User talk:Hurricane Devon

unblock|I'v leaned my lesson!

Knowledge seeker has been notifed of your request. Please do not re-add the unblock template. pschemp | talk 03:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

You are still unblocked, but have been caught in the auto block, which has nothing to do with your actions. Please do not remove my previous message, as it is important to anyone who might need to remove the autoblock. I have unblocked again. pschemp | talk 01:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

view • edit

This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hurricane_Devon.

Wikimedia Foundation

My quotes will be box like this. — HurricaneDevon @ 19:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC) [1]

Cyclone Larry

Welcome to Hurricane Devon's complaint department — HurricaneDevon @ 20:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

HO Librae vs. Gliese 581

Devon, you claim that HO Librae is "higher" name than Gliese 581. If it was a Bayer of a Flamsteed designation, I would agree. However, it is a low-order variable star designation and like Chaos Syndrome pointed out, it is not nearly as widely used as its Gliese number. Please respect other contributors and don't resort in unnecessary edit wars only because you disagree. It is vital for the development of Wikipedia that we respect each other's contributions and don't force our personal likings. You have made some fine articles, direct your enthusiasm to them instead of blaming others. If you don't accept our criticism, tell it to us instead of insulting us. If you continue acting like you've done recently, I'm afraid you'll be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Believe me, I wouldn't like that. --Jyril 05:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

When I joined Wikipedia, I thought I could work to improve the extrasolar planets articles. However as a result of attempting to do this, you have filled up my talk page with incoherent rants, put me on a "users I hate" list and made death threats against me. I think this is the point to call it a day. You have helped me come to the realisation that knowledge cannot be dealt with in a democratic, consensus-based manner, since the vocal idiots can out-edit those who take their time to research the topic before an edit: you are a perfect example of why the Wikipedia is a doomed project. Therefore, thanks to your help in getting me to see the light, I quit. I'll take the universe as-is over your fantasyland any day, it's a far more interesting place to be. Chaos syndrome 08:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Let's take a break

Devon, I agree with your wikibreak and I think it will do you good to be away from Wikipedia for a while. When you return, I would like to work with you; I know you mean well but you're not being very nice to other editors and you're violating some Wikipedia rules as well. I want to help you understand. I want us to be able to concentrate on these matters for a bit, so I'm going to block your editing powers for now. If we can resolve these issues, I'll definitely take the block off. Please leave a message here on your talk page if you wish to continue. Thanks — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

KS, I was thinking of going a perminent wikibreak. But something has come up. I guess I would like your help, and this page of me terminated. — HurricaneDevon @ 19:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed the unblock template; I would like to unblock you but I think we should resolve these issues first. I'm afraid I can't delete your RFC; I have the technical ability, but not the authority, to delete pages in that manner. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

So what's first? — HurricaneDevon @ 20:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The first thing to realize is that the other editors are not your enemies. We all have the same goal—we want Wikipedia to be as good an encyclopedia as possible. Even if you don't agree with their approach, Chaos Syndrome and Worldtraveller want the same thing you do. They are not vandals; they are not deliberately trying to degrade Wikipedia, and to brand them as such is insulting at best. I sometimes come across editors with whom I don't agree, and sometimes a lot of editors don't agree with me. But we are all trying to make Wikipedia better. Do you understand this? I would like you to understand and acknowledge that Chaos Syndrome and Worldtraveller are trying to work with you, not against you. Also, if you want to talk about any of your stresses on Wikipedia or what's motivating you to stay or leave, please feel free. I'm here to help. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, can you unblock me know? — HurricaneDevon @ 20:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Devon, obviously I like you, or I wouldn't be talking with you now, and I think others will like you more once you're nicer to them. Killing yourself would not be correct; what do you think it would accomplish? That would solve nothing. Devon, do you have anyone you can talk to about these issues? A parent, or a schoolteacher? Older brother or sister? Is there anyone who can help you when you need it? — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

My wikibreak has givin' me a brighter mood (I should do it more offten, it calms me). With that in mind, my apperence on other users has been brightened, because of User:Alastor Moody's nice comment. I feel I'm ready to be unblocked.
— HurricaneDevon @ 21:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Article formatting

Dear Tropical cyclone editor,

As a member of the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject, you are receiving this message to describe how you can better tropical cyclone articles. There are hundreds of tropical cyclone articles, though many of them are poorly organized and lacking in information. Using the existing featured articles as a guide line, here is the basic format for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

1. Infobox- Whenever possible, the infobox should have a picture for the tropical cyclone. The picture can be any uploaded picture about the storm, though ideally it should be a satellite shot of the system. If that is not available, damage pictures, either during the storm or after the storm, are suitable. In the area that says Formed, indicate the date on which the storm first developed into a tropical depression. In the area that says Dissipated, indicate the date on which the storm lost its tropical characteristics. This includes when the storm became extratropical, or if it dissipated. If the storm dissipated and reformed, include the original start date and the final end date. Highest winds should be the local unit of measurement for speed (mph in non-metric countries, km/h in metric countries), with the other unit in parenthesis. The lowest pressure should be in mbars. Damages should, when available, be in the year of impact, then the present year. The unit of currency can be at your discretion, though typically it should be in USD. Fatalities indicate direct deaths first, then indirect deaths. Areas affected should only be major areas of impact. Specific islands or cities should only be mentioned if majority of the cyclone's effects occurred there.
2. Intro- The intro for every article should be, at a minimum, 2 paragraphs. For more impacting hurricanes, it should be 3. The first should describe the storm in general, including a link to the seasonal article, its number in the season, and other statistics. The second should include a brief storm history, while the third should be impact.
3. Storm history- The storm history should be a decent length, relatively proportional to the longevity of the storm. Generally speaking, the first paragraph should be the origins of the storm, leading to the system reaching tropical storm status. The second should be the storm reaching its peak. The third should be post-peak until landfall and dissipation. This section is very flexible, depending on meteorological conditions, but it should generally be around 3. Storm histories can be longer than three paragraphs, though they should be less than five. Anything more becomes excessive. Remember, all storm impacts, preparations, and records can go elsewhere. Additional pictures are useful here. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its peak, use a landfall picture in the storm history. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its landfall, use the peak. If the landfall is its peak, use a secondary peak, or even a random point in the storm's history.
4. Preparations- The preparations section can be any length, depending on the amount of preparations taken by people for the storm. Hurricane watches and warnings need to be mentioned here, as well as the number of people evacuated from the coast. Include numbers of shelters, and other info you can find on how people prepared for the storm.
5. Impact- For landfalling storms, the impact section should be the majority of the article. First, if the storm caused deaths in multiple areas, a death table would work well in the top level impact section. A paragraph of the general effects of the storm is also needed. After the intro paragraph, impact should be broken up by each major area. It depends on the information, but sections should be at least one paragraph, if not more. In the major impact areas, the first paragraph should be devoted to meteorological statistics, including rainfall totals, peak wind gusts on land, storm surge, wave heights, beach erosion, and tornadoes. The second should be actual damage. Possible additional paragraphs could be detailed information on crop damage or specifics. Death and damage tolls should be at the end. Pictures are needed, as well. Ideally, there would be at least one picture for each sub-section in the impact, though this sometimes can't happen. For storms that impact the United States or United States territories, this site can be used for rainfall data, including an image of rainfall totals.
6. Aftermath- The aftermath section should describe foreign aid, national aid, reconstruction, short-term and long-term environmental effects, and disease. Also, the storm's retirement information, whether it happened or not, should be mentioned here.
7. Records- This is optional, but can't hurt to be included.
8. Other- The ideal article should have inline sourcing, with the {{cite web}} formatting being preferable. Always double check your writing and make sure it makes sense.

Good luck with future writing, and if you have a question about the above, don't hesitate to ask.

Hurricanehink (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #1

Number 1, June 4, 2006

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary of the activities of the WikiProject over the past month and upcoming events over the next month. In addition monthly tropical cyclone activity will be summarized.

You have received this as you are a member of the WikiProject, please add your username in the appropriate section on the mailing list. If you do not add your name to that list, the WikiProject will assume you do not wish to receive future versions of The Hurricane Herald.

Storm of the month

Typhoon Chanchu near its peak intensity

Typhoon Chanchu was the first typhoon and first super typhoon of the 2006 Pacific typhoon season. Forming on May 9 over the open western Pacific Ocean, Chanchu moved over the Philippines on the 11th. There, it dropped heavy rainfall, causing mudslides, crop damage, and 41 deaths. It moved into the South China Sea, where it rapidly strengthened to a super typhoon on May 14, one of only two super typhoons recorded in the sea. It turned to the north, weakened, and struck the Fujian province of China as a minimal typhoon on the 17th. The typhoon flooded 192 houses, while heavy rainfall caused deadly mudslides. In China, Chanchu caused at least 25 deaths and $480 million in damage (2006 USD). Elsewhere on its path, strong waves from the typhoon sank eleven Vietnamese ships, killing at least 44 people. In Taiwan, heavy rainfall killed two people, while in Japan, severe waves killed one person and injured another.

Other tropical cyclone activity

• Tropical Storm Aletta existed in the eastern Pacific Ocean from May 25 to May 29, peaking as a 45 mph tropical storm.

New and improved articles

• New storm articles include: Typhoon Joan (1970), Hurricane Bonnie (1986), Tropical Storm Matthew (2004), Storm of October 1804, Typhoon Chanchu (2006) and Cyclone Olaf.

• New non-storm articles include: Tropical cyclone rainfall climatology, Dvorak technique and List of Bangladesh tropical cyclones.

• New Featured articles: 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, Hurricane Mitch, Hurricane Irene (2005) and Hurricane Claudette (2003)

• Articles which became A/GA class: Hurricane Katrina (A), Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans (A), Hurricane Felix (1995) (GA), Cyclone Percy (A), Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 (A), List of New Jersey hurricanes (A), Hurricane John (1994) (A), Tropical Storm Isabel (1985) (GA), Tropical Storm Odette (2003) (GA)

New articles and improvements wanted

• An article is requested on subtropical ridge
• The current collaboration of the fortnight is Hurricane Gilbert, please help improve this article.
• Improvements are requested to Indianola Hurricane of 1886, Hurricane Camille and Hurricane Andrew.
• The WikiProject is likely to submit Hurricane John (1994) and Hurricane Katrina to Featured Article Candidates in the near future, so please help improve them to featured standard.

Member of the month

This isn't the generic barnstar, we just don't have a WPTC star yet…

The May member of the month is TitoXD. The WikiProject awards this to him for his brilliant work in improving articles. TitoXD joined the WikiProject in October just after it had been founded. Since then he has contributed substantially to many articles, for example Hurricane Nora (1997), which is currently a Featured Article Candidate. He is also actively involved in the assessment of articles and so helps to improve many more articles.

Explanation of content

If you have a topic which is not directly related to any specific article but is relevant to the WikiProject bring it up on the Newsletters talk page, and it will probably be included in a future edition of The Hurricane Herald.

These two sections are decided by the community on the newsletter's talk page:

• Storm of the month: This is determined by a straw poll on the page. While all storms will be mentioned on the newsletter, the selected storm will be described in more detail.
• Member of the month: Nominations are made on the talk page, voting is by secret ballot; read the talk page for details. The winner receives the WikiProject's barnstar (when we make it).

Main Page content

• 2005 Atlantic hurricane season appeared on the Main Page as Today's Featured Article on June 1.
• Hurricane Floyd will appear on the Main Page as Today's Featured Article on June 17.
• Entries from Dvorak technique, Typhoon Joan (1970), Typhoon Chanchu (2006), and Storm of October 1804 appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during May.
• Entries from 5 other articles relating to tropical cyclones had appeared in the Did you know column earlier in 2006.

Storm article statistics

Grade	April	May	June
FA	7	7	10
A	4	5	7
GA	0	3	5
B	62	66	82
Start	154	177	168
Stub	13	12	10
Total	240	263	282
percentage ≥Less than B	69.6	71.6	63.1

The assessment scale

• The cyclone assessment scale is one of the bases of the new assessment scale for Version 1.0 of Wikipedia. It splits articles into several categories by quality, to identify which articles are "finished" and which ones still need to be improved.
• The assessment scale by itself counts of several grades:
  • FA: reserved for articles that have been identified as featured content only.
  • A: this grade is given to articles that are considered ready for Wikipedia:peer review. The way to get this grade assigned to an article is by asking other cyclone editors at the WikiProject's assessment page.
  • GA: reserved for articles that have passed a good article nomination.
  • B: these articles are "halfway there", and have most of the details of a complete article, yet it still has significant gaps in its coverage.
  • Start: articles that fall in this category have a decent amount of content, yet it is weak in many areas. Be bold and feel free to improve them!
  • Stub: these articles are mostly placeholders, and may in some cases be useless for the reader. It needs a lot of work to be brought to A-Class level.
• The way to use these assessments is by adding a parameter to the WikiProject template on the articles talk page ({{hurricane|class=B}} as an example). This feeds the article into a category which is read and parsed to create an assessment table, summary and log.

Hi!

Hello, Hurricane Devon, its me, Alastor Moody. I came to say that when I looked at your webpage, it was a pretty neat design you got there. Anyhow, I came to ask if you can help me on how to join the astronomy wikiproject and the tropical cyclone wikiproject (whatever they are called). So can you help me? thanks. Alastor Moody 04:22, June 12 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back

Glad to have you back, Devon. I've unblocked you for now; I hope you will be able to work with the other editors. If you have any questions about what's appropriate, please ask me. And please remember not to insultor or be mean to other editors—we're all here to make Wikipedia better. Consider this sort of a "probation" period. Be nice, OK? — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thansk, yet i'm still blocked! — HurricaneDevon @ 04:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I cleared another autoblock. Try it now. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Nopw, still blocked! — HurricaneDevon @ 12:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Still blocked here! — HurricaneDevon @ 01:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting annoyed here! Please unblock me. — HurricaneDevon @ 23:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm unblocked now, thanks! — HurricaneDevon @ 19:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

redirects

When moving a page, like you did with Rho-2 Cancri, please check for double redirects like 58 Cancri and fix them--Kalsermar 01:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

I am quite disappointed that after I unblocked you, you promptly returned to copying material from other web sites. To take another's work in this manner is both unethical and illegal, and it places Wikipedia in a precarious legal position. Devon, I like you, but by copying material in this manner, you are just creating more work for other users to check over your edits and revert them if they find you copying material. Other people shouldn't have to watch over your edits, Devon. If you're unable to contribute to Wikipedia without plagiarizing other material or violating international copyright law, then I'm afraid you can't be a contributor here. This behavior is not acceptable, and I've reblocked you indefinitely. I'm sorry. — Knowledge Seeker দ 18:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know it was copyrighted! Thanks you so much. F.Y.I. blocking me dosn't make me learn my lesson, all dose is is makes me angry (especially at you). With users like you (not calmly taking my actions) are making me think of going perminent wikibreak. I don't want to leave wikipedia, but i'll have no choice. UNBLOCK ME NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — HurricaneDevon @ 01:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not trying to punish you or teach you a lesson; I am trying to keep copyrighted material out of Wikipedia. I previously tried discussing matters with you and you just demanded to be unblocked. I unblocked you and you went right back to the same behavior. I realize that perhaps you still do not understand copyright principles and I am willing to take time to explain it to you. I will not, however, unblock you until I am satisfied that you understand the principles involved and will not continue to copy material from other sources. Please do not add the {{unblock}} template again. Wikipedia policy (as well as federal law) does not permit copying material in this manner. If these terms are not acceptable to you, then I'm afraid you'll have to find another web site to which to contribute. I don't wish to be harsh but copyright violations are not acceptable, and this really is not negotiable. I can't unblock you if you copy material like this. — Knowledge Seeker দ 21:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I QUIT. I'd rather be in New Oreans through Hurricane Katrina then be a user on this website. Unblock me so I can delete my personal information (NOT YOU, ME!) I want to delete my data, Not you, not another user, Me! — HurricaneDevon @ 00:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that, Devon. I'd like to keep you as a contributor, though not if you're copying material from other web sites. I'd be happy to remove your personal information or even delete your user page if you like, but I can't unblock you. We can't allow copyright violators to edit. I'm sorry, Devon. — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to still be a user, but not a major one. Please unblock me, I sware on my dog's grave that I won't copyvio again. I've done some reading about said subject. I couldn't beleve the lawas I was breaking! I feel very ashamed, I deserve to be blocked. I promiss if you unblock me i'll never copy articals from copyrighted articals again and take pride in my editing. Please don't make me kiss your ass and call it ice cream! — HurricaneDevon @ 14:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm pleased you are willing to learn about and respect copyright and are wish to remain contributing to Wikipedia. Let's take some time to discuss copyright and other matters and how these are applied on Wikipedia. I do want to make a couple matters clear first. Repeat copyright violators are normally blocked indefinitely. I'm willing to take the time to help you understand these matters, but don't expect to be unblocked in the next couple days. Last time I gave you the benefit of the doubt and unblocked you before making certain you understood all the issues, and it didn't take long for the old behavior to resume. I understand that you may not have realized what you were doing, so this time we're going to talk first to be absolutely certain you understand what's involved. I hope you will be more amenable to discussion than later time. Also, you should try to work on your anger a little bit. The outbursts of the last couple days really aren't appropriate. We all get angry from time to time; my advice is to stay away from Wikipedia when you're angry. When you cool off, you can return. Finally, flattering me is not necessary, nor will it be effective. I try to be reasonably rational; as you may have seen, insults aren't effective either. Let's stick to the topics at hand, OK? And let's take our time this time. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I feel like a monster. But quick question. What happened to my Archive box? Why was it deleted? — HurricaneDevon @ 14:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like an administrator thought you wanted it deleted, perhaps based on your earlier comments. I restored the archive. I want to explain two related concepts: plagiarism and copyright. I don't know how much you already know, so I'll start with basics, and I'll simplify it somewhat.

Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work as your own. It emphasizes more of the ethical violation. For instance, if you copy part of an encyclopedia article into your word processor and submit it as your school report, you're committing plagiarism. "Literary theft" is another term for this. A journalist was in the news some months back for copying parts of Wikipedia articles into his news articles, without crediting Wikipedia as the source. That is, he was presenting the article as wholly written by himself. This is unethical, and the journalism regards this as a violation of journalistic integrity, which is quite serious (I believe the reporter in question was fired). It's plagiarism even if you aren't selling the product; the act of pretending that someone else's work is your own is plagiarism. So be sure that for instance, when you're writing a school paper, you don't copy material from other sources. It won't be that hard for a Web-savvy teacher to discover that you didn't write the work yourself.

Copyright is a legal term; it refers to who has the right to copy, publish, and sell the work (either all or in part). It doesn't matter whether you admit you didn't create the work. For instance, the band U2 or their recording label owns the rights to the song "With or Without You". This means they can decide how the song can be copied or sold. It would be illegal for me to make a copy of the song or CD and give it to my friend, or for me to make the song available over the Internet. The former is not as serious, but in the second situation, making their copyrighted work available for many people is a serious copyright violation. It doesn't matter that I'm not pretending that I made the song myself. It's not my song to give away. By giving it away for free, I would distribute it to people who otherwise might have paid for it. In the extreme case, one person could buy the CD and just make copies for everyone else in the world who wanted it. Also, it doesn't matter if there is an explicit copyright notice on the work. Under U.S. copyright law, intellectual works are automatically copyrighted by the creator. So, for instance, the sentences I'm writing here are automatically copyright by me. Now the copyright holder may decide to release certain rights to his work. For instance, I might create an image and specify that anyone can use it for noncommercial purposes, that is, as long as they don't use it to sell something or for any sort of business purpose. This is how it's licensed. Most movies that you buy are licensed only for home use (watch the license information at the beginning). It would be illegal to sell tickets to people for them to come watch the movie. Another license is the GFDL. This is what we use on Wikipedia. While I retain the copyright to what I write, I release it under the GFDL, so that others may reuse it, provided they credit me with writing it. People don't have to grant any rights at all; this is called "all rights reserved".

So when you copy material from other web sites, you are often committing both plagiarism and copyright violations. On the one hand, you are taking someone else's work and pretending it's your own, which is unethical. And even if you credit them or list them as a reference, you're still using their creative work without their permission, which is a copyright violation; this is illegal (and unethical as well, in most people's opinions). Doing so damages the credibility of Wikipedia and opens it up to legal problems as well.

Do you understand this so far? And do you understand why the other users are so concerned? They're not doing saying those things to punish you or make you angry. They're doing it because they care about Wikipedia, the law, and being fair. — Knowledge Seeker দ 00:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

OMFG. Now I feel like a criminal. I'm so sorry! — HurricaneDevon @ 16:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I's so sorry about my past behavior. I'd like to come back as an editor on this site. If you can forgive me though?
— HurricaneDevon @ 00:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you. I've been thinking about your situation over the past few days, and I've decided that I'm not comfortable removing your block. This is not a decision I've made lightly, and I'd like to explain.

I like you, and I've enjoyed your presence here. Enthusiastic editors are great to have around. But it's been a problem for you to follow policies here. It's one thing not to be familiar with Wikipedia policies, but once they're explained to you nicely, with links for more information, there really is no excuse for you to continue in the behavior. This has been a problem from when you first started here under your previous username, making inappropriate page moves that I had to sift through and undo. But the copyright violations are far worse, both because of their illegality but also because they are much harder to catch. I am quite busy at work these days and don't have time to mentor/supervise you. And it would be quite unfair and selfish of me to unblock you, forcing other editors to double-check all your contributions and revert the ones that are copyright violations. They have other tasks to do. It's especially disturbing because I already tried to get you to stop this behavior with my previous block; once I unblocked you you promptly resumed copying material from other web sites.

Everyone can make mistakes, but the really problematic behavior has been how you handle conflicts. Other users made good-faith efforts to explain to you why your actions were wrong or what to do differently. At best, you ignored them and continued the behavior, but in many cases, you got angry with them, harrassed them on their talk pages, or added them to a "users to kill" list. This is not the way to treat your fellow editors. And you shouldn't have to be repeatedly blocked to get you to discuss or change your behavior. And instead of discussion, you reacted with anger, stating you'd rather be a hurricaine victim than contribute here, and threatened suicide. This is not appropriate; it creates a lot of work for other editors and it is quite taxing.

I normally am quite generous with "second chances", but I am dismayed by the lack of effectiveness our previous discussions have had, that I've had to reblock you in order to converse with you. And as I mentioned earlier, I am just too busy right now to properly supervise you. If you wish, you may request unblocking via the {{unblock}} template or by communicating with administrators via e-mail (privately or over the mailing list) or on IRC. To any reviewing administrator: you may use your judgment in evaluating this block. If you feel comfortable unblocking and supervising Hurricane Devon, you may feel free to do so; consultation with me is not required. You are welcome to contact me for further information or rationale. Outside parties may wish to see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Hurricane Devon for context. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I feel like a monster for my past behavior. But I will promis you that if you unblock me again, i'll never use copyrihted stuff again. I'm very sorry about that, but... I don't know. I know I've been a bad person and friend, but I'll do better in the future. Please trust me. — HurricaneDevon @ 01:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

If anyone unblocks it should be done in the spirit of WP:AGF --Containment Unit 09:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Hurricane Devon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I've learned my lesson, I'd like to get my dignaty back

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I've learned my lesson, I'd like to get my dignaty back |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I've learned my lesson, I'd like to get my dignaty back |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I've learned my lesson, I'd like to get my dignaty back |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I've learned my lesson know. I'd like to make my name good, not bad. Please unblock me KS. — HurricaneDevon @ 14:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to take the responsibility for unblocking you if you agree to the following three conditions. First, I think you should agree to be on probation for the next six months. During that time, you keep a box prominently displayed at the top of this page that explains you are on probation for copyright violations, and that explains you should be blocked for any copyright violations. Second, within the first week of your unblocking, you should go through all your old contributions that still exist and mark them with {{db-author}} so that they can be speedily deleted. A lot of them are still out there, and you can help clean up the mess. Third, for the next month, refrain from starting new articles or uploading images. If you agree to this, leave a note here agreeing to it, and I'll unblock you. Mangojuice^talk 15:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

But i'ved leared my lesson. I won't copyvio stuff again. The point of being unblocked is to clean my name, not tell everyone els i'm a bad person. I'm not going to delete the popular articals i've copyvioed in, i'll fix and get rid of it but not delete it. And I'm not going to stop editing for a month. I'm willing to be on probation but not be a prisoner from this website.

FYI. theres about 20 people in my building that are also members and they complain to me that they are also blocked because they have the same ID code. Think of them. — HurricaneDevon @ 17:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. What I want you to mark for deletion are the copyvio images you uploaded, and any articles that started out as copyright violations and only you have edited. As you can see from the messages below, there are still lots of images you've uploaded that are problematic. And I don't want you to stop editing for a month, rather, just don't upload any new images or create any new articles for a month. The reason for this request is that most copyright violations happen when people upload images or create new articles. There are plenty of articles out there in need of improvement. Mangojuice^talk 06:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand, but a few things to tell you. One, all copyvio works i've uploaded have been deleted or being put up for deletion. Two, ok for the month thing. I've been through a lot. Please unblock me know. — HurricaneDevon @ 12:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #2

The July issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images

You uploaded the following images in Category:Hurricane Devon's uploads as "fair use", however you did not provide a fair use rationale. They are now listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2006 July 8.

• Image:2005-1104galaxies.jpg
• Image:617patroclus.jpg
• Image:AB-Pictoris.jpg
• Image:Aldebaran--planet.jpg
• Image:And-s.jpg
• Image:CatFromOuterSpace.jpg
• Image:Cet-s.jpg
• Image:Geminga.jpg
• Image:LIPA.gif
• Image:Leaderdog2.jpg
• Image:NGC1097.jpg
• Image:NGC1232.jpg
• Image:Phot-19d-99.jpg
• Image:Phot-20b-99.jpg
• Image:Phot-20d-99.jpg
• Image:Phot-27-00-normal.jpg
• Image:Phot-32b-99.jpg
• Image:Phot-37-05-normal.jpg
• Image:SCR1845-6357--22.jpg
• Image:SCR1845-6357.jpg
• Image:SuperearthOGLE.jpg
• Image:Tort1.jpg
• Image:Virgo-Overdensity.png

Chaos syndrome 14:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfree images

You uploaded the following images in Category:Hurricane Devon's uploads as public domain, however the license at [2] says that permission is required for publication. They are now listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#8 July.

• Image:Messierobject109.jpg
• Image:N4565hugo.jpg
• Image:N4656.jpg
• Image:N7753.jpg
• Image:NGC3953.jpg

Chaos syndrome 14:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The following images also violate licenses, though you claim they are public domain. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#8 July for more information.

• Image:Eyesgalaxies.jpg
• Image:NGC4321.jpg
• Image:OmegaCentauri.jpg
• Image:Piscesdwarf.jpg
• Image:Stephan'sQuintet.jpg

Chaos syndrome 14:53, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Public domain images

You uploaded the following images in Category:Hurricane Devon's uploads as public domain. However, checking the source reveals no indication of this. They are now listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#8 July.

• Image:80606b-comparison.gif
• Image:87sylvia.jpg
• Image:97-BLG-41schematic.jpg
• Image:BetaLyraeSky.jpg
• Image:HD149026b-Jupiter.jpg
• Image:Hd28185hr.gif
• Image:HD80606AB.jpg
• Image:IC1296.jpg
• Image:IotaHorologii-orbit.jpg
• Image:Kirbyvacuums.jpg
• Image:M31pole.jpg
• Image:M81+M82.jpg
• Image:MACHO-1997-BLG-41.gif
• Image:NGC1532.jpg
• Image:Nova-DMLyrae.jpg
• Image:TrES-1.jpg
• Image:Vega--proplyd.gif
• Image:Vega--proplyd2.jpg
• Image:Vega-vs-sun.gif
• Image:Waterjovian.jpg (actual source http://www.allplanets.ru/tipy_exoplanet.htm)
• Image:Sulfurjovian.jpg

Chaos syndrome 14:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Image information

Template:Image information has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 20:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)