Jump to content

User talk:Steel

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zingostar (talk | contribs) at 16:43, 8 November 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
RfA candidate S O N S % Status Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Worm That Turned 243 3 4 99 Open 09:47, 18 November 2024 3 days, 11 hours no report
Archive
Archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Starscream box art image

OKay, you said I could come to you if an old image came up where there was a problem. I'll try this out. The image I uploaded http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Starscream-hasbro.jpg was nominated for speedy deletion, but I think it can be fair to use. It formerly lacked a FUR and got deleted, but I added one when re-uploading it. If there is no way it can be used though, I have an alternate for it. I have a similar image of the same character from a comic book, drawn by the same artist. I can offer it as an alternative, with a FUR about comic book art. Let me know if you want to see it. Thanks Mathewignash 17:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That image has no source information. Per Image talk:Onslaught-boxart.jpg, it was deleted the first time for inadequate sourcing (the image was claimed to be promotional, but the only source was a fansite which had clearly taken it from somewhere else). – Steel 19:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, HOW do I source it properly? I can tell you what box it came from and the URL of the web site. I just don't know how to write it. Instead of "Promotional" isn't there a toy box image tage of some kind? I think it's {{Product-cover}} Mathewignash 20:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't look like a product cover. It may be an image on the product cover, but it on its own is not the cover, if you get me? This particular image (i.e. jpg file itself) must have originated somewhere.
The discussion also raised the point that it could be replaced by a photo of the toy itself anyway. Could that be done, in theory? – Steel 13:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Thanks. Maybe I can take a Photo of the box cover myself. I had another question. The image here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Beast_Mode.png uploaded by some other user is about to be removed because of the lack of a fair use rational. Can I write one and you let me know if it sounds correct or not? Mathewignash 21:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah of course. – Steel 01:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Non-free use rationale |Article=Kickback (Transformers) |Description=Kickback in Transformers TV series. |Source=Transformers TV show. |Portion=Single Frame |Low_resolution=Yes |Purpose=The image is used to demonstrate the distinctive style of the Transformers TV series depicting Kickback. |Replaceability=No |other_information= }}

OKay, they didn't like me posting it on the page, sorry about that. This is what I had come up with and you were going to offer me pointers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by mathewignash (talk • contribs)

That would probably be adequate for a FUR. Personally I wouldn't have uploaded an image like that in the first place though, but still... – Steel 21:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a GFDL image

I have a 1986 Transformers Air Raid action figure I took a picture of. Can I see about uploading it for his page?Mathewignash 04:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is a free image I would rather we waited a bit. Part of the point of this exercise was to try and take your mind off images for a while. – Steel 15:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image needs FUR

An image I uploaded a long while back needs a FUR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Optimusprimal-raging.jpg Can I add one of have you do it? Mathewignash 14:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Optimus Primal has a tonne of fair use images on it. I'm going to orphan most of them and then the rationale problem will be moot. – Steel 15:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Optimus Primal was given a completely new body in each of the three seasons of the animated series, so there were three pictures of him, one from each season. Mathewignash 18:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have many of those toys in my collection. I could donate GFDL images to replace the toy images there. Mathewignash 16:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm... ok. Let's do that. – Steel 21:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have this toy and took a picture of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Optimusprimal-ultra.jpg Can I replace it with a free image? Mathewignash 22:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok. – Steel 15:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a free image to replace a non-free one of the above toy. Now I have a book cover I had uploaded a while back that needs a FUR. Can I add it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Losttreasureofcybertron-cover.jpg Mathewignash 23:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another couple of images I uploaded have no FUR or they are missing the "Article" tag in the FUR. Can I fix this as long as I don't remove anything in these image, only add it? Mathewignash 10:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've just deleted a truckload of images from various pages. The ones BetacommandBot complained about on your talk that aren't deleted, but still need rationale fixes are:
That book cover, File:Losttreasureofcybertron-cover.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), needs a source and a rationale. – Steel 13:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks for letting me try to fix some of them. I want to focus on free images of things I take pictures of myself in the future. These FURs and all are too much hastle, and I can make free images of many of them if I get off my behind and take photos for myself. Mathewignash 22:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you removed all the non-free images from the article Optimus Prime (Unicron Trilogy) - I have some of those toys. I can add some free images I took myself to replace them. Mathewignash 22:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken some pictures of my collection, so I could replace these pictures with free ones:

Alright. Go right ahead. – Steel 01:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GameFAQs

OOps - looks like we clashed. I reduced prot to move only per that request but when I returned, you'd declined! What do you wish to do? You can re-instate the prot if you like, but the vandalism is only staying up for seconds. Over to you ... and sorry!! - Alison ❤ 00:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:(
You put me in such awkward positions... I'm going to re-instate it, I think. – Steel 00:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know whose stupid idea it is to have date relevance to FAs. Will (talk) 00:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Sorry! But good call. I was just about to do the same. It's mayhem over there right now & I should have left it alone - Alison ❤ 00:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, I'm confused. Why was a main page article semi-protected? I just undid that before I saw this discussion. We never protect main page articles. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it can be done in cases of extreme vandalism and then only for short periods of time. I think we all agreed that earlier today was one of those times. Vandals were constantly hitting the article ever couple of seconds and reverters couldn't keep up - Alison ❤ 03:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see the discussion at WP:AN when I unprotected. The vandalism level doesn't seem that bad now. Only a couple edits every ten minutes. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to take issue with a few things here but I'm a bit late responding to this and everything seems to have resolved itself during that time (GameFAQs was semi-protected for a bit longer but now it's happily unprotected with average or less rates of vandalism). Just one point though. Wknight, your first comment suggests that you unprotected the article before arriving here at my talk page. It's a bit discourteous, even concerning, that you would reverse an admin action before reading the discussion that the other admin referenced in their summary (i.e. "Per my talk" here, and had you checked my contribs you'd have found the WP:AN discussion too). There could have been anything in this thread and knee-jerk unilateral reverts based on false reasons ("Main page article [therefore] no sprotection") are not helpful. As it happens there wasn't much going on here so in this instance it didn't really matter too much, but that's not the point. I hope you don't make a habit of doing this. – Steel 16:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw the hand-slapping here. I've seen enough admin's accidentally protect main page articles not realizing they're on the main page that yes, I will likely protect first and look for a better explanation second in such cases. Otherwise, anonymous users cannot edit the main page article while I'm looking for a better explanation, and that's a worse sin than possibly offending a protecting admin IMHO. (I.e., I will proudly "make a habit" of thinking of the general Wikipedia populace before a single admin's sensibilities). Then, if a better explanation does present itself, I will immediately reverse myself and re-protect. I did not find such an explanation at your talk page so I did not reverse myself. I apologize that you've been offended to the point where you felt the need to make a statement 13 hours after the fact but I do not apologize for putting out what I consider a fire (i.e., a semi-protected main page article) before trying to find out what started the fire. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice Non-apology apology.
Seriously though, if you consider the main page FA being semi-protected a situation so dire that unprotecting cannot wait two or three minutes for you to briefly check for discussion... well, I don't know what to say to that. Your fire analogy is a little inaccurate, too. – Steel 16:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Thank you. Wildhartlivie 15:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

np. – Steel 15:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I know that you have blocked ChocolateLover96 forever. Can you delete her page?

Just asking. Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.211.220.237 (talk) 22:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RadioTime

Checking back on our September discussion asking to undelete the radiotime page. The page had links to coverage across major publications including NY Times, Washington Post, etc. Thanks 18:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC) Radiobill 18:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If they're online could you link me to them? – Steel 02:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GameFAQs nominated for Featured Article review

GameFAQs has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Life, Liberty, Property 11:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same old story

Zingostar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back causing problems again. First off there's the creation of two sentences stubs from IMDB such as Tanya Gingerich, Hope Harris, Alexandra Sapot and Melissa Hanson. Then because User:Kim Dent-Brown tagged one for speedy deletion (see here), there's this bad faith AfD !vote in retaliation. Don't know who's dealing with this editor, but I know you have ample prior experience. One Night In Hackney303 15:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont you have bette rthings to do one night in hackney. im contributing to wikipedia. you just causing problems. that the difference between you and me. and dont revert messages from other as that not according to wikipedia rules. i apologize to you steel who has to read all this.--Zingostar 16:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And no one can tell me what to vote at a afd and not what my opinion is in a matter of deletion either.just because i have another opinion doesnt make it wrong.--Zingostar 16:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are entitled to your opinion of Kieferism, but it's wrong, 110% wrong. I have no further comment to make on this subject. One Night In Hackney303 16:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to explain to User:Zingostar a few days ago about supporting AfD opinions with actual reliable sources, but he wasn't very receptive, and just insisted that he had a right to his opinion... I wasn't able to help him understand the difference between 'opinion' and 'verifiable fact,' and gave up trying. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please fisherqueen keep me out of your and one night in hackneys strange vendetta fight against me and other users. Be productive not the opposit.--Zingostar 16:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And again i have to apologize to steel who has to read all this hate.--Zingostar 16:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And im sorry if i tried to do something productive instead of fighting i will try to do the opposit form noe on fisherqueen and one night in hackney makes it impossible for me to do anything productive or good for wikipedia.--Zingostar 16:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steel&oldid=170122525"