ALLST✰R▼echo's Wikipedia talk page Currently, Allstarecho's Wikipedia online status is: - Also add this page to your watchlist for my status updates. Currently, Allstarecho's local time and date is: 6:08 AM on November 4, 2024 - Is my clock slow? Click here to wind it up!
Hello and welcome to my talk page. Please note that I will reply to you on this page unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you comment.
Further, please note:
Please take note of my status and the time where I live. If I'm not online, I'll reply when I am, but feel free to look at my contact page for other methods of contact.
Please use a ==descriptive header== and sign & date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message.
Please use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages.
I will not reply directly to attacks, innuendo or general incivility. You will be wasting your time if you're here for that. I may however reply via a warning on your own talk page or a report to the Administrators' incident noticeboard. Save your time and mine so that we can both use it to build a better Wikipedia.
Please note that I archive talk posts so if commenting on an old thread from the archives, consider starting a new thread.
Please note that I am a "regular". Do not template me as I will surely revert. For more info, refer to WP:DTTR.
With all that said, ask away and I'll try and help.
ALLST✰R▼echo's talk page archives - click 'show' to view and/or search them ------>
I'm not sure if you read my reply, but the image contains multiple geometry which does not qualify for PD ineligible. ZooFari22:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It only contains 1 simple geometric shape, a star. Everything else is text. Per {{PD-textlogo}}, this logo is not copyrightable because it ..only consists of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes.. -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here22:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It contains text, a fixed star with a stroke, a background, and 3 colors. Seems too picky but something ineligible would basically be text. But if you insist, the image falls under your responsibility. ZooFari22:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't know about the book, thanks! I'm the one that created the The Free State of Jones (film) stub. Due to the past drama with my articles, I'm not creating any new articles for Wikipedia, but I do agree that it should have its own article instead of a redirect to a blurb about it. -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here17:10, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It might be useful to have a little statement somewhere on your page saying something along the lines of "I own the following doppelganger account(s): User:ASE..." That could help alleviate any confusion of impersonation such as in this case (or even headoff concerns of sockpuppetry). LadyofShalott18:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Was just looking at the templates for doing that. The account was just created about 5 minutes ago. Of course, anyone with a keen eye will notice the shortcut box at the top of this page too. ;] -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here18:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If all Republican politicians looked like him, I'd consider rejoining the GOP. I was going to add two pictures, but I guess they should be uploaded to Commons. Can you be of service? I'll add the pix and Commons link if you upload. (Do you want me to get down on my knees...and beg?) APKis your own Personal Jesus02:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There you go. Assholes need to date their images. I figured out what day the 2 images at the school were taken but have no idea on the one at the Beardstown River. -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here02:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have boldly closed Delicious carbuncle's ANI post on you. It seems he is block shopping and two users have said that no admin assistance is needed. I have asked him the same and I will ask you the same, please stay as far away from each other as you can and you will not have any issues with each other. No good can come from that ANI post. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Delicious carbuncle has reverted my bold close. I will not revert him (so as not to start an edit war) so the ANI post continues. Sorry, I tried. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said in my edit summary when I made my one and only post there yesterday, that was my 1 and only reply to that thread, there will be no more. So I'm not even going there to say anything. I know what he's trying to do. Others, such as yourself, know what he's trying to do. I noticed throughout the day how he gradually added bits to his "opening statement" of the ANI thread, trying to bump it so others would pay attention to it. Needless to say, I'm not the one following him around Wikipedia. He's the one following me around. That's why I made the decision that I would not participate in that ANI farce except for that one lone reply to it yesterday. Thanks for the heads up and for trying to spread some common sense at ANI. :] -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here04:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Matt Sanchez may be violating his article ban
Hi. If you take a look at the Matt Sanchez talk page over the last 30 days, you will find many similarly written arguments from various SPA anonymous IPs [1][2][3] have been placed there, all with the goal of turning the article into self-promotion. I'm not going to sock-tag the IP pages, but I'd like to call it to your attention, as you have a history of dealing with this in a civilized manner. Thanks --StephenLaurie (talk) 08:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's also this. Note the anon IP finishing the sentence that the "Dale720240" account began. The anon IP account history is fiercely for turning the article into an anodyne bit of propaganda; the "Dale720240" account has been skeptical of Sanchez in the past, but now has magically come around to agreeing with the rewrites done by the anon IPs. My guess is Sanchez has created this account to try to gin up consensus under an account less strident that some of his other ones. I just wanted to bring it to your attention. --StephenLaurie (talk) 11:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a GFDL violation of WP:HOTTIE. Please acknowledge my note here, as it needs to be deleted. This is evidence you just cut and pasted. Please db-u1 now to keep it easy. Thanks Allstar. Pedro : Chat 21:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dear me. "It's old" is utterly irrelevant. If it was 50 or 75 years old maybe, but - well it isn't. Allstar, I really do like your work but you really need to read up on some stuff as at the moment you are causing far more harm then help. And Moonriddengirl is not wholly correct - you should have attributed it from onset - I'm not sure retrospective approval does the job at all as it then becomes unclear. So why not clear it all up - get it deleted and start afresh? Simple solution. Pedro : Chat 21:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is relevant when you brought it up as part of my recent copyvio drama. It must be said that it's not something new I've created, ignoring the recent drama. Look at my block log where an admin thought something was new and blocked me, then reverted. So yes, it is relevant to point out something is old and not new. I've asked Moonriddengirl to clarify the GFDL notices I've done. Thanks. -ALLST✰R▼echowuz here21:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steve McNair Links
Thanks for accept my edits my Friend!!! I will search for the videos in other site, Anyway thanks for be patient with me.--Zta (talk) July 5 2009 ♠Nastia
