Jump to content

User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive110

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, I am[edit]

Yes, I'm Vietnamese, but also 1/4 Chinese. You can spot a photo of me on the WM-AU wiki. I haven't really triple-checked the usable Tet photos, either. I'm only having a literal moment's reprieve right now, since I need to relieve stress and get sleep, even though I can't get either. Hopefully this moment will make me feel better. I'm not sure where else I could be heading, but if you have some suggestions for what photos I could take over here I'd appreciate it; It gives me something to do. Something like the Honda Super Cub riddled streets, or the strange fact that the KFCs here are like restaurants: plates, metal cutlery, glasses, and good service. - Zero1328 Talk? 16:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finally had a chance to do a lot of personal stuff, but only because I got ill and resting at home right now. Thanks for the suggestions again; I've been thinking that you might be doubting me or something, since I haven't shown anything, so I grabbed a sample and stuck it on megaupload: [1]

My hands have been shaky lately, for some reason, and most of these photos were taken from inside the car, whilst driving. We've mostly been going around the areas close to the house. I stuck them on megaupload instead of commons because I've only glanced at them so far and I want to be personally sure of the licensing and blurring of the sensitive things like faces, and I can probably only do that when this is all done. - Zero1328 Talk? 14:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to describe each photo; here's a quick summary in order of the photo numbers:

  1. bamboo pole at Inala
  2. nem nuong at Inala, mum said that it's red food colouring in the nem mix, not like that in vietnam
  3. Entrance to Tet in INala, at night, the center banner in viet is actually all over the place in vietnam
  4. A performance in Inala Tet, too blurry
  5. This is taken over singapore
  6. Something at a quality vietnamese restaurant
  7. Interior of main saigon post office, has international help, money exchange, phones
  8. power lines, it's like this everywhere
  9. I think it's the emergency side to the hospital, I'll catch the name later
  10. roundabout in front of a shopping center, billboards in center
  11. one of many small streetpost signs
  12. balut with side dishes, I cracked one open and placed it on the tray, this needs cropping
  13. The ones with phone numbers are some sort of advertisement, I don't know what the center text says, I can't read it and didn't ask my mum

A quick file count says 244 photos in my camera so far, and I'll leave the settings as you see the vietnam photos as. I still need to further study my phone's abilities to take better photos. My sister also has a camera and I might use some of the ones she took, but I'd prefer to have her properly aware of the licensing available, which I also haven't properly studied.

After you and DHN download it I'll probably delete it just in case, next time I'm free, or after a few days, since this isn't realy ready for presentation. I have fruit in the fridge and some dried lychee thing, a bit like raisins, which i might take photos of if I grab a plate to properly present it. I've taken alot of street photos, since I've been trying to find a photo of the explicit danger invloved, particularly one with a turning group overtaking someone going straight, or someone crossing a road. It's all from the car though, so there should be a slight window reflection, and right now I can't tak photos at night due to light blurs, I need to work thatout - Zero1328 Talk? 15:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi YM![edit]

Can you check whether 119.154.69.93 (talk · contribs) and 117.102.34.155 (talk · contribs), Retoxen (talk · contribs) are socks of Adil your (talk · contribs) (who seems to be located in Pakistan). Request as per suspicion arising from [2] where the ips and the reg. user added "gaand chudwaai)" to title text which in Hindi means "Ass fucker"! --KnowledgeHegemony talk 15:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coming soon YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, confirmed. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank[edit]

Thank you for welcoming me, I will try to fix some Vietnam history article (my English language skill isn't good but I will try my best).--Amore Mio (talk) 01:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Email[edit]

Hi. I've sent an email. Dr. Blofeld White cat 19:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Derrick FAC[edit]

Hi YellowMonkey. Thanks for your comments on the above. I think I have addressed all of your issues, so when you have a spare minute or two would you be able to drop back in? Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of that, mate. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tran Van Khiem[edit]

You restored this page as being "not an attack page". However, the reason it was deleted was G10, attack page or negative unsourced BLP. I don't think you can get a much morte negative unsourced BLP than an article about someone only notable for killing his parents, without sourcing. The source you added is untraceable (Tucker, p. 288-293). Furthermore, the article fails WP:BLP1E. Fram (talk) 07:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problems with the current article, thanks for the good work! Fram (talk) 09:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine/ YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

I see, but anyway... I was fighting for the sake of Wikipedia, and got my hard work thrown at my face. Thank you for the message. I'm not upset at all, only a bit disappointed ar the way things are running on here. I considered the edits made by the user disruptive, because he had been warned not to add unreliable sources or else prove their reliability. He preferred to enforce his edits by just reverting others'. It was in my view an act of sneaky vandalism, and I do not regret I was reverting it.

I'm still not sure whether twitchfilm.net is reliable or not. A WP:RSN discussion has started twice: once by me, on which the conclusion is that it is not a reliable source; once by the user, whose message (the user evaded his block when posting it, but I have to admit this is the first good message regarding sources that he writes) has not been responded yet.

Thanks again, Shahid • Talk2me 06:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blnguyen, could you please semi-protect the Bollywood article? One week ago it was heavily vandalised by one person who used multiple accounts to add POV and nonsense. This user was blocked again and again until all his sockpuppets ran out. The article was protected, but now he's back with another account doing almost the same edits. In general, the article is often vandalised by different users and anons and is better stay semiprotected for a while (as you can see in the history page since the protection was released). Shahid • Talk2me 07:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. Will you semi-protect it? Or you suggest to turn to WP:RFPP? Shahid • Talk2me 15:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sock pppeterer nor i am making any fan edits. He is making baseless assumptions. Shshs is himself taking off the material from the pages like he did it in Aamir Khan's page and in Aishwarya Rai's pageUser: The Dark Wizard

You are acutally, and created some attack usernames as well. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

some cricket articles looking kinda deteriorated.[edit]

Hi. :-) Just FYI, some of the cricket articles that are used as wikilinks are looking kinda run-down. Forex, Cricket pitch is a template farm, with one whole section looking like it might need to be deleted or moved off Wikipedia...Scoring (cricket) could use some TLC. Run out actually has an NPOV tag on it (how could a sports term be NPOV? Shrug.) I'm sure others could use help as well. Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 07:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, noted. Definitely. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some comments at Talk:Arthur Morris with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948/GA1Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 00:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replied. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You asked why I mentioned COPYVIO. I do not have access to the source material(s). However, I have a set of habits developed as a college professor, and what's even worse, a professor in an EFL department. The two instances that made me blink were "we" for "he" and "following" for "preceding". Sudden shifts in time frame or in frame of reference etc. which are grammatically correct when viewed in isolation, but semantically odd when taken in context are prime suspects for plagiarism. I hope you aren't offended, but these instances raised red flags in my mind. Thanks. Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 05:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, just surprised. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)[edit]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
From the Coordinators
This month has been interesting for MILHIST, as we reorganized a few departments. The Outreach Department has been replaced by the tabs at the top of our totally redesigned project page; thanks to Kirill for the design and Bellhalla for the logo. We also created the Academy, a hub for practical advice about creating, editing, and reviewing quality content. All project members are cordially invited to fill in some of the red links, and new ideas are always welcome.
As you can see on the right, our A-class and featured content is growing quite rapidly; these numbers have now gone up by 45 for the second straight month! Great work! In addition, thanks go out to those who recently helped in reducing the A-class nominations backlog. Reviewers are still needed; if you feel up to it, please stop by and leave comments on an article—every review helps!
Lastly, the contest results for the month: Bellhalla took the cake again with 77 points and gets the Chevrons, while Ian Rose gets the Writer's Barnstar for his 60 points. Other participants included Bryce (49 points), Cam (25), David Underdown (11), Kirk (5), Parsecboy (20), Piotrus (?), Rosiestep (3), the_ed17 (27), Wild Wolf (6), and YellowMonkey (35). 51 total articles were improved as part of this.
Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. Dreadnought
  2. Edmund Herring
  3. John Whittle
  4. Murray Maxwell
  5. SS Kroonland
  6. United States Military Academy
  7. USS Connecticut (BB-18)
  8. William Bostock

New featured lists:

  1. List of Australian George Cross recipients
  2. List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine

New featured pictures:

  1. 1917 surrender of Jerusalem
  2. WWI Canadian war bond poster (french)
  3. WWI Canadian war bond poster (english)
  4. Lexington class battlecruiser
  5. Battle of Ticonderoga attack plan, 1759
  6. Military College of Chapultepec, c. 1847
  7. Machine gun corps, Tell el Sheria Gaza line, 1917
  8. First Battle of Manassas map
  9. Aftermath of Wounded Knee, January 1891
  10. Ottoman camel corps at Beersheba, WWI
  11. Japanese archer with targets, 1878

New featured topics:

  1. Iowa class battleships

New A-Class articles:

  1. Battle of Sio
  2. Battles of the Kinarot Valley
  3. Capture of Fort Ticonderoga
  4. Clare Stevenson
  5. Edgar Towner
  6. Falaise pocket
  7. Frank Hubert McNamara
  8. Japanese battleship Musashi
  9. Japanese battleship Yamato
  10. Joe Hewitt (RAAF officer)
  11. Keith Miller
  12. Lee-Enfield
  13. Military career of Keith Miller
  14. Operation Mole Cricket 19
  15. Powder Alarm
  16. SMS Moltke (1910)
  17. SM U-66
  18. SM U-68
  19. Sydney Rowell
  20. U-5 class submarine (Austria-Hungary)
  21. U-20 class submarine
  22. USS Texas (BB-35)
  23. Walter Nowotny
Project news
Nomination period: 00:01 Sat 7 March - 23:59 Fri 13 March
Voting period: 00:01 Sat 14 March - 23:59 Sat 29 March
Awards and honors

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

jesse jackson article[edit]

please note changes to discussion section and make changes to article as necessary —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki fighter99 (talk • contribs) 06:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Please do use an edit summary instead of blanking without one. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you[edit]

The Reviewers Award The Reviewers Award
For his comprehensive and through reviews of multiple Featured article candidates, thus alleviating the high backlog, I am pleased to present YellowMonkey with the Reviewers Award. As ever, your contributions to the project are appreciated. Thankyou, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are very welcome. As am I, although I do suspect one or two other editors who have met the criteria I outlined, but I'll have to check up that. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:AN[edit]

WP:AN#Stopping a vicious circle of blocking and account creation — Sebastian 18:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. You've been had. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hauritz, Re: spinning ability.[edit]

I still think we need a reference. Someone must have critisized him over this. I can only find blog comments, and I'm not referencing them. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 05:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, I thought his lack of spin was well commented on YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

your one week ban of me[edit]

Hi YellowMonkey, you banned me for one week, and you never explained to me why you banned me. You simply kept saying "per the ANI". I'm going to try and discuss this with you again, ok? So, I'd appreciate an exact reason to why you banned me, and for what. Or, I really need to bring this to the AN board for review, because I feel I the ban was abusive, and it should not be something that happens to others. Icsunonove (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to go round and round in circles YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Hello, Bln! I would like to report The Dark Wizard (talk · contribs) who is back with his terrible editing and reversals. He reverts all my copyedits, all my formats, all the information I add (or remove, based on policies such as WP:POV, WP:UNDUE) on the Aamir Khan page to his own revision (which is full of typos, grammatical errors, POV and fancruft). I organised the article properly, copyedited it etc., and as always got my hard work reverted brutally without a reason. Warnings do not help, he just keeps his incivil posts about his block warnings, such as "Go ahead, make my day", and then starts vandalising the article and sending such messages as that to me. Two days ago, you blocked another of his sock puppets, Humvee786 (talk · contribs), indefinitely. Now, he came with another account, Humvee796 (talk · contribs) (clearly it's him, no? hehe...), despite all. I think it's high time this user gets his due. Shahid • Talk2me 17:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Humvee786, Humvee796, Martineejames, KING OF BOLLYWOOD, PreetiZintaIsASlut, PreetiZintaIsaWhore, Al Deniro is defnitiely him. Ban Time.  Confirmed YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Be Constructive[edit]

Please respect the work of other Wikipedians and do not undo constructive edits without comment. Please see the Wikipedia policy pages for acceptable reasons to undo edits. Manyanswer (talk) 14:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I ask that you follow W:AGF. We have started a discussion on the talk page for the info you object to. Please participate in the discussion prior to taking unilateral action. Perhaps we can discuss a project to streamline the article as a whole and place information in relevant subarticles. As it stands now, the level of detail of the article is permissive to the notability of this info. Manyanswer (talk) 14:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is total NN. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1f[edit]

  • People will argue forever. I suggest a !vote now in the new thread. Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 00:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed at DYK[edit]

DYK is overdue for an update. Can you help? The next update is supposed to be from Queue 4. --Orlady (talk) 01:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pitching in! --Orlady (talk) 02:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Haigh, Green & Whimpress[edit]

Actually I've met Bernard as well and spilled devonshire tea all over Aravinda de Silva. The joys of being a journalist. --Roisterer (talk) 03:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duallattice.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Duallattice.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duallattices.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Duallattices.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I owe you an apology.[edit]

I owe you an apology. I must must must quit Wikipedia, 'at least for a few months. It's a real-life thing, but not a bad thing, just an important thing. I'm very very sorry about Ernie Toshack. I hope you can forgive me. Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 02:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear. all the best YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Japan FAC[edit]

Can you please revisit your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Surrender of Japan Raul654 (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009[edit]

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 07:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


DYK update[edit]

DYK is due for another update. Can you do it? Should be from queue 2. Shubinator (talk) 01:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'll do credits and archiving. Don't forget to reset the time and bump the next queue number to 3. Shubinator (talk) 01:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished the credits, so you can clear queue 2. If you have time, can you glance over the hooks in next next update and put them in queue 2? Shubinator (talk) 01:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Royalbroil's got it. Thanks for your help! Shubinator (talk) 01:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One Week Ban[edit]

You banned me for one week for sock-puppetry, which i later found out was for using two accounts from the same ip address.....Well that is totally unfair since the second account was my brother's......All he did was revert an edit to my version.....and without consulting me or giving any warning, how could u put a ban on me.....??? Could u plz give an explanation......Best wishes..........

P.S: The revert was within the rule of three-revert rule...... Adil your (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using meatpuppets is not allowed. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seraphimblade[edit]

Dear Bln, hello! I really need your help with this bit.

It all started when Zinta was featured on the main page. Seraphimblade (talk · contribs) started removing all the non-free images, which I have worked very hard on. This issue has been running on Wikipedia for a very long time. Almost all the BLP FACs (specifically on actors and filmmakers) use images which are fair use.

This is what normally happens. Most admins don't care about FAC, they only care about policing, actually most don't even care about policing, many became famous by sitting on IRC and chatting all day and got voted in and only notice something when it was on the main page. My first FA, Ian Thorpe, I didn't know anything about how FAC worked at the time, and some other reviewer who didn't know much about at all FAC worked and he complained about it having no photos, so I piled in a pile of FU to keep him happy. If I knew what Sandy/Raul and the proper FAC people thought I would have said "Not needed". But anyway, nobody else complained...until it was on the main page. See Talk:Ian Thorpe, some guys said it was the worst FA of all time, and complained about FAC not policing images etc...and after Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/March_25,_2007 and Raul trying to whack a FU image on the main page [3] and then there was an edit war and people started a new policy proposal (endorsed by Jimbo) saying that there should be no FU on the main page and saying Thorpe was the worst etc. So in practice, FACs are not a guarantee that it won't be spotted on the main page. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was particularly discussed at the FAC, when someone opposed to it because of the images. Many users disagreed with him, saying the images did not violate any criteria. His oppose did not withhold its promotion eventually. The fact that the article passed FAC with these images says it all. Many discussions regarding the issue have taken place in different talk pages consequently, and the result was quite clear in all of them.

FAC reviewers are very tough in checking loopholes for free images, but generally are pretty liberal with FU as to whether it "sginificantly adds" to understanding. They don't want a subjective argument whereas with PD it is just a yes/no type thing like a computer form. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now, the above mentioned user just removes the images without any prior discussion. His only words are, "It violates WP:NFCC, these images are replaceable". Both Blofeld and I fought this user's removals. I decided to start a discussion myself on the talk page where I had gone in minute detail as to why the images do not violate any criteria, explaining and citing why the images are not replaceable in the first place.

Did you start an article RFC or pop down to WT:INB? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The images also have long rationales, which are extremely elaborated and well written. I worked very hard to make this rationale correct. Now, the rationales explain how the images provide a critical commentary on the film and its contents, and secondly and most importantly, they explain how the images increase readers' understanding of the topic, that's in order to show that the images actually do follow the policy, and particularly criterion number 8, which is a very important one and can stand on its own to make the images acceptable.

I see, I did that too, but a detailed thing doesn't necessarily change how people perceive it's value. One of the main copyright images people said that the Thorpe pictures don't really show anything that is hard to convey in words (unlike maybe the famous burning Thich Quang Duc or his heart that wouldn't turn to ash), as it was just a picture of Thorpe punching the air/celebrating, so only the weird one of him falling over was kept. I guess he's saying that a picture of PZ waving her arms during a Bollywood dance or doing a hug isn't that special, unless there is something rather iconic about that hug, for example, compared to the iconic (allegedly spontaneous) kiss between the WWII soldier and the army nurse (strangers) taken at the end of WWII [apparently it was actually posed]. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For instance, you'll have to do more convincing on why it is hard to understand PZ being a westernised fashion editor without a picture of her wearing a woman's european style suit. In any case, start a RFC. Personally I don't care about photos, I hardly even bother to add them (Free or otherwise) until I am up to GAN standard, and then only bother with frees, apart from the self-immolation photo. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user did not really know how to respond to my long messages, and posted only partial, insignificant messages. The last word on the discussion was mine, after which he apparently stepped out. And after two weeks or so, he returned, and as if no discussion had happened before, started removing the images. It's funny, because during this month he has made only about 20 edits, and all these edits are on the Zinta page. He comes every few days only to remove the images.

It's so annoying and weird. He just removes and dosn't even try to explain on what particular basis - because clearly he himself can't really do that. If numerous BLPs on actors pass FAC and get promoted when they include so many fair use images - it means a lot. Almost all the current FACs on actors and filmmakers include FU images, that's because screenshots and images which show actors while performing in front of the camera, cannot be free, which makes them irreplaceable. This has been discussed so many times Blnguyen, and this user's behaviour is frankly disgusting.

I have neither time nor energy to spend on these endless discussions (to which he brutally refuses to reply, and if he does, he doesn't really have much to say - he just repeats his mantra and inores my explanations). He makes his edits (or, edit wars) without any discussions and without reaching consensus, which, in this case, has already been reached a long time ago. Shahid • Talk2me 07:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm extremely grateful for your detailed response. I think you're right regarding the rationale thing. I gave utmost explanations on this image, summing it with: "The image thus adds depth to the article by providing a visual representation that illustrates pertinent points in the article, in a clearer manner than could be achieved with prose alone." - which explains why the illustration of the role would not be as clear and complete without the image. Because after all, she's an Indian actress, and you would expect her to walk in a saree and one huge bindi, and the image shows quite the contrary. As someone who's aware of her off screen persona, I know that she is way too far from being like that, but the readers don't. Also, the article says that Zinta tried to shed her bubbly public image with the role, which is illustrated very well in the image: she is relaxed, matured, and looks very western. That all was the reason I considered the image. The other image with the hug illustrates the tragic mood of the film, which is also quite important. What do you think?
I would agree with you that images are not that of a big deal, but it's a kind of a principle now. During the FAC, User:John Carter started an RFC, with most users supporting the inclusion of the images. This was one of the most discussed issues on the FAC itself, and the decsion was to leave the image and accept their inclusion. And now, after so many discussions and my hard work, this user removes the images without even taking a quick glance at the rationales which are very effective in general. Any discussion with him ends with no rsponse from his part, and he acts like the owner of WP, who takes the decisions of what is and what is not acceptable. That's what angers me. Another thing is that most FACs use FU images and some of them have only short, insignificant rationales unlike the ones I took hours to compose for these images. Therefore I'd like to know if images can or cannot be used in such articles. There must be consistency. I think he is not really aware of the entire policy and this partciular criterion, which is overlooked by him and was not even mentioned by him once. He did not question the rationales at all (he only repeats his mantra that they are not acceptable). If the issue is so debatable--and in this case was discussed so many times in particular--with the result after FAC and RFC being to leave them on the article, I think those who think to remove them must discuss it first, because they are going against consensus. What do you say?
I think starting a new RFC might be prudent. Yes the random inconsistencies are very annoying, especially with FU... and with FAC most of the regualrs there patrol black/white PD images and more pertinent things to article quality, like prose/POv/content. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YellowMonkey/Archive110&oldid=1142677474"