User talk:Swamilive

April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Westboro Baptist Church, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Fogster (talk) 00:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

In response to your comment on my talk page... Let me first preface my comment by saying that I hate the Westboro Baptist Church. They're an insult to Christianity and preach a hateful message. However, the context in which "Lord" was used was a quote referencing what he appears to think of as a Christian god, even though you, I, and probably anyone else with their head screwed on right would agree that they're totally off the mark. But Wikipedia is big on the Neutral Point of View, so, as disgusting as it is, we can't interject the 'popular' view (that they're delusional hatemongers) into their article, but instead accurately quote their views. Because all indications are that he wasn't referring to Satan, it's inappropriate to link to Satan. Don't confuse this with any of us endorsing their viewpoint, we're simply being accurately quoting the nonsense they spew. So I absolutely agree with the way you feel: these guys are hateful idiots. But it's not our place as an encyclopedia to say that, and linking the word "Lord" to "Satan" is not what he intended: they think they're doing the work of the 'Christian Lord,' however wrong they are. Fogster (talk) 02:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, I'm afraid I have to agree with you. A large part of me wishes that Wikipedia could serve as a place of public opinion, rather than expressing a neutral point of view (especially when it comes to matters such as the WBC). Nonetheless, I do understand the necessity of a neutral POV if the site is to maintain unbiased integrity. However, I must say that I'm pleased (though not at ALL surprised) to see that my personal opinion of this sick group of subhumans is shared among many. Sadly, I recognize that these people are not legitimately Christian and do not actually believe what they preach (they are clearly in "it" for the publicity, albeit negative), and that any notice they receive (from you, me, or anyone else) only serves to perpetuate their goal. Still, I despise this group as much as the next person does, and I strongly hope that some day there will be a widely recognized, easily editable forum through which the general populous can denounce such hate, and furthermore, actually obtain productive results from the publicity.

In short, thank you for agreeing. I loathe the fact that Wikipedia's policies call for such reverts, but I can grasp the paper-thin need for such censorship.

Swamilive (talk) 03:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vov Abraxas as Ace Trigonometry - Whatever Forever cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vov Abraxas as Ace Trigonometry - Whatever Forever cover.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. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:The Notwist - One With the Freaks.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Notwist - One With the Freaks.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

User page edits

Howdy, WP:UP#OWN discourages users from editting each other's user pages, especially when that user objects. If it was not clear, the page User:Dominus is not an article, just a user page. It is merely written to look like an article, but is subject to entirely different policies. If you continue to think the edit should be done, you should leave a note a User talk:Dominus rather than making the edit yourself. JackSchmidt (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Jack. I will make an attempt to inform Dominus about any suggested changes. However, as you will see on his talk page, I have made several well-intentioned attempts to get his intervention or opinion on a variety of subjects recently, and he appears unwilling to respond. As he does make edits to other sections of Wikipedia on a daily basis, I have to conclude that he skips reading my comments to him for whatever reason. Thus, I felt I could help out by making some grammar edits and the like to his user page for him, as they wuld otherwise go uncorrected. Swamilive (talk) 13:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:UP#OWN and the discussion above, leave Dfgarcia's talk page alone. If he wants it to be spelled incorrectly, then let him. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Westboro Baptist Church. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 00:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Westboro Baptist Church

I responded to you on my talk page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Left another message there. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Jeremy Tact

A tag has been placed on Jeremy Tact, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Beeblbrox (talk) 01:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Jeremy Tact, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Beeblbrox (talk) 01:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to use talk pages such as Talk:Fred Phelps for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked. Beeblbrox (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't reckon I said anything inappropriate on the Fred Phelps talk page. Please refrain from using my talk page as an outlet for undue frustrations as it is childish. Swamilive (talk) 18:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Your incivil remark was removed by another editor, that is why it's not on the page but here is a diff for you, since you apparently don't remember. Both your remark and your response to my warning demonstrate a lack of forethought and a lack of understanding of how to interact with others in a civilized manner, although I can see from this page I am not the only one to make that observation. Beeblbrox (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

You are absolutely hilarious, Beeblbrox. One of a kind. My offer to stay off my talk page still stands. Swamilive (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• So you want me to go away, because you can't fathom why someone would think "Phuck Phred Phelps" was not a useful contribution to the talk page? Beeblbrox (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

It's simply an offer for departure, my friend. If you'd prefer to stick around, by all means do. If you're low on troll food, I've got some in the fridge, so there's no need to leave. Swamilive (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

"Dicking Around"

Exactly what have I done to offend you? Pedro :  Chat  18:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

You've done nothing that I'm aware of. Perhaps you have me confused with somebody else? Swamilive (talk) 18:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Not really [1]. Suggest you come up with a better explanation as your edit was recorded permanently in my talk page history. Pedro :  Chat  18:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

You asked what exactly you've done to offend me. You've done nothing to offend me. Does that not answer your question? Swamilive (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. A second question. In what way am I "dicking around"? Pedro :  Chat  18:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Tons of customers. I'm writing from work, so I had to deal with people in the meantime. Your dicking around was probably in reference to Vov Abraxas. Swamilive (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you give me a diff or something? I can't see (on quick review) anything I've deleted / edited by that title. Pedro :  Chat  19:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I cannot provide you with a diff, sir. If I've put you off, you have my apologies. I could do you a packed lunch, but I'd just need to know what you'd like in it. Swamilive (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm thinking maybe some blocked troll on brown bread. Put up a diff or at least a useful reference. If you can't, consider this discussion over, as no further benefit will come from it. Pedro :  Chat  19:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This discussion probably has no redeeming value to it, I agree. In fact, I find it a bit silly. I'm alright with us discontinuing the conversation. Swamilive (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Pity you started it then. I've gone through your contributions and they seem less than conducive to a collaborative atmosphere. Please note that editing to make a point and a lack of civility are both blockable actions. I'd recommend you consider wether you're here to help Wikipedia or just to be a pain in the backside. If the latter, you'll find "log out" to the top right of the screen, and light relief located elsewhere on the internet. Bye. Pedro :  Chat  20:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I reckon my contributions have been rather useful to Wikipedia, aside from my ancient history of vandalism. I've sorted all that out, though. Anyway, take care Pedro. All the best. Swamilive (talk) 21:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Swamilive.jpg

As noted above, I've had some leisure to now review your contributions. The above image is a modification of Image:Placido2-s.jpg which is released under the GFDL licence. As per Section four of that licence [2] You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release the Modified Version under precisely this License,. Regretfully you have uploaded it under the cc-by-sa 3.0 licence as shown here. As you are no doubt aware, to take an image under GFDL and upload it as cc-by-sa 3.0, particularly with no indication of the source, is not acceptable. Unless you can give reason otherwise, I'm afraid I will have to delete that image. Sorry, but if you don't want you contributions scrutinised 1) don't edit Wikipedia and 2) don't be a troll when you do. Pedro :  Chat  21:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Pedro. I did in fact modify that original image, but I was not aware that a heavily-modified picture could not be used. The image can be deleted. Swamilive (talk) 21:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Gone. You might want to alter your user page. You know what, if you actually talk to me I'm like a really nice guy, kids, wife, best interests of everyone in my heart etc. etc. etc. So stop with the childish stuff (like your initial post to my talk) act like a grown up and maybe you and I can enjoy our leisure time that bit more? Ta. Pedro :  Chat  21:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't doubt for a minute that you're a nice guy. You seem very personable, very approachable. Aside from our little encounter today, I'd say we'd probably get along. Dominus and I do quite well these days, and we've had our Wiki-scuffles. Anyway, take care. It's been a splash. :) Swamilive (talk) 22:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Friendly but final warning

Swamilive, this is trolling [3] and you know it. Please consider helping this work rather than just annoying editors. If you make any further edits that are less than fully constructive I'm going to block this account. Please just chill and try to help not hinder. Pedro :  Chat  20:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Pedro, thank you for being decent in responding to me. I suppose responding to Beeblbrox the way I did wasn't necessary. I did feel that his/her responses to me were also lacking a sense of friendliness, which I don't honestly think I was provoking. As for my comment to you yesterday, the truth is that I couldn't cite a diff since I wrote the "dicking around" comment purely to get a rise out of you. I saw on your talk page that you took the same comment from another user pretty roughly a year or so ago, and I simply felt like trying to get you going. This was incredibly mean of me, in retrospect, especially since you've been pretty nice to me despite the incident. So, for what it's worth (and you probably don't think it's worth much, since I've not done a great job of proving myself), you have my sincere apologies for yesterday. I am man enough to extend the same apologies to Beeblbrox for today's non-flattering comments. I actually do have good intentions on Wikipedia. I have a record collection that includes numerous titles that are lacking entries on the site, and in time I want to create and try to maintain the quality of these articles. Among other things, this is something I want to use Wikipedia for. Anyway, until I actually go ahead and make the edits, this all boils down to semantics. I take your final warning honestly. You may monitor me if you wish, but you won't find me causing anymore trouble. Swamilive (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, in future don't just have a go at editors to "get a rise out of them" - believe me, others would block on site for comments like that. So, moving on, I hope you enjoy working on your project for WP and please hit me up if I can be of any assistance. Pedro :  Chat  06:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stan Jacobsen

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Stan Jacobsen, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Stan Jacobsen

I don't think Stan Jacobsen has any hope of passing an AfD. If you agree with that, and I suspect you do based on your defense of the article on the talk page, please consider just restoring the prod tag and letting it go. It's probably less bother for everyone. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Delicious carbuncle. It would seem to me that it's less bother for everyone without the tag up, as there's no longer a need for admins to scrutinize over whether it should be deleted. Perhaps I'm not understanding the process of AfD, but doesn't removing the tag and explaning why I did so (as was the suggestion) solve the problem? Or does my explanation now have to go through review as well? Swamilive (talk) 21:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm hoping to avoid a needless AfD by giving you the chance to let the article be deleted (by restoring the prod tag). If you don't, that's fine, I'll start an AfD, since the article clearly fails WP:NOTE. Your choice. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I have restored the tag, but may I ask something? Does the article definitely get deleted on August 20th if the tag stays up, or does the tag simply provide a limited timeframe under which its deletion is possible? Swamilive (talk) 21:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

It gets deleted soon after the prod expires, whenever an admin gets around to it. Does it matter? I assume by restoring the tag you are agreeing to the article's deletion. If you intend otherwise, please say so now. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the "no games, please" summary of your last edit was entirely necessary. I simply didn't understand the policy. I disagree with the article's deletion, so I will be removing the tag again. I understand that this means you will bring it to AfD. If so, though, keep in mind what I said about other articles listing only DrinkSwap.com. If the Stan Jacobsen has to go, then so do they for exactly the same reason. Swamilive (talk) 22:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my edit summary upset you, but allow me to point out that despite your words above, you didn't restore the tag, so you can't remove it "again". See you at AfD. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You're right. I had two windows open (one on my talk page, and one at Stan Jacobsen), and the connection dropped before the edit was made. Sorry about that. Swamilive (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stan Jacobsen

I have nominated Stan Jacobsen, 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/Stan Jacobsen. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Re-addition of spam links to Wedding

Why did you revert my removal of spam links from Wedding? If this is retaliation for my redirection of articles about unremarkable songs to their albums, please stop. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You've been mentioned at the 3RR noticeboard

Hello Swamilive. See this 3RR report. EdJohnston (talk) 03:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ed Johnston. Thank you for the heads up. It wasn't me who made those edits, but it's no surprise that User:Delicious carbuncle tried to scapegoat me for them. He's been on my case lately. I'll keep an eye on him. Swamilive (talk) 11:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)