User talk:Daynal

License tagging for Image:Barnard telescope.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Barnard telescope.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) 12:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daynal Institute Press

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

Thanks for uploading Image:Press_logo.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. Melesse (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Daynal Institute Press, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Daynal Institute Press and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. AndrewHowse (talk) 14:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AndrewHowse:

As my username has been "blocked indefinitely" in the context of adding a stub linking from another article, I seem physically unable to reply to your suggestions for engaging in the dialogue recommended to address your concerns. --Daynal (talk) 22:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC) Rob Davis[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: single-purpose account here to promote Daynal Institute Press. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because of concerns that the chosen username may not meet our username policy.

This is often not a reflection on the user, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name which does meet our guidelines and are invited to contribute to Wikipedia under an appropriate username. If you feel this block was made in error, you may quickly and easily appeal it - see below.

Our username policy provides guidance on selecting your username. In brief, usernames should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, related to a 'real-world' group or organization, confusing, or misleading.

If you have already made edits and wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name you may request a change in username which is quick and easy. To do so, please follow these directions:

Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note, you may only request a name that is not already in use. The account is created upon acceptance – do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change since we can far easier allocate your new name to you, if it is not yet used. Usernames that have already been taken are listed here. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username.

Last, the automated software systems that prevent vandalism may have been activated, which can cause new account creation to be blocked also. If you have not acted in a deliberately inappropriate manner, please let us know if this happens, and we will deactivate the block as soon as possible. You may also appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below or emailing the administrator who blocked you. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cobaltbluetony:

It appears I violated a guideline recently by composing the (now quickly deleted) stub on Daynal Institute Press linking from the article I submitted on Timothy Wyllie whose work we are publishing. When I went to reply to the concerns expressed about the stub, I found that I had also violated the Wikipedia username policy (even if there was no such concern expressed in the context of previous articles or talk pages). The stub then has apparently stirred sufficient indignation to ban further contribution.

As there is always lot to learn about local protocols, I would like to discuss with you how further contributions to Wikipedia may be done in a way that does not cause such adverse reactions.

Gratefully,

Rob Davis

--Daynal (talk) 22:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What an honor to be 'banned' from Wikipedia for contributing the articles Landon Garland, Timothy Wyllie, and Daynal Institute Press. The first article was greeted with automated accusations of "vandalism", the second was judged as having an inappropriate 'tone", and the third was "deleted" without discussion due to "blatant advertising". As such, Wikipedia represents well a mechanistic culture by the sustained exhibition of a precipitous disinclination to dialogue where

"the primary felt activity of questioning is eclipsed by an (immediate) demand for answers, puzzles by solutions, creativity by control.¹

1. Theology Vol. 102 (1999) pps. 169-176, Real Presences: Two Scientists Response, by Wilson Poon & Tom McLeish

--Daynal (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

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 Landon Garland, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. 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. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Landon Garland was changed by Rldavisiv (u) (t) blanking the page on 2008-04-22T05:32:37+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Most interesting as this is the comment received when I wrote the article in the first place. Perhaps automated 'editors' cannot discern the difference.

--Rldavisiv (talk) 05:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Timothy Wyllie. Your edits have been automatically marked as unconstructive/possible vandalism and have been automatically reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Timothy Wyllie was changed by Rldavisiv (u) (t) blanking the page on 2008-04-22T05:33:01+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 05:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Most interesting as this is the comment received when I wrote the article in the first place. Perhaps automated 'editors' cannot discern the difference.

--Rldavisiv (talk) 05:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Anthony:

Thank you for your reply!

I do appreciate the rationale for discouraging individuals from choosing usernames of a 'business, band, or other organization'. It is for this reason that I want to be sure no one else will use the name daynal on Wikipedia. If you can assure me that this username will remain blocked indefinitely, I will gladly choose another name. In such case, the reason for the initial use of 'daynal' will have been accomplished.

As to how the editorial culture of Wikipedia demonstrates that it does "value positive contributions", it may prove helpful to revisit the practice of individual 'editors' focusing upon what warrants elimination to the exclusion of appreciating the human source(s) of what is retained in the collection of articles. Where editors function solely as copyeditors, ferreting out what does not comply with policy, then the higher editorial functions of identification and composition suffer accordingly. No doubt, there are groups of editors who actually know one another well and recognize the value each brings to the project because Wikipedia could not have emerged without such. However, the requisite for continued growth beyond this current stage of development is to foster such appreciation proportionate to the project's expanding scale given all writing emerges from within human beings who have a 'single purpose'.

Gratefully,

Rob Davis --Daynal (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock-un|tiahuan}}

--Daynal (talk) 16:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Allowing username change to [[::User:tiahuan|tiahuan]] ([[::User talk:tiahuan|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/tiahuan|contribs]]). Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking.

Request handled by: - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Press logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Press logo.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) 00:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hi Daynal, Happy to discuss a new submission. Please be sure to read Wikipedia's policies on notability and verifiability, and then the best thing might be to start your new page at User:Daynal/sandbox. You can then move it into mainspace when ready. --AndrewHowse (talk) 12:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew:

I am grateful for your willingness to have a discussion!

The policies on notability and verifiability will be re-read along with a range of articles the policy governs to understand how the literal theory functions dynamically. After composing a new article, I would appreciate your review prior to any consideration of moving it to the mainspace.

Thanks,

Rob --Daynal (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The best thing might be to put a note on my talk page with a link to the new article, when you're ready. No rush, of course. --AndrewHowse (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew:

When I attempted to follow your instructions, I was greeted again by an automated message indicating that I was not allowed to do the kind of work you recommended in either the sandbox or your talk page. What might you suggest now?

Rob

--Daynal (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message: This account was blocked in accordance with the user name policy (see above). You were unblocked specifically to allow you to request a name change, which it does not appear that you have. However, you continued editing as a single-purpose account, interested only in those subjects which are directly connected to your publishing company, Daynal Institute Press. I will not be available to unblock you again today (I am leaving soon); you may address this with another administrator if you do not want to wait. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest that you try to get unblocked for the sole purpose of changing your username, and make no other contributions under Daynal. I'd then suggest that you stay well away from any articles in which you might be perceived by others to have a conflict of interest; Daynal Institute, its Press, and its authors would all fit in that category. I realise that's not what I said earlier, but in the interim I've noticed that your email address is at a daynal domain. I don't know if you really have a conflict of interest, but that doesn't matter; it's enough that there appears to be a risk of such. If those topics are sufficiently notable, then other editors will eventually contribute articles on them. If there are no contributions, then that's a good sign that they are not sufficiently notable to be included here. --AndrewHowse (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anthony:

As there was no reply to the message sent¹ yesterday, it appears the communication indigenous to these emergent phases of human-computer interface require patience, so I will wait for your return.

Enjoy-

--Daynal (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Earlier message

Subject: Re: username block? From: rdavis@daynal.org Date: April 22, 2008 12:03:06 PM EDT To: cobaltbluetony@yahoo.com

Hello Tony-

Again, thank you for taking the time to articulate the rationale for the necessary framework within which persons around the world can contribute to such a valuable reference! No doubt, we are all learning how to correspond more effectively within the framework of an open source environment, and despite its shortcomings, I am committed to fostering its success.

It is my understanding that the difference between opening a new account with a new username and following the procedure to "change in username" will transfer all edits to this new username. If so, I will follow your suggestions and :

Add unblock-un|your new username here below (at bottom of Daynal user talk page

Otherwise, I would like to utilize the method you refer to as being used by "experienced editors" that "work on their articles in user space sandboxes, releasing them into the main article space only when they are convinced that it does meet policy", but I would like to know if there is a procedure for inviting the scrutiny of such editors prior to releasing to the main article space. It would seem that this would mitigate the need for negative comments.

In any event, please look over the insertion of unblock-un|your new username here at the bottom of Daynal talk page and let me know if it is in order.

Gratefully,

Rob