translations. I suppose you have an argument for linking to the page that contains lyrics for a particular song though. I don't think a link to the general site would be appropriate, however. Just a link to the page with the lyrics. ~MDD4696 22:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Good evenin sir!
And a fine how dee do to ya too! I assure ya that mnot Bradyp. Thanks fr inquiren.Sweet Pete 17:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Mi first name was User:Is It One? Aftr creatin it, I thought it a tad stupid, so I dumped 'r unceremoniously!Sweet Pete 17:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Willing to Withdraw the TfD for Template:YouTube?
I agree that it needs to be an IMDB-style template -- and I made it such a style, and fixed the existing references on Wikipedia (basically by inserting prefacing bullet points). In light of same, you willing to withdraw the nom? — Mike • 23:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Wesley College Dublin
That "weird quote" which you removed from the Wesley College page is the motto of the school dating back over 150 years, clearly not a past pupil or any knowledge of the article to lable it a weird quote. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Historicalbuff (talk • contribs) 16:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- You are correct; I'm not familiar with the article's content at all. While I was removing some deleted images from it (menial maintenance work), I noticed the seemingly random quote at the top. There was no context stating how it was related to the school, so I removed it. I see that the school's motto is also noted in the School Coat of Arms section, so fortunately it turns out that I had only removed a redundancy. ~MDD4696 16:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Atheism?
Hi Cool Cat. I was reading your user page and I saw that you're a Computer Engineering major... cool! I am too. Furthur down I saw that you put an exclamation point after Atheism. I'm not sure what that means. Did you intend to emphasize that atheism is not a religion, or something else? I'm just curious. ~MDD4696 21:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, it is just that being acused of being an atheist and a muslim was kinda funny since the two religions arent compatible. I do not reveal the faith I believe in or weather I believe in one. ;)
- Atheisms claisfication (weather its a religion or not) is a contraversial issue which I'd rather not get indulged in
- --Cat out 21:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Would I be right if I assumed you follow the Naruto series? If so would you mind helping out with this list? Every episode needs a short summary and I do not want to write all 270+ of them on my own. --Cat out 22:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)