User talk:Dman41689

2012 in film discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "2012 in film". Thank you. --Wavehunter (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dman41689. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#2012_in_film.
Message added 16:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just in case you quit watching this discussion after seeing my last posting there and Wavehunter's response. TransporterMan (TALK) 16:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

False positive

I accidentally reverted it as I neglected the fact that he was adding additional nationality information to the article's table; thought he was replacing "Actor" for "Ameican". Sorry for the inconvenience. hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 07:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Johnson

I don't understand what is going on with Martin's page. What is everyone's insistence that these photos from 4 years ago be kept on his page????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohankohli86 (talk • contribs) 06:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

why wouldn't we use them they are images of him aren't they? on Wikipedia we use photos through out a persons career to to tell the story about their life. it doesn't matter when they are taken. it doesn't have to be the most recent photo just a photo in general that show him. he hasn't changed much since the photos were taken so I don't see why you keep removing it. other editors have all agreed that they are ok the page isn't all about you its a community of people working together. also those are the only free photos we have of him. if you want i will keep an eye out for more recent free images but do not remove the images again. because you have been warned and could be blocked from editing if you continue to edit war. Dman41689 (talk) 06:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded copyright-approved photos before that have been taken down. I will upload it again, please let me know if you have any issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.14.25.70 (talk) 22:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

if the images you uploaded before were taken down its because they were copyrighted, if you upload any images make sure they are proven to be under a free license otherwise they will be deleted. Dman41689 (talk) 05:53, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have uploaded an approved image, approval by Dan Gillan - dangillan@gmail.com. Please let me know if we are all set. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohankohli86 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long John Baldry photo

Could you be more precise as to why the non-free promotional tag is not appropriate for this image? DoubleBlue (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

because their is now a free image in the commons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Long_John_Baldry_1972.jpg Dman41689 (talk) 18:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I didn't see the pic when I checked the page. Thanks. DoubleBlue (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rudy Minarcin

Thanks for replace image. MusiCitizen (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no problem I'm happy to help. Dman41689 (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Free image?

Any chance you can locate one for recently deceased Bud Adams? Surely there must be some alternative to the non-free one that was added upon the occasion of his death.. Thanks! – Connormah (talk) 14:09, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sure I uploaded one i'm sure I found one from 1964 that should be good. Dman41689 (talk) 21:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Would something like this be fair game for us to use? – Connormah (talk) 01:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yes their is no copyright on the front or back of the photo it is free to use. Dman41689 (talk) 16:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Additionally... any chance you can look into one for Red Kelly? I'm not so sure, so I thought I'd leave it to you... thanks.. – Connormah (talk) 01:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hi, thanks for your recent contributions to Deaths in 2014. The editors there have agreed that the most appropriate format for references is <ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Ron-Penndorf-popular-West-Berkeley-blogger-dies-5744714.php Ron Penndorf, popular West Berkeley blogger, dies at 76]</ref>, that is url + space + title. Could you use this format for any future contributions? Thanks for your support. Regards, WWGB (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:The-Replacements.jpg listed for deletion

Just FYI, it wasn't me who removed the Speedy notice, and if you check the talk page you will see that I do not oppose the deletion as I have already found a free image. Robman94 (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

oh I know someone else did sorry you got notified twice about it. Dman41689 (talk) 00:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moxie Raia

Could I possibly get you opinion on the AfD in question I noticed you had help edit the article. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 09:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Hi Dman, I notice you have lots of experience in image use, and I hope I can get your input. I like to upload the image on this webpage [1] for use in the infobox of This Article. Reading the site's copyright policy [2] I am not sure if I can. Would the template {{PD-USGov}} or {{PD-USGov-NEA}} cover this situation? Thank you in advance. Bammesk (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How about the picture on this webpage [3] for This Article?! Bammesk (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

you can't use either of them you need permission from the person who took the photo that website got permission to use them and do not own the copyright. Dman41689 (talk) 07:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense, thanks. Bammesk (talk) 13:04, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Treen

If at all possible, could you upload a headshot for the actress Mary Treen (1907-1989) Wikipedia page. She has bare none.

Margaret Early

If you can, would you be able to upload a picture for the actress Margaret Early's Wikipedia page. There is nothing there for her. Please and thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old Maid in Retierment (talk • contribs) 16:40, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcus Mojo for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcus Mojo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Mojo until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 23:59, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of births and deaths

Please don't accuse me of "vandelizing" [sic] when I am acting in accordance with wikipedia guidelines. Deb (talk) 08:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

what guidelines? there is no rule as to how many people can be put on the page and when you remove over 3,000 on a page its vandalism you are also edit waring Dman41689 (talk) 18:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed on the project Talk pages many times. I have never removed 3000 entries - that is nonsense. Deb (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. slakr^\ talk / 02:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dman41689 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am requesting to be unblocked is because I was mistaken for being a sock puppet because I came to the defense of another editor who was involved in an edit war. I made the mistake of reporting the other editor to the administrators instead of trying to resolve it on the articles talk page. I understand why they assumed that I was a sock puppet because I can to the defense of someone who came to my defense recently when one of my articles was nominated for deletion. I should of minded my own business but I did what I thought was right but I understand that the problem should've been dealt with differently and I am sorry for any confusion. Dman41689 (talk) 05:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have extensively examined the histories of this account and the account Redsky89, and the evidence goes way beyond what you suggest. There are abundant connections between the two accounts going back for years, to an extent that leaves no room for reasonable doubt. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Dman41689 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

ok I will do this right this time. I was sock puppeting I use both this account and redsky89 I let my ego get the best of me and i tried to get away with it. I was just mad that I saw an editor removing a lot of stuff a page and I thought that if another editor reverted them they would stop and I thought reporting them would help but I was wrong on all parts, I should've just took it to a dispute board. It was stupid of me to even try and act like a victim of mistaken identity in my last request I thought that if I admitted to sock puppetry no one would take me serious as an editor and I am sure you probably wont now. but if you look through my history on both accounts you can see that I have made many useful edits to many pages and have never been blocked before or had any major problems on Wikipedia. If you are willing to give me a second chance to use both accounts again I will promise to be a better editor on both accounts. I will only use the Redsky89 for the Days of the Year pages and I will only use this account for the years in film and for adding photos to pages. I understand that what I did was wrong and its probably hard for anyone to trust me after this but I am serious about this I will do anything to be able to use both of my accounts again. If there is a way to link my accounts together so that people know that they are used by the same person, please let me know and I will do it, so that I will not be able to sock puppet again in the future. I understand that I need to be blocked for a certain amount of time on my other account but I ask that you reduce the block on this account, for whatever amount of time you feel is appropriate, so I can use it again in the future. I am a man of my word and if you give me a second chance I will keep my promise thank you for your time.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=ok I will do this right this time. I was sock puppeting I use both this account and redsky89 I let my ego get the best of me and i tried to get away with it. I was just mad that I saw an editor removing a lot of stuff a page and I thought that if another editor reverted them they would stop and I thought reporting them would help but I was wrong on all parts, I should've just took it to a dispute board. It was stupid of me to even try and act like a victim of mistaken identity in my last request I thought that if I admitted to sock puppetry no one would take me serious as an editor and I am sure you probably wont now. but if you look through my history on both accounts you can see that I have made many useful edits to many pages and have never been blocked before or had any major problems on Wikipedia. If you are willing to give me a second chance to use both accounts again I will promise to be a better editor on both accounts. I will only use the Redsky89 for the Days of the Year pages and I will only use this account for the years in film and for adding photos to pages. I understand that what I did was wrong and its probably hard for anyone to trust me after this but I am serious about this I will do anything to be able to use both of my accounts again. If there is a way to link my accounts together so that people know that they are used by the same person, please let me know and I will do it, so that I will not be able to sock puppet again in the future. I understand that I need to be blocked for a certain amount of time on my other account but I ask that you reduce the block on this account, for whatever amount of time you feel is appropriate, so I can use it again in the future. I am a man of my word and if you give me a second chance I will keep my promise thank you for your time. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=ok I will do this right this time. I was sock puppeting I use both this account and redsky89 I let my ego get the best of me and i tried to get away with it. I was just mad that I saw an editor removing a lot of stuff a page and I thought that if another editor reverted them they would stop and I thought reporting them would help but I was wrong on all parts, I should've just took it to a dispute board. It was stupid of me to even try and act like a victim of mistaken identity in my last request I thought that if I admitted to sock puppetry no one would take me serious as an editor and I am sure you probably wont now. but if you look through my history on both accounts you can see that I have made many useful edits to many pages and have never been blocked before or had any major problems on Wikipedia. If you are willing to give me a second chance to use both accounts again I will promise to be a better editor on both accounts. I will only use the Redsky89 for the Days of the Year pages and I will only use this account for the years in film and for adding photos to pages. I understand that what I did was wrong and its probably hard for anyone to trust me after this but I am serious about this I will do anything to be able to use both of my accounts again. If there is a way to link my accounts together so that people know that they are used by the same person, please let me know and I will do it, so that I will not be able to sock puppet again in the future. I understand that I need to be blocked for a certain amount of time on my other account but I ask that you reduce the block on this account, for whatever amount of time you feel is appropriate, so I can use it again in the future. I am a man of my word and if you give me a second chance I will keep my promise thank you for your time. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=ok I will do this right this time. I was sock puppeting I use both this account and redsky89 I let my ego get the best of me and i tried to get away with it. I was just mad that I saw an editor removing a lot of stuff a page and I thought that if another editor reverted them they would stop and I thought reporting them would help but I was wrong on all parts, I should've just took it to a dispute board. It was stupid of me to even try and act like a victim of mistaken identity in my last request I thought that if I admitted to sock puppetry no one would take me serious as an editor and I am sure you probably wont now. but if you look through my history on both accounts you can see that I have made many useful edits to many pages and have never been blocked before or had any major problems on Wikipedia. If you are willing to give me a second chance to use both accounts again I will promise to be a better editor on both accounts. I will only use the Redsky89 for the Days of the Year pages and I will only use this account for the years in film and for adding photos to pages. I understand that what I did was wrong and its probably hard for anyone to trust me after this but I am serious about this I will do anything to be able to use both of my accounts again. If there is a way to link my accounts together so that people know that they are used by the same person, please let me know and I will do it, so that I will not be able to sock puppet again in the future. I understand that I need to be blocked for a certain amount of time on my other account but I ask that you reduce the block on this account, for whatever amount of time you feel is appropriate, so I can use it again in the future. I am a man of my word and if you give me a second chance I will keep my promise thank you for your time. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}