User talk:Solidusspriggan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Talk[edit]

Ultramarine[edit]

Ultramarine is a highly disruptive and wikipedia editor that is guilty of, but not limited to, the following:

  1. adding tangental information
  2. adding biased information
  3. adding incorrect information
  4. adding poorly cited information
  5. participating in Edit wars

He usually adds this information to any articles that are even remotely related to the opposition of his stated view: "My own POV is that capitalism and liberal democracy overall are beneficial."

Anyone that has had this type of experience with ultramarine please post your experince or accusation here or if you would just like to voice your opinion:

I'm convinced he's a robot produced by the CIA. Take his user-name: Ultra Marine. His level of contributions is quite phenomenal. He has a bad habit of making multiple edits, making a change, saving, making another, saving, etc., with minutes between edits, which makes it very hard to keep up. He seems to be on WP as a full-time job, with an edit approximately every minute, which makes me even surer he's some kind of Capitalist Automaton. He's already had an RfA against him. Strangely, he doesn't seem to be interested in China, ie. Mao Zedong, Cultural Revolution etc.

In the long term, I fear that Resistance May Be Futile. How can us mere mortals keep up with the most advanced propoganda machine ever produced in the Western World? :(

Flag of Ireland.svgCamillusFlag of Scotland.svgtalk 17:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to note that he was completely gone for 3 weeks. Heh... only human. :D Btw, thanks for the heads-up, Solidusspriggan, but I am already very much aware of the kind of POV-pusher Ultramarine is. I've had non-stop conflicts with him for months, and I fully endorse your review of his behaviour. -- Nikodemos (f.k.a. Mihnea) 08:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


So I'm registered now GeorgeSears

He can be a problem, but like Trotsky said, "In periods of political reaction, ignorance bears its teeth." Fight fire not with fire, but with water. Look for more people like Ultramarine to appear as the class struggle assumes a greater intensity. There's plenty of them, the vast majority.Kozlovesred 08:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have been somewhat in contact with Ultramarine. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ultramarine and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ultramarine. For our present contacts, see Talk:R. J. Rummel and Talk:Democratic peace theory. I find that the best strategy, aside from the normal methods of Wikipedia:dispute resolution, is to demand his sources and to read them. Since, as with Amartya Sen, he rarely reports them accurately, this will often stymie him - and quite frequently result in a better article than if he had not existed. Septentrionalis 02:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC) (Btw, please sign your post to me.)

On democracy[edit]

Hi. First, there may be an misunderstanding, I am not a libertarian. I support relatively high taxes in order redistribute wealth. I think that some form of democracy is supported by most groups, except for extreme right-wing groups, like Nazis. Many libertarians vehemently oppose any form of democracy, many advocate anarcho-capitalism and some even argue that a Monarchy is better than democracy. The arguments in support for liberal democracy can easily be used in support for the direct democracy advocated by socialists. The arguments for democracy is some of the best arguments against right-wing extremists and not arguments against socialism. I would be glad to discuss this further with you.Ultramarine 03:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, I do not have that. I hope that it is possible to discuss like this. Let me say that I think that more direct democracy as advocated by many socialists is a good idea. Many of the problems of the Communist states could have been avoided if there were more real democracy. Ultramarine 05:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I think there are some advantages to not having real-time, one can think before responding. I have had some very good discussions with another socialist here on Wikipedia, user:Nikodemos. First, I hope we can agree that some form of democracy should decide policy? Ultramarine 05:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
How about keeping the discussion on my page? I will respond there? Ultramarine 05:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Did you see that I included that this was arguments for democracy and not capitalism? Ultramarine 08:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Lenin![edit]

Looks like the right wing army is again descending on the Lenin article. Help a brotha out, Solid! Kozlovesred 04:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images[edit]

I previously left you a polite message asking you to remove the fair use images from your user page - this contravenes copyright. However, you blanked my message and have left the images in place. Please could you now remove them? If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks, CLW 08:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - all looks good to me know! Cheers, CLW 07:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Solid, where you at, bro?[edit]

The forces of reaction have again descended upon Lenin! I need some help!

No problem, Solid.[edit]

They've just been attacking recently: check out the history of the Lenin article. I was forced to make them look like the ideologues they truly are when they quoted Lenin out of context in a speech about the Paris Commune. Kozlovesred 02:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid (PSP)[edit]

It was deleted in accordance with policy (WP:NOT a crystal ball). I quote from the article at its time of deletion: "As of January 2006, the producers are still considering if the title will even be released". The article was written at such a premature stage that there was no point in keeping it (at least, according to the community consensus at the AfD). It is not my job to question consensus or directly contravene policy without good reason. Johnleemk | Talk 06:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


Image:Bright Icon.gif[edit]

I'm afaraid this image is labeled as "fair use". Fair use images are not allwed on userpages. Could you remove it please.Geni 02:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

can I sell coppies of the image. Can I make derivative works and sell them?Geni
I have. Copyright © 2006 The Brights' Network. All rights reserved.Geni
I did download the zip but it doesn't meantion copyright. It is not however a free lisense since it resticts the way in which it can be desiplayed. We need it to be released into the public domain or under the GFDL or creative commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.5.Geni 18:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
that was in responce to the comment "NB I have permission to use this logo as a paid up Bright member".Geni 18:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
"any registered Bright to utilize the logos and other symbols found at URL" So I can't sell coppies of the image and I can't make coppies and sell than as derivative works. Thus it under a non free lisence. thus it cannon be used in the user namespace.Geni 17:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
If you read the GFDL you will find that it allows comercial use. Thus the images on wikipedia should also allow comercial use. The relgions you list all have symbols that have been around long enough that they are PD due to age. If the brights movement wants it's symbol to be treated in the same way it needs to release it into the public domain. The issue is copyright (so a pentagram would be fine but bloody crucified men might not be depending on when the picture was made and what lisence it was released under).. The philosophy of your movement is of no relivance to this point.Geni 17:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


What you have described is a with permission image. We shoot those on sight these days unless a fair use claim can be made. Fair use images can not be put on userpages thus you cannot use it on your user page. All "brights" may have premission to use it but do all reusers of wikipedia content?Geni 19:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the logo is actually rotated 180°, and I've uploaded a version as such. Am I correct there? If not, we can talk about it on the talk page and figure out the correct version. Thanks for the help here! Snoutwood (talk) 07:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I have just had Geni remove the image from my userpage, fortunately she has been a bit clearer about what needs to happen. We need to change the logo to PD in the copyright section. BTW Technically the logo was intended to point on any of the three directions except sun beams up.--Hontogaichiban 21:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I have put in a request to the Brights team to clarify the copyright status of the logo.--Hontogaichiban 21:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, I have written conformation that the image is indeed PD i.e. has no copyright. Now how do we change the tag?--Hontogaichiban 21:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Wyld Stallyns[edit]

Did I get the "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" page at a bad day? Wyld Stallyns is not in the article, with no discussion of the removal.192.88.212.68 12:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:NikitaKhrushchev.jpg[edit]

Hello Solidusspriggan, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:NikitaKhrushchev.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Solidusspriggan. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Nintendo Page Redesign[edit]

A new page design is being considered for the WikiProject Nintendo page. A rough draft can be viewed here. Please add all comments and thoughts to the discussion. From the automated, Anibot 22:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sol (akira).jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sol (akira).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) 08:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mobil Ave (The Matrix)[edit]

I have nominated Mobil Ave (The Matrix), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mobil Ave (The Matrix). 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. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)