User talk:Mysidia/Archive/4
Archives /Archive/1 /Archive/2 /Archive/3 /Archive/4
GFDL and editing for consideration[edit]
Interesting point you made at the thread on paid editing at the VPP. Can you please put that in layman's terms though? English is not my first language or? Erich Mendacio (talk) 20:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- The GFDL is the license used for Wikipedia articles.
- When you submit an edit to Wikipedia, there is legal text displayed under the text box.
- Some of the text says you agree to license under the GFDL.
- Some of the legal text also says that a Wikipedia Terms of Service applies.
- The proposal (as I understand it) was to force paid editors through a special process that involves the foundation collecting a percentage from the payer.
- If the proposal were accepted, additional legal text could be added to the Terms of Service.
- The additional text could demand editors comply with the policy.
- My speculation is that the additional rule would be just as binding on editors as the requirement they irrevokably license their edits under the GFDL. --Mysidia (talk) 22:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Rollback[edit]
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of DreamHost[edit]
An article that you have been involved in editing, DreamHost, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DreamHost_(2nd_nomination). Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Judas278 (talk) 17:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
hi, since you are one of the few editors i've seen to stand up to NRen2k5, I thought you might like to weigh in on the new ANI thread about him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#His_cyber-thuggery_clouds_his_judgement . You might also encourage others like SlimVirgin to contribute there. (I would but I can't edit SV's talk page.) 12.36.128.89 (talk) 00:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry about this, it's been resolved.Abce2|Free LemonadeOnly 25 cents! 00:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
"Mirror" sites[edit]
See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. Basicaly yes.©Geni 00:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Progress is now being made at WP:Paid editing. The topic is very important, and I'd love to get the proposed policy back on track. If you have any input, I'd love to see it on the page. Smallbones (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Sources[edit]
It's good that you did eventually provide sources Talk:Roman Polanski/Archive 2#Child molester needs to be in the lead. If you had provided those sources earlier, I wouldn't of course bothered to reply. You can't expect me to be aware of sources you haven't provided and it is intrinsic on those making claims in articles or talk pages to provide sources. And yes, I stick by my claim that in the absence of sources, it's far better to rely on an expert then some random person. (Of course it's better to rely on neither but in that case, there was no choice since neither side provided sources and instead just continued to argue.) Nil Einne (talk) 11:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Toothpick[edit]
Welcome back to Wikipedia, and thank you for the comment you left on my talk page. But I'm afraid you appear to be incorrect in your assertion that my revert introduced a nonsense sentence. Assuming you're referring to the "lleytons maiden" comment, the revision clearly shows that it was already there and not (re)introduced by me. The vandalism had been made a month previous to my reversions of 11 April, and not reintroduced since. If you're referring to some other sentence, then please point it out to me. I am not perfect in my anti-vandalism work, but the effect of unfounded accusations like this is very negative. Please be careful about incorrectly reprimanding other editors and leaving patronisiong comments on their talk pages. Canthusus (talk) 12:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
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) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Mysidia. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Mysidia. 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)