User talk:ViperSnake151

Discussion Archives:

Please do not vandalize any user page, especially this one.

Tv-Links.

I have contacted them via email and confirmed that they are indeed the same TV-Links. Ive emailed them again asking about the results of the cases against them. Ill add all the info to the page soon. Just letting you know this so you don't delete it again. - Yamagushi

Sent the email to you for verification. - Yamagushi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamagushi (talk • contribs) 19:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Changes on Gurgaon page

Gurgaon is a rapidly growing metropolitan and I personally feel that having a lot of images on the page in not bad. Actually it makes the page much more appealing. I do agree that the way the article has been written is below average and I would appreciate u making cahnges. One the Shooping Mall section u reverted everything to another page. i do think that the Shopping mall section to remain It is 1 of the only reason why Gurgaon is so famous across India. So I have reverted your image removing good faith edits. ThanksEnthusiast10 (talk) 20:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- You considered the image to be deleted but it has been used by numerous articels and also used as a cover on Delti Times saturday magazine. Do u want me to upload it as a cover of a magzine I would do that.

Your GOOD FAITH contribution to the Gurgaon article has been reverted please discuss changes on the Duisscusion page. Thank You Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - Yes Enthusiast 10 and I bith upload images by flickr users to Wiki. I can send u the cover of a the DElhi Times saturday magazine that shows that image. Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - - The photographer of the image, Gurinder Osan's picture are avilable on many sites on the web. Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to Wikipedia:Image use policy

Just FYI— You were reverted over there on the basis that your edit changed the meaning without discussion. However, the text you removed was only recently introduced, itself entirely without discussion or evidence of support that I could find. On that basis I reverted the revert and noted my reason in the edit summary. Cheers. --Gmaxwell (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I didn't see any support for that either. That recent undiscussed addition was draconian in any case:P. It almost seemed to me like it was suggesting that we photoshop legitimate images in order to remove any trademarks! If it isn't a free image, then you sure as heck shouldn't be messing with it. Someone owns that thing, and even if they are letting you use it, they're not going to want you changing it. Not only that, but it said "trademarks are copyrights", as if trademarks are a type of copyright. Uh.... no. Trademark, Copyright, and Patent are 3 totally different things, with different rules, different purposes, and different consequences for violation. I wish people wouldn't confuse them all the time.Gopher65_talk 02:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Canadian_bills2.jpg

I saw you put http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canadian_bills2.jpg put for speedy deletion. I didn't see any obvious explanation anywhere of your reasons, nor did I see any obvious place to discuss an image deletion. Should this be on the talk page of one of the articles using that image?Gopher65_talk 02:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Ok I guess you are right. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.Manaspunhani (talk) 06:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Free Software Portal Logo.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Free Software Portal Logo.svg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bulldozer

We've been through this already, and I moved the article back to the *correct* title. Correct in the context of article titles is not factual correctness, but what the topic is most commonly referred to. In this case, it's without doubt Jerusalem bulldozer attack, and therefore that is the correct article title. Please don't revert again. "Jerusalem front-end loader attack" is wrong as the article title. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 15:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work

trying to stop articles turn into glossy OR brochures. --Allemandtando (talk) 13:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk on my page

I'm not 122.162.109.130 I've not logged in for the past month how can I even edit. Pl. talk to 122.162.109.130 for revirting you edits anyway somebody used huggle and made it okayManaspunhani (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Metacity edit

Hi,

The recent change you made to Metacity is incorrect, as confirmed by User:Marnanel, the project's maintainer. GTK+ isn't a language; please make sure to double-check technical content changes in the future. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

InkBall

Hi, could you fix your AfD nomination for InkBall? There's no AfD tag on the article. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You win

You win. I am leaving Wikipedia. I am not sure why you wanted me gone so badly, but you can be happy I am gone. --TV-VCR watch 20:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]