User talk:Daniel Case

Hi, welcome to the eighth volume of my talk page.

Archives

Radovich v. National Football League

On 13 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Radovich v. National Football League, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 10:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Winnecunnett

Is Lake Winnecunnett DYK length yet? - House of Scandal (talk) 04:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. House of Scandal (talk) 07:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

165.21.155.14

Hi Daniel, I see that you put a temp block on that ip. I understand that it is a shared IP, but we have been getting a lot of vandalism from 165.21.15*.** of late. Even tonight we had to place a block on .16. I suggest that we put a short range block .155.** of 24 hours in hopes of the vandels deciding to give up. We have tried everything else with no hope. Thright (talk) 07:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sounds good! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thright (talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

go ahead, I'm off to bed, take care —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thright (talk • contribs) 08:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one last note, I search **.11 until **.20 every one had several warnings and blocks, maybe a range block of 1 week on .155.**. In any cause have a good night.Thright (talk) 08:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Double check

I recently blocked a school IP 63.88.37.33 (talk · contribs) for two weeks and have now had a request to extend the block to a longer time period on my talk page. Would you mind looking at the situation and seeing if you think a longer block is warranted? Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick response - I will do as you suggest. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:SHOUT357437943#I_have_something_to_say

I said that I would point you to that thread, so be it. -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Thank you for the compliments!

No problem, you've done a great job on those articles. As for the HV tags, I adjusted the template to include categories, and I added it to maybe 60 or so articles (I'm sure there are at least 100 more). also, I have a bunch of images of just about everything from the state museum, so I'll look through them and see if I have one of Springside for you. Juliancolton ^{(St. Patrick's day)} 18:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

68.33.89.79

You may wish to consider placing 68.33.89.79 for an abuse report since he has vandalised and made threats to you. Go here and place your report. I'm sure User:GO-PCHS-NJROTC won't mind seeing something like this, and possibly, Comcast will take action on this IP. Momusufan (talk) 05:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I agree, the evidence is pretty clear. Momusufan (talk) 05:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

iloveminge

"Minge" is UK slang, roughly the equivalent of "pussy". I am fine with lifting the unblock for a name change. Gwernol 11:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:71.168.117.44

IP is possibly abusing the unblock template with some anti-semetic rant on it, Would it be possible for semi-protection on the talk page? Momusufan (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Clayton images

Thanks Daniel; the original image still does not evoke anything from the film in me, but the context is certainly clearer now. Regards, скоморохъ 20:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NYC meetup?

I see you're thinking of going. I had other plans, but wouldnt mind meeting you. dm (talk) 20:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Slindon Cricket Club DYK nomination

The lack of inline citations issue has now been addressed. Mjroots (talk) 20:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Hate Username" User:Hate124

Thanks for hardblocking that name, He would have continued making accounts if it wasn't hardblocked. Momusufan (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found another one, User:Hate121. Momusufan (talk) 03:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That user made this name too User:JJISACOCKSMOKER, I would hard block that one too. Momusufan (talk) 03:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it would be easier to monitor it from here: New users list. Momusufan (talk) 03:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Meeker's Hardware Pepsi ad.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Meeker's Hardware Pepsi ad.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) 12:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Skogstroll

Hiya - a user you blocked for violation of the username policy is requesting an unblock. I've double-checked, and his one edit (other than requesting unblock) isn't vandalism, although Cluebot wrongly identified it as such. _GB^T/C 15:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to the exhibition. _GB^T/C 15:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you review

Ok, I know you're an administrator, so I've got a situation I think you should look into. This page 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment (United States) is a clear copyright violation of [1]. I have removed the copyvio portions three times now ([2], [3], [4]). Each time it has been re-inserted by the article creator Daniel Eger. Then, said user posted a rather incendiary message on my talk page saying that 1) the page isn't a copyright (however, if you look at the global security page it clearly shows at the bottom that the information on the page is copyrighted) and that it was 2) written by a person in his battalion. Then he quite incorrectly says that it wasn't taken from any one page, when it clearly is directly copy and pasted from the global security page. I warned the user on his talk page, which he promptly deleted [5]. As you can see, this is a clear copyright violation. Apparently I have been unable to get through to the user that he is breaking policy, perhaps you can assist? Batman2005 (talk) 17:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, he then claims that information covered in the Units section, is stuff that he wrote. At this point, all of that qualifies as original research, which is also not allowed. Batman2005 (talk) 17:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]