User talk:Dtobias/Archive 3

See also Archive 1 (20 Dec 2004 - 16 Jun 2006), and Archive 2 (30 Jul 2006 - 19 Aug 2007).

BADSITES

Good essay. If you start to work on getting the WP:NPA policy changed, of work to change this in other ways, let me know and consider me on board. --David Shankbone 13:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to say I enjoyed this essay very much. I am very disturbed by the clear conditions of censorship by the community here, in particular with regards to admins citing arbitrary pages as policy, i.e. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Perennial requests, and using that to close down discussions. SamuelRiv (talk) 16:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Cliques

This is in response to your statement that Slim Virgin is "a powerful clique member".

There is a Clique, yes - a Conspiracy, a Cabal, a Hidden Cluster of Admins Communicating With Each Other Out Of The Public Eye Ooh Spooky Scary.

And you know what?

Slim isn't one of us.

Oh, she is an old-timer, I'll admit (and oh god, "three years ago" is "old times"?), and she's dropped by once or twice. But I'm a regular - I'm there almost daily - and in all that time I don't think I've seen her more than once. DS 02:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the thing about cliques is that there can be more than one of them. You're obviously in a different clique from hers. *Dan T.* 02:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Amazing, and I thought all we regulars knew about Slim, SqueakBox 02:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, guess, it involves SV, alternate accounts, and lots more at AN/I !

Um... if we are going to play "Good Cop/Bad Cop" couldn't you at least have told me? I might have wanted to be "bad cop"! nb. I hereby confirm that this is (intended as) a humourous edit! ;~) LessHeard vanU 16:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 22:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Don Murphy

If you are referring to the Michael Moore thing then you should understand that this is a different case. Michael Moore didn't go around demanding personal information and the address of Ted Frank. Don Murphy goes around asking for those very things. I'm not worried about what Murphy will do, I'm worried about his fans, who may do anything to please him. You may say that that does nothing to damage Wikipedians, the information is already available to these fans; but you should understand that by allowing such a link, we are almost condoning the actions taken by Murphy. I won't remove it, but I'm certainly not happy it is there. Saturday ^Contribs 00:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

See also, WP: NPA External Links. On second thought, per that part of policy, I will remove the link. If you wish to put it back we can start a discussion on the talk page with a third party. Saturday ^Contribs 00:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I've put this on WP:VPP as I am tired of seeing this issue come up over and over. Mangoe 13:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Acoustic coup sticks

Yes, all coup sticks are acoustic. Nice to see a sense of humor around. KP Botany 19:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 18:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Childrensdigest-1950-10.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Childrensdigest-1950-10.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ~ Wikihermit 01:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Afgnic.png

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Afgnic.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 12:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Afnic.png

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Afnic.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 12:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Seven-deadly-enemies-of-man.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Seven-deadly-enemies-of-man.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Aub-logo.gif

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Aub-logo.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 19:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Aub-logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aub-logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites opened

Hello, Dtobias. The arbitration case in which you commented to has opened. Please provide evidences on the evidence page for the Arbitrators to consider. You may also want to utilize the workshop page for suggestions.

For the Arbitration Committee,
- Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 21:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Defender 911's earlier comment:"Unnecessary".

“ Your concerns are understandable but this was totally out of line. If I'd wanted a diagnosis on my mental conditions, I would've asked! Please don't do this ever again! ”

--Defender 911 (Leave a message!) 01:04, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

He is right, you know. We aren't a hospital, and we aren't a therapy center. Maybe you should talk to him. If you can't, find someone who can get in contact with him. You might have driven him off. --The Wiki Loner (Let's chat!) 10:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Those comments were in response to this, where that user objected to me using "Obsessive-compulsiveness" as the headline of a comment where I criticized his behavior. I didn't "drive him off", however; he was soon banned. *Dan T.* 12:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you didn't? Why does it say then, and I quote "This user left Wikipedia" on his talk page? And please paste your response onto my talk page so I know you've responded; I will not watch your page. --The Wiki Loner (Let's chat!) 17:41, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Brunet.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Brunet.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 19:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Btnic.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Btnic.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 19:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Tiffany ITWAN 80s Hits CD.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tiffany ITWAN 80s Hits CD.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 05:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Rutabaga

Hey, I removed your Rutabaga comment because I worry it might be accused of disrupting wikipedia to prove a point / might otherwise hurt your case. But it's totally up to you-- please feel free to add it back in if you're sure you want it. Alecmconroy 20:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC) (ps, it did make me chuckle)

No, you're right... it's a shame it's gotta go. *Dan T.* 21:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

But "the other side" went and replaced the section, so they could use it as a launching point for attacks against me. *Dan T.* 17:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

re: Attack eggs: [1]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dotws.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dotws.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the heads up on Wikitruth. If you know of any others that are notable, let me know. P-J is close, but it probably skirts the definition of "anti-wiikipedia attack site" enough that it would probably just muddy the waters to include it in the list. --Alecmconroy 05:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, but no thanks

BTW, there is no consensus for including these sleazy sites and even Fred Bauder has stated it. Can you show me the consensus? For example Wikitruth has articles on notable topics like David Gerard Kelly Martin and FCYTravis do we want to make it easy for people to find this crap? This is not complicated, Dan. 61.60.74.118 19:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Either the above user is a troll, or someone who's worldview is so far removed from reality that they should be confined for their own good. Zurishaddai 22:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Linking to off-wiki harassment

What's your take? Privatemusings 07:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Not bad... though, if it were policy, it still would likely not stop all the fighting over so-called "attack sites" as there's still plenty of room for debate and wikilawyering over just what constitutes "harrassment" (some people seem to have a very expansionist concept of this that encompasses fairly mild unwanted criticism), and what is a "not generally known" real life identity (is everybody still expected to try to squeeze toothpaste back in a tube when somebody's been outed a long time ago, if they are still "officially" anonymous? Does the New York Times have to print the real name in question before anybody else is allowed to say it on any web forum on pain of it being declared an "attack site"?), and what constitutes "routine engagement" in these practices (if it's a web forum, do they have to do heavyhanded censorship of anything that anybody might think is outing or harrassment in order not to be considered an "attack site", even if such things are still a very small fraction of the content?) As usual, it's all in how it's interpreted and enforced, rather than in the rule itself. *Dan T.* 12:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right about that - could I ask you what your best conceivable outcome from this controversy / debacle would be? Do we require any such policy? How can we reduce the wasted effort from the community on this issue?

My energy is directed towards encouraging a broad consensus before we test the limits - I support Newyorkbrad's work thus far, and Alec has completed some interesting analysis of specific cases previously (ED = remove, DonMurphy = keep, MichaelMoore = keep, WR = keep in context). Privatemusings 12:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm bothered by the "harassment" issue as well. The business of digging up some comment weeks after the fact and using it as justification for a link pogrom sounds like harassment; a a few cranky remarks in a blog that you aren't reading isn't harassment.

Right now I think we should work from the NewYorkBrad proposal; it seems to hit most of the main points clearly, and it at least is a rational starting point, rather than an act of dogma. Mangoe 13:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Fortis est veritas

I've been reading your contributions to various discussions across Wikipedia for some time now. I just wanted to throw in some support for your (apparently) unpopular stances on a variety of issues. Large portions of the vocal community here are surprisingly intolerant to rational discussion and I commend you rising above the masses. HydroMagi 18:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-Protection of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Attack sites/Workshop

I don't see any IP vandalism there. Would you consider unprotecting? -- User:146.115.58.152 22:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so you're asking the wrong person. *Dan T.* 22:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, got you and Durova mixed up. -- User:146.115.58.152 17:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.98.206.2 (talk)

Editing User:Deeceevoice

Edit a user page to include such content again and you'll be blocked. One warning only. Neil ム 12:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Note I do appreciate the "I don't agree with what you say but I defend your right to say it" comment you made, Wikipedia is neither a democracy, nor is it a forum for unfettered and glorious free speech. It's an encyclopaedia, and soapboxing tirades do not help construct an encyclopaedia (in fact, they actively harm it by driving people away). Neil ム 12:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

In addition - the removal is also mandated by Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Deeceevoice#Offensive_user_page_prohibition. Neil ム 13:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Nato-logo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Nato-logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 00:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

AGF, NPA, and BADSITES

So, I'm tired of you having all the fun of having a dedicated essay to the BADSITES issue. I've written my own little manifesto, User:Alecmconroy/AGF and BADSITES. I've also posted it to the mailing list.

The gist of it is that the ANTI-BADSITES people aren't Pro-Harassment, immoral, or trolls, and people should stop implying that they are. What do you want to bet that within 48 hours, someone will have responded to my claim that ANTI-BADSITES people aren't pro-harassment, immoral, or trolls by accusing me of being pro-harassment, immoral, or a troll? <sigh>

Your input most welcome on the essay, and the general-case version of it, Wikipedia:Dissent is not disloyalty. -Alecmconroy 17:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For tirelessly defending the project against those who would enable the suppression of information from external sources and let fraudsters to run amok among us. Nice work! -- 146.115.58.152 02:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Puntcat.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Puntcat.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nicit.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nicit.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of DreamHost

An article that you have been involved in editing, DreamHost, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DreamHost. Thank you. J 16:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logosvnet.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Logosvnet.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. PxMa 23:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicma.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nicma.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 22:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicmc.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nicmc.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 22:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicmt.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nicmt.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 22:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicpe.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nicpe.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 22:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicvi.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nicvi.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ρх₥α 22:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Not as such, no.

Re this comment - the answer is "for some values of anyone". We have had a blocking and banning policy for a good long time, there is no significant dissent from the view that "anyone can edit" does not mean "anyone can use as a forum for foolishness". We block people for consistently unproductive behaviour, and we ban them for consistently disruptive behaviour, and we have pretty much always done so. Incidentally, I think you are skating on very thin ice right now, and it's showing signs of melting. Do take care. Guy (Help!) 15:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Dtobias, please take that as a friendly warning from Guy. For months now you have been "fighting the good fight" but in a way that is annoying to almost everyone, even those of us who agree with you. You are nagging. No one likes to be nagged. So don't be a nag. For example there might be some inane discussion on a mail list and you steal the thread by trying to make it about something else, something we have all heard you opine about (bloviate?) for what seems like a million times. Please be aware that we are all human. People react poorly to being nagged. WAS 4.250 23:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I know I've been annoying sometimes, but have I done any of it recently, like in the last week or so? I've lately been making a great effort to "turn a new leaf" and be more reasonable and civil than I had been. I haven't recently labeled anybody as being part of a "clique" or "cabal", made insinuations about their motives or other ad-hominem attacks, haven't hijacked any discussions into unrelated points, and haven't even posted to the mailing list in over a week. I've also expressed agreement with several proposed wordings of the various attack-related policies, even ones proposed and supported by people I've fought with in the past, because I found them reasonable and it has never been my position that harrassment must be legalized. Has any of my current activity still been too annoying? What should I try to tone down some more? *Dan T.* 23:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

In the edit that Guy links to you say

• "Isn't this supposed to be the "Free encyclopedia anyone can edit"," Free here means no cost and copy-left. Anyone who can get to a public library can edit most any page. This is not a free speech zone and was never intended to be that.
• "not just the encyclopedia where anyone who meets very subjective standards for having personalities compatible with the "in crowd" will be permitted to edit?" Please tell me you are smart enough to know that is uncalled for.
• "Does the tagline need to change now to "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"?"" The mission of the WikiMedia Foundation is to provide as much educational information to as many people as it can. Its mission is not as a publishing service for the opinions of people. Our opinions are only useful to the project to the extent that they help with the mission. No one has the right to use WikiMedia Foundation resources in ways that do not support the mission. The foundation has delegated much of the responsibility to decide that question to the community. The community has a decision making structure that is close to anarchy and needs to be improved. But free speech for free speech sake has never been part of the mission. By the way, the WikiMedia Foundation is legally obligated to limit its resources to educational purposes as per its charter. WAS 4.250 01:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Just yesterday you made the just quoted edit that refers to "the "in crowd"" and now you wish to claim "I haven't recently labeled anybody as being part of a "clique" or "cabal"". Please tell me you understand that this is a difference that makes no difference and that you will review your edits for tone with greater discrimination in the future. About half the time, after I have typed a reply, I don't send it. Writing it helps get out the emotion. Not sending it saves me the trouble of replying to its replies. Re-re-re-read anything you write. It's all saved for the rest of your life online. WAS 4.250 01:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Point taken. I don't always live up to my stated principles, and I'll strive to improve. I still feel that JzG's statement went beyond a "friendly warning", though. What would be a more tactful, less inflammatory, way to say that I think the standard applied in the case of the block being discussed was subjective in nature and seemed to amount to people finding the person annoying, without any more specific rule violation? *Dan T.* 02:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You want people to give you a break based on "Point taken. I don't always live up to my stated principles, and I'll strive to improve." but insist on not giving Guy a break. Drop the "JzG's statement went beyond a "friendly warning"" thing. Give him a break. He has been under a lot of pressure lately and we are lucky to have kept him as a contributor at all. WAS 4.250 05:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You say "What would be a more tactful, less inflammatory, way to say that I think the standard applied in the case of the block being discussed was subjective in nature and seemed to amount to people finding the person annoying, without any more specific rule violation?" How about "I think the standard applied in the case of the block being discussed was subjective in nature and seemed to amount to people finding the person annoying." I find that to be an accurate and acceptable statement of your personal evaluation of the situation. Others made pretty much the same statement. However if the person who commented at WR by that name is him, I think we are well rid of him. WAS 4.250 05:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Dan, my comment was meant to be taken at face value. I think that you are skating on thin ice (my opinion). There are a lot of people who think your drama to contribution ratio is way too high, and it is my personal view, speaking for nobody else, that you need to take care. Don't read any more into it than my personal view, stated as such. Guy (Help!) 07:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

NPA

Yuo mentioned that someone had left an edit summary of "Reverted trolling from ED and WR partisans." Could you provide the diff, please? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 01:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Here are some edit summaries along those lines: [2][3][4]*Dan T.* 01:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't see any mention of "trolling". The reverts appear to be to edits made by user:Miltopia, who was apparently well-known as an ED editor (and has now been banned for, um, trolling). Even so, I can't endorse using edit summaries like that. However unless you want to make a formal complaint it doesn't help matters to keep bringing up old issues. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs .rw .si Mount McGuire .gw .jm Erich Raeder Ashlie Brillault .gs Rachel Snow Robert Carradine .fk Lizzie Borden (filmmaker) .kg John McGuire State racism .jo .td Cyrus Vance Dick McGuire

Cleanup Bill McGuire Chris Daughtry Interstate 496 Merge Foster Zacarias Moussaoui I Saw Her Standing There Add Sources Public figure Edward the Confessor The Da Vinci Code (film) Wikify Escrow DNS zone Fabolous Expand A1 (band) Demographic history of the United States Zinedine Zidane

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Veronica 167.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Veronica 167.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 1 != 2 06:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Katy keene special.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Katy keene special.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 1 != 2 06:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

MONGO/NPA RfAR

A request for arbitration involving you has been filed. Viridae^Talk 03:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The secret mailing list you're looking for

is very likely this members only mailing list we found on Kelly Martin's del.icio.us, wonder what exactly takes place there. 210.235.223.182 (talk) 23:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 18:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Potter-bus.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Potter-bus.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) 20:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

E-famous

Congratulations, that should help shake things up around here. --arkalochori ^|talk| 01:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Or E-infamous, anyway. Mangoe 03:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep up the good work. - grubber (talk) 00:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Well done --RogueTrick (talk) 06:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Sir, thanks for everything. salut! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.177.162 (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dotsco.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dotsco.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Elonka RFC

I'm considering putting Elonka up for RFC seeing as the election process was corrupted. Mindraker (talk) 22:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)