User talk:NoCultureIcons

Welcome!

Hello, NoCultureIcons, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 22:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --NoCultureIcons 22:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Rayman

The image you tagged for deletion as "most stupid "fair use" of all time" was uploaded years ago, from memory. If I recall correctly, Commons didn't even exist at the time, and I don't remember Ubisoft having made any agreements, either. I agree that the image, at this point, warranted deletion, but your manner was perhaps less than necessary. Cheers. - Vague | Rant 07:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I know. That statement wasn't about you but about the fact that such an image still existed one and a half years after ubisoft agreed to allow freely licenced screenshots. What's the point of the work someone put into making it possible to illustrate such an article with freely licenced images when noone around here seems to care? Sorry if you felt insulted. --NoCultureIcons 11:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion process

If you contest a proposed deletion, you need to go through articles for deletion. The process is described here. Administrators carry no weight in final say in an edit dispute. x42bn6 Talk Mess 04:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Right, I got that part wrong when I scrolled through the rules. Now I know, thanks. --NoCultureIcons 04:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

And just so you know, I didn't think you were working in bad faith. I just wanted to pre-empt a potential revert war. Smashville 04:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

That was OK, I guess I shouldn't have edited at that time of the day anyway, seems that makes me a bit unbalanced (around here, it was 4 to 6 am). Normally, I would have left the article alone. --NoCultureIcons 10:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Same here...keep up the good work! Smashville 17:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use

I believe you should review WP:CSD, particularly criteria I4, I6 and I7. In both cases, the speedy was done too hastily. Per CSD I4: Images in category "Images with unknown source", "Images with unknown copyright status", or "Images with no copyright tag" that have been in the category for more than seven days..., but the necessary template {{nosource}} was not used in this case, something the deleting admin missed. A similar 7-day period exists for CSD I6, again, the necessary template was not utilized. As for CSD I7, the policy states that the upload should be notified 48 hours prior to deletion, again this was ignored. Had you reviewed the revision history on Image:Thrice.jpg, you would have seen that a previous revision had an acceptable copyright statement.

Can these images be replaced with free license alternatives? Likely so. However, there is a process to follow to ensure that the image uploaders and other people who maintain the articles can replace these images in due time, hence the waiting periods.

As far as your comments about reading the fucking manual and not being fit to be an admin, I would strongly caution you to do several things:

1. Bone up on WP:CIVIL. Comments like that are not acceptable here.
2. Before you challenge an experienced editor on policy, make sure you know your shit.
3. Review WP:CSD to learn the best templates to use when nominating an article or image for speedy deletion. There are far better templates to use than the generic {{speedy}}, so that there is no question which CSD criterion is being cited. You also need to make sure that you follow the correct templating procedure as far as nominating images for speedy deletion to ensure that fair use alternatives can be found.

If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line. Caknuck 06:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure, thanks. --NoCultureIcons 09:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Goldrush (band) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 23:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I will continue vandalizing. It's much more fun. --NoCultureIcons (talk) 23:25, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Johnwoodstock99.jpg

I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Image:Johnwoodstock99.jpg. The reason I declined it is because If you think the image is replaceable, then either replace it in the article or tag it with {{rfu}}. For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC) עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't care, don't wanna know. The effort that is put into protecting blatant copyright violations around here annoys me big time. Cheers, --NoCultureIcons (talk) 13:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Swarm of the Lotus

This was the entire text of the deleted article: "Swarm of the Lotus (also known as SOTL) are a post-metal band from Baltimore. The band formed in the year 2000, and since then has played shows with many influential bands such as Mastodon, Pelican, Lamb of God, Converge, Kylesa, Pig Destroyer, Superjoint Ritual and Today Is The Day." I don't think that's worth restoring. I looked at the German article, and it still doesn't look like you have sufficient coverage by reliable independent sources to meet WP:BAND. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Well done

Thanks for righting The Turbo A.C.'s page. Whilst I didn't create the original band page, I did do all the album articles and only noticed it had gone when one of the articles was still a redlink. So thanks for that and well done. By the way, I'm (supposedly) an admin and have no idea why it was speedily deleted either. – B.hotep ^u/_t• 11:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Civility

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. 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. Johnny from Bronx (talk) 07:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Standstill (band)

A tag has been placed on Standstill (band) 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 a band or musician, 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 musical topics. 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), 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. MuffledThud (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC re:publica was accepted

re:publica, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Hasteur (talk) 17:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, NoCultureIcons. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, NoCultureIcons. 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)