User talk:Audriusa/Archive2

Enigma machine

Thanks very much for providing the picture of the Swiss Enigma; cheers! — Matt Crypto 18:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Here is a (late) thank-you for removeing the um. . .(is it vandalism?) catagorizing from my user page. I love having my user page reverted before I even see it! thanks a ton --Banana04131 01:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Next time be sure to sign in before archiving your talk page, otherwise it looks like an anonymous vandal. :D. — Mar. 15, '06 [14:07] <freakofnur_xture|talk>

Terminatorius blanking of IP user talk pages

Is there a policy authorizing the blanking of IP talk pages after a period of inactivity?Wuzzy 18:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is definitely no policy for removing useful notes such as {{sharedip|Cambridge Area Schools}} (User talk:195.144.131.12). Does this bot have en:Wikipedia:Bots approval? 48 hours or even 10 days seems way to short for en: even if everybody agreed on blanking pages. I gave the bot a stop message until it's clear there was consensus on its behavior. Femto 20:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, waiting for consensus. All bot changes are now manually reverted. Audriusa 22:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think that this bot is a good idea. Some IPs are chronic vandalis, and when I'm dealing with them it's very useful for me to be able to see that. When I'm going to an IP talk page to add a vandalism warning and I see that that IP has 20 previous warnings stretching back over six months, I handle it differently than if the IP has received one or no warnings. Hbackman 23:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion at ~~Wikipedia talk:Counter Vandalism Unit#Terminatorius bot blanks warnings Wuzzy 00:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)~~ WP:BRFA#User:Terminatorius - automated blanking of the vandal anonymous IP talk pages Wuzzy 00:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus has been reached

I am convinced by the arguments and do not plan to continue with this idea. Audriusa 08:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You were well-intentioned and you obviously put a lot of effort into the Terminatorius bot, and carefully explained what you did, and incorporated the innovative "Emergency stop" feature. So, thank you, even if the bot will not go ahead. 14:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Images

[1] You have a creative way of using images, I must say. :) Femto 15:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Username signature in Wikipedia articles

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Please, however, refrain from using your username signature in Wikipedia articles. Username signatures are used for talk (discussion) pages only. --Kurt 02:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not have intention to put the username signature into any article. Where did you find it? Audriusa 06:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re Image:ElectricLocomotiveCabine.jpg

Could you please add details as to the locomotive type and alter caption in electric locomotive accordingly? Mangoe 17:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

River Image

I really, really, liked the image of the start of a river at the site of the melting glacier, on the page River. However, a couple of questions: 1) what river is this? 2) did you do the superimposing of the closeup image yourself? If so, I would encourage you to redo it. Let me know if you can redo it, before I bother explaining what I think would make it better. No matter what, I liked it (I have a weird fetish for headwaters). Unschool 05:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [2]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PlantsInArvenbul1400m.jpg

Hi Audrius, Your picture shows Astrantia major. Cheers --87.165.85.73 17:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) (de:Benutzer:Density)[reply]

Oh, thanks! Audriusa 19:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transistors in Diode Detection

Hi Audriusa, I removed it because several electrical engineers couldn't understand it. Someone asked me what it meant and I (an EE) couldn't figure it out. I asked someone else smarter than me and they couldn't either. So if you add it back, please write it so it is easier for people to understand. If people don't understand, you don't get your point across.

If you intend to imply that a transistor in reverse bias (to the zener point) is a better detector than a comparable diode in comparable bias, then I think I can convince you otherwise. But I could not understand whether that is what you intended to imply.

Also, I think there may be some words out of place in your contribution.

Thanks. John 02:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dry rot

Nice addition of Serpula image.Heliocybe 18:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source code request

You offered to make the source code of your Java Terminatorius bot available to any admin on request. Could you email it to me? Thanks. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 16:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK Audriusa 19:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Steponas darius.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Steponas darius.jpg. 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 (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lituanica.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lituanica.jpg. 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 (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stasys girenas.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stasys girenas.jpg. 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 (talk) 05:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lituanica.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Lituanica.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Calao systems logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Calao systems logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:ObjectWebLogo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:ObjectWebLogo.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 10:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Umbrello2.ssp.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Umbrello2.ssp.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture illustrating kurtosis

Hi Audriusa, would you like to comment on Talk:Kurtosis#Diagram.3F? --Pot (talk) 13:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GSM.

Hi - I noticed you put a piece of text in on cell breathing in the GSM article. I removed it for now - as far as I remember from my studies of GSM (a while back) cell breathing is really a characteristic of CDMA based networks. GSM is TDMA based. UMTS on the other hand does have cell breathing issues as its W-CDMA based? Perhaps your comment may be better suited on the UMTS article? beardybloke (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note and your slides... Even in those slides it notes cell breathing as a CDMA technology, not GSM. But that slide on Cell Breathing is a bit out of place. All the slides before talk about Satellite comms, all the slides afterwards talk about GSM. I think it looks like the presenter wanted to cover the topic, but didnt know quite where to put it. I'd suggest they should add a few slides on UMTS or other CDMA based technologies and the slideset would make more sense. Or they could simply remove the slide on cell breathing. beardybloke (talk) 09:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually just re-read a couple of the slides before, the slide creator does appear to try to talk about cellular systems in general, but the Cell Breathing slide is a little out of place and out of context. I assume the lecturer mentioned a few things during the lecture that arenmt mentioned on the slide to provide more context. beardybloke (talk) 09:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Thehelpfulone is doing unapproved actions.

Hi there,

Sorry for the late reply - I'm on a wikibreak so I've not been looking at my talk page.

Anyways, in response to your question, if you see the second BRFA for the bot, you can see I requested as a general message delivery bot.

I didn't create the newsletter / message - I was simply posting it for the user that requested it. The request is located here.

Hope this helps,

The Helpful One 11:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:DariusirGirenas1.JPG

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:DariusirGirenas1.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 07:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:ChessApplet.png

File:ChessApplet.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:ChessApplet.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:ChessApplet.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Audriusa. You have new messages at Talk:Viral license.
Message added 22:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Audriusa, I disagree with your recent edits on Viral license and I have commented on the talk page. Please respond if you are interested in discussing the focus and feel of the article. — sligocki (talk) 22:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ultrastudio.org.logo.png

I have tagged File:Ultrastudio.org.logo.png as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. Melesse (talk) 02:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ultrastudio.org.screenshot.png

I have tagged File:Ultrastudio.org.screenshot.png as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. Melesse (talk) 02:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Audriusa, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Audriusa/Ultrastudio.org. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Audriusa, just so you know, I have been replying on the bots talk page. Tim 1357 ^talk 09:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ultrastudio.org

The article Ultrastudio.org has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Possible unremarkable website WP:WEB, Possible advertising/promotion. WP:Advert

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. Kudpung (talk) 08:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ultrastudio.org

A tag has been placed on Ultrastudio.org requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I42 (talk) 08:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good day to you sir. I have declined the above mentioned csd request on grounds I feel the article satisfies its mandate to remain here, and have recommended afd as a venue for any future deletion moves. Note that I have also moved the article to comply with naming policies. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Ultrastudio has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ultrastudio&action=history Kudpung (talk) 09:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Ultrastudio

I have nominated Ultrastudio, 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/Ultrastudio. 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. I42 (talk) 18:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultrastudio

Please note the instruction not to modify this page at its head. If you want to contest the result, please see WP:DRV. I42 (talk) 20:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultrastudio, you may be blocked from editing. I42 (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultrastudio, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please use WP:DRV. I42 (talk) 20:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wonder how would you do this if you say you had no rights to delete the article. Audriusa (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV. I42 (talk) 20:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To repeat; if you disagree with deletion, WP:DRV is the place to go. Messing with the AfD page is not only prohibited, it is also pointless. I42 (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I currently cannot defend the article for the formal notability in the strict discussion but I expected some help from Wikipedia community in my project. After all, I have contributed so much during multiple years - see my history, see my history on Commons. You see no difference between mine case and any commercial spam, you even see no reason to talk to me in a normal way pushing these references instead, you even deny me right of the normal discussion before deletion. Whatever it be, it does not look like you are worth to be administrator or anything the like here, if this is that are you seeking with such an attitude to people. Audriusa (talk) 20:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your first communication was to remove the PROD and CSD tags from the article with the edit summary "Fuck off" (removing the CSD tag was itself vandalism). An admin has reviewed the article and concluded the subject unambiguously fails notability requirements. I have advised you of the correct process for challenging the deletion. I can understand your frustation with the process, but you are clearly not listening to what people are telling you. I42 (talk) 20:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not tags, I have blanked the all article. I will be back after several weeks or months, when [Ultrastudio.org] will be more ready for the discussions of this type. Currently I see more sense in working on my server than trolling there with people of your kind. Audriusa (talk) 22:43, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]