User talk:Yamla

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 3 days are automatically archived to User talk:Yamla/Archive5. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Magazine Covers and Stuff

In case you overlooked my previous complaint...

As you know better than anyone, an image of a magazine cover is fair use for an article about that magazine. So why did you delete the cover images for Stuff (magazine) and Blender (magazine) despite our previous dialogue? If there's a minor problem with the image tag, fix that if you like, but don't obliterate the images that obviously are not a copyright violation. I cannnot figure out how to retrieve the cover images you deleted for Stuff (magazine) and Details (magazine) so I'd appreciate your help. Thanks Ghosts&empties 03:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I haven't had the chance to go back and verify. I'm not ignoring you. My understanding is the following. Legally, we are probably permitted to use a magazine cover to depict the magazine generally. However, Wikipedia policy, which is more restrictive than the law requires (for example, no copyrighted images in user space, no matter what the rationale) still does not permit this. I haven't had the chance to double-check to see if this has changed recently so I may be out to lunch. I am sorry that you and I are running up against this. --Yamla 03:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been blocked by you for relevant that I have put up. You also use the phrase multiple vandalsim with me. I want someone to explain to me why putting a link to a site that is directly on point can be construed as vandalism. Most of the links are either samples of what the topic is or a more detailed explanation of the definition. Can you please explain this to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Teflon (talk • contribs)

There's no evidence that I can find that I have ever blocked you. Are you sure this isn't an autoblock? I need to know what IP address you are trying to edit from and how you are able to edit this page if you are blocked. --Yamla 19:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A block....

My username is Dwslassls...Why did you block me? It says for "multiple vandalism"...I'm going to assume it is just my IP being blocked, but could you just clear that up please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwslassls (talk • contribs)

I've never given out a block to that username. That you can edit my talk page implies that you are not blocked. However, it is entirely possible that your IP address was blocked. If you let me know which IP address, I can look into it for you. --Yamla 18:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an autoblock, from Tanerious (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log), I've been hitting them too--152.163.100.70 18:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My User Name is Mike Teflon - I have been adding some links from a commerical site. But they are not advertising. My site's primary purpose is to educate other attorneys. It is one of the leading sites on the Interent in this regard. Could you please look through the site it is at Miller & Zois. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Teflon (talk • contribs)

Your sites are inappropriate. Once more, please reread WP:EL. Linking to your own site is specifically prohibited. --Yamla 18:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it says normally to be avoided. Can we agree on this? If not, show me where it says it is specifically prohibited. I think this is completely unfair. You are taking down a link not available elsewhere on the web that would be of interest to users. Should this not be the test? Can you please tell me how I go about protesting this if you will not reconsider? Take a look at the topic. Take a look at the overall context. I'm sure you are a nice guy and, like you say, you can't pick up tone on the Internet. But I don't think you flip response is correct or fair to us or the readers of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Teflon (talk • contribs)

You agree that the link shows up in the links to normally avoid. So you agree that Wikipedia policy states that these links should not be added by you. There's nothing that says "specifically prohibited" because Wikipedia tries to follow the spirit of the policies rather than having people engage in Wikilawyering. If you feel the links are appropriate, they should be brought up on the discussion pages for the articles and someone else should add them. --Yamla 19:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikilawyering comment is not appropriate. You can't call logic and reasoning Wiklawyering. It is not fair. You point to the "spirit" of the policies. I agree this is what should be controlling. Yet your initial comment makes no reference to "spirit" of the policies. Read the category. Look at the link. And then tell me it is inappropriate. I realize and appreciate the power you derive from all of this. But, in my humblest of opinions, it might not be the worst idea to allow the best interest of the readers to trump your desire to assert your power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Teflon (talk • contribs)

Just to be clear, I'm quite happy for these links to be added. But only if the regular editors on the various pages come to a consensus that they would be good links. --Yamla 00:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, and I'm not trying to make a federal case out of this. But I don't like being treated like some sort of spammer. Google something like sample deposition or sample interrogatories. We are first on the internet on these things. Why? Because we are the only law firm who offers this kind of stuff for free. So I'm trying to add some of this material into Wikipedia but only the stuff that I have screened to make sure there is no commerical message of any kind and that it is truly suitable for the topic at hand. You raising the spirt of the rules I think was appropriate - I am trying to operate within the spirit of the rules. And I feel like your knee jerk reaction is commerical website=spam. But in this case, it is far from it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Teflon (talk • contribs)

Okay, I apologise for coming down harshly on you. The reason I did is because, with a little over 3000 pages on my watchlist, it's almost a full time job reverting spam and copyright violations. I tend to revert and use the standard warning templates and then not spend enough time pointing out exactly what people are doing incorrectly. I truly do hope that you request additions of your links on the various articles' discussion pages as I think they would generally be great additions. By the way, you can sign your comments by adding --~~~~ to the end of your comment. That is, two minus signs, four tildes. --Yamla 00:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I don't know if we agree but I think at least we understand each other better. We spend a lot of time working on the educational content of our site. Believe me when I tell you we don't get business from it but we still continue to do it. I like spreading our education message everywhere I can because, I don't know, I just like doing it. (Probably the same reason you are on here on a Saturday night.) You tell me, Yamla, how do you want me to approach this medical malpractice complaint thing? Mike Teflon 01:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. Thanks for the sign your name thing...[reply]

P.S.S - Look what I just did to contributory negligence. Tell me if you think it is helpful or not.

I'll settle for understanding. :) And I must say, I'm fully in support of a law company who provides free education. As to the medical malpractice, what I'd recommend is to add a brief note to the discussion page of that article stating something like, "I'd like to add the following URL to this page. I believe it adds information which would be of general use to readers of this article. However, it is on a site that belongs to me so I thought I would run it past the other editors of this page. Please speak up one way or another. If nobody objects within a week or so, I'll add the link myself. If people object, I won't add the link." Something like that, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. Feel free to mention that you have run your actions past an administrator. Anyway, the point is that this demonstrates you are acting in good faith and gives people a chance to object. If nobody does object and you add the link and then LATER people object, you are quite justified in pointing out that you've gone above and beyond in your good-faith efforts regarding external links. Anyway, I'm not dictating how you should continue, just letting you know that if you acted this way, you'd have my full support. Additionally, if you choose to follow these guidelines, I would recommend you archiving your talk page. This will clear off all the current warnings which, in my opinion, have now been dealt with. I can help you out with this if you wish. --Yamla 01:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help me out? Because while I appreciate what you suggest, I have no idea how to do it. By the way, take a few minutes and look around the Internet. The stuff we are making available no one else is making available. It is not that hard to do, but no one is doing it.

Okay, give me a URL here and a page you'd like it added to and I'll add the comment to the article's discussion page. You'll then see how you can do this to other discussion pages. --Yamla 01:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.millerandzois.com/malpractice-complaint-medical.html This is the link to a sample medical malpractice complaint. Again, someone is looking to Wikipedia for medical malpractice information is looking for basic stuff. This is the legal document that initates any medical malpractice case. There a million (I exaggerate, of course) medical malpractice cases filed every year. Yet google "sample medical malpractice complaint." Besides ours, which is first search result, it is hard to find another one. We are really the only ones providing legal education of this sort using this medium. Thanks, Yamla. Mike Teflon 01:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, please take a look here and see what I did. Note that I added the request to the discussion page. When you are viewing an article, you can click on the discussion tab to go to the discussion page. I would expect that you would monitor that page and respond to any comments that come up in discussion and if nobody speaks up, you can add your link to the article itself after a week. --Yamla 02:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep I did and I added in a quick comment. Thanks.

Sitting Room page

What do you think? I added a picture to Sitting_room. There wasnt one before, so I thought I would add one. D'you think it gets the point across ok?

My image license

I just wanted to let you know that the licenses I added for the Mel Peachey pictures [1] were not intentionally false. I put them there with good intentions, but it seems as if they weren't appropriate. I just didn't want you think I was putting fake crap there to get away with the image. I've found a good enough image that doesn't have any negative ties, so it's good now. — Chad "1m" Mosher ^EmailTalk _Cont. 19:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images I uploaded

Hi, I still don't quite understand what fair use rationale needs to be added to the images that I have uploaded. Could you explain please what can be added to prevent any more copyright violation messages and me being blocked from editing. Thank You. (Shakirfan 22:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

My pictures

Go to www.google.com and search for paris Hilton cartoon in Images and you will find those pics. So ha. Jtervin [VS] 02:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. who the hell are those people?!?! User:Jtervin 02:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't understand how that is relevant to anything. We most certainly cannot use an image just because it shows up on Google. --Yamla 03:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea but they released it to the public and so it is OK to use it here. It is a promotioanl photo which is OK to use her. HAHA. Jtervin 04:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's your evidence of this? Certainly, the fact that it shows up in Google is not sufficient to indicate this. --Yamla 14:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny Gould (game show presenter) page

Sorry to bother you but your the only administrator i've had any dealings with. On the above page, that I have been mostly responsible for editing, someone has added a "citation needed". It appears after the name of the personthe article is on and I was just wondering if it is really neccessary to provie proof of the guys name? Your input would be appreciated Basement12 15:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think it requires a citation. Has anyone ever disputed that this is actually his birth name? --Yamla 16:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No i don't think so, there was bit of confusion over various diferent Jonathon Goulds at one point but this was cleared up by the (game show presentr) addition. I shall remove it for now then, cheers for your help. Basement12 16:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Timberlake

The album cover for FutureSex/LoveSounds IS in use. What are you doing? It's the album cover. It has the source as well. Please refrain from removing images without first checking it's usage. Stewiegfan 15:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This image is missing the mandatory detailed fair-use rationale as required by the license. It is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright and fair-use policies to continue using it. --Yamla 16:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not fair

User:S-man gave himself a barnstar on his talk page.He can't give himself a barnstar can he?-- Cute 1 4 u 20:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he wants to, he can. The barnstar doesn't have meaning in and of itself, only in the act of giving or receiving. It's somewhat existentialist. It would be safe to say that such a barnstar has much less meaning than one awarded by an independent editor. But there's nothing wrong with it. --Yamla 20:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons

Hi, could you tell me how link to images from the above as I've found an image on the site that I wish to use but i'm unsure how to link it into a wikipedia page. Basement12 22:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don'y worry, i've just stumbled across the answer Basement12 22:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use Rationale & Archiving

Dear Yamla,

How do I go about providing the fair use rationale when submitting photo's? Also, how do I archive. Thanks --7g7em7ini 00:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links & Referencing

You posted the following to me earlier today

"Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia, as you did in Jennifer Garner. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links as long as the content abides by our policies and guidelines. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia."

First of all, the site in question is NOT a commercial one - the only advertising on it is that placed there by the host, Geocities, over which the site owner has no control.

Secondly, the site is NOT mine - So you're dead wrong on two points there. Check the update history of that page, and you'll find the link etc were originally added by another user, NOT by me... (And I don't think it's their site either) I was simply restoring content deleted by someone who's only purpose on Wikipedia seems to be deleting content they personally don't agree with.

Thirdly, I have now added a correctly-formatted reference to the embedded citation in question, as detailed in the official Wikipedia guidelines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Embedded_Citations), rather than having the site listed in the external links section as previously. There are currently four embedded citations on this particular page, and only one with a correctly-formatted reference - the one I've just added. Surely, if this gets deleted as well, it's the person doing the deleting who's then in breach of the guidelines, isn't it, for removing correctly-formatted content?

Gidz 01:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gidz, you did a good job with that reference. As a general rule, Wikipedia doesn't want external links but we do want references. I apologise for the earlier warning, it was a standard warning template (and I didn't create it) which could perhaps be reworded. --Yamla 14:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my Tego link to his new album? And don't give me that B.S. about Advertisement! I see you have worked with magazines before I think you're abusing your power!! While I see you leave links to other websites that are in question. I 've personally talked to Tego's Atlantic reprsentative about this and I must say you're a racist!! Go ahead block me but I'ma write a article on Wikipedia !! Y'all all abuse you powers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danger99 (talk • contribs)

As was pointed out to you already, your link to a commercial site violated WP:EL. I have not "worked with magazines before", though in some cases a link to a magazine website may be appropriate. As to Tego's Atlantic representative, that is entirely irrelevant. Please see WP:NOT. Wikipedia has nothing to do with Tego and does not exist to promote that artist. Also, please see WP:NPA. Your accusion of rascism is inappropriate and further personal attacks will lead to a block. --Yamla 14:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

Someone vandalized my userpage. It said I don't trust Jimbo but I do. --Pretty Woman 03:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has been reverted. In the future, you can just fix this yourself. --Yamla 14:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Janet Jackson

Is there a reason why you removed the cover for 20 Years Old from the Janet Jackson videography page? Stewiegfan 08:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it needs a detailed fair-use rationale for each use on the Wikipedia. It's been justified for Janet Jackson and for 20 Years Old but not for anywhere else. --Yamla 14:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rawlett High School

I noticed that you put a speedy flag on the Rawlett High School article. After you tagged the article, I expanded it, so it's now an adequate stub, and I have therefore removed the speedy tag. In general, though, if an article is labelled as a stub, it's probably best not to speedy it as empty. Sometimes it's just as easy to expand it youself as to tag it for speedy deleton. Regards, TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 16:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure, let's put the burden on "them" to fix up one-sentence substub articles on schools (uniquely of all content areas). Just zis Guy you know? 18:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acadamenorth

Acadamenorth is a POV pusher who engages in vandalism and harrassment. If he is unblocked he will reoffend. He will also find our he is unblocked almost immediately, from past experience. Absolutely any AOL user can be caught by the autoblock. I am in Philly with restroicted access so I will leave it to you. Maybe take it ot the noticeboard. I won't oppose an unblock, but it is frustrating -= I thought the recent changes were supposed to fix this problem. Just zis Guy you know? 18:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nickelback etc.

Hi Yamla,

Just want some clarification -- the only reason those were added was that the Forbes lists are frequently cited. It seems only reasonable to add some Canadian references when the subject matter is distinctly Canadian. (Well, alright, Celine lives in Vegas these days, but...) And here I was thinking I was adding some value to the article, especially for Canadian readers who want may more information from another credible source. CB material is archived by libraries, FP datamart, Thomson, etc. after all.

Cheers,

CBO Editor

Bismillah Khan

Hi Yamla, I am having trouble deciding about the usage of an image at Wikipedia. I have described the situation at Talk:Bismillah Khan. Please see through the matter and give an opinion, since I see you are an expert in copyright-things :)--Anupamsr 10:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tsk

Sorry, I was just trying to see what it would do, and I just picked a username at random.

Be nice

Clearly, in this edit, it is shown that you had a slightly rude response to Bethicalyna. In the future, please try and be firm, but a little more friendlyness. It takes much more muscles to be rude than to be polite. Although you are an adminastor, and you can just unblock yourself if I were to even ask someone to block, it doesn't mean warnings won't be given away by me. Now, please be polite to my sister and any other Wikipedian, or else, they'll report to me (P.S, this is practice for being an adminastor, I'm doing this in deffence of my sister and practicing administration so I can develop more skills.) Thank you, happy reverting, blocking, and editing. Lindsay1980 22:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't my intention to be abrupt or rude with your sister. My only point was that she could revert vandalism. Please apologise to her from me if she was at all offended and wish her a happy weekend from me. --Yamla 22:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tcatron565

Hi Yamla, I was wondering if you could do me a favour and send a message to Tcatron565 (talk · contribs). At the moment I'm struggling to get through to him about some of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and how important it is to listen to other editors; he's been rather uncivil in his messages to me, and most recently he's chosen to ignore me completely (see, for example, [2]). I think that maybe he believes he's doing nothing wrong and I just have a "bee in my bonnet" (so to speak); if somebody else had a word with him, he might realise what I'm telling him is important. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 16:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ajith Kumar pic

Hi, Yamla, another problem with a user, User:kadavul. He has added this picture [3] to Ajith Kumar's article and I did some research, since the picture looks kinda familiar.

Looks like the picture is taken from here: [4] and has been cropped. No indication that the picture is from the movie Paramasivan (2006) as Ajith Kumar looks slightly different in this movie. See here: [5]. Exact same picture has been uploaded by User:Kanna90. See his discussion page. Case of Sock puppetry? --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 16:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keri Russell External links

Yamla says: Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia, as you did in Keri Russell. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links as long as the content abides by our policies and guidelines. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Yamla 17:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

208 says: Yamla, They are not MY private websites. I did not add links. Those links were on the wiki page for the tv show Felicity. All I did was add them 2 the Keri Russell page bc there are related. I also added info about Keri's haircut affecting the show Felicity. Also, I always get messages from you Yamla, are you monitoring my IP address? I'm adding the links & hair info back."

Yamla says: These links are inappropriate for an article on Keri Russell. Please reread WP:EL. No, I am not tracking your edits but I do have several thousand pages on my watchlist. --Yamla 17:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

208 says: Yamla, I just read WP:EL. The links I added ARE relevant. Your/ Yamla's opinion is that the links are inapprpriate for KR. I disagree. I checked the page history & another wiki reader RockyMM said quote

  "links r interesting, not neccessarily spam" .

KR is most famous for her Felicity tv show, so definitely links to & about Felicity tv show are appropriate. You also called them spam, but as I stated b4, they are links from the Felicity tv show page; so how are they spam? Wouldn't the links have been labelled spam & deleted from the Felicity tv show page as well if the links are/were in fact the spam u r labelling/calling them?

The links would be appropriate for Felicity because they deal directly with that t.v. show. Linking them in to a page about an actor who played a character on the show is inappropriate, however. Additionally, if these are the links I am thinking of, they require proprietary browser plugins which also make them inappropriate. --Yamla 16:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

208 says: Yamla, Again, you are deeming appropriateness, which I think is very unfair. What about RocyMM who found the links useful.

The 3 links are

TV.com: Felicity – includes full episode guide
FelicityPage.com – fan site
NoelCrane.com – site that was referenced several times in the show; it was updated during the show's run as if Noel Crane were a real person

You say tv.com is not appropriate? It is reuptable.

The felicitypage.com is a very nice site about the show.

The noelcrane.com is directly affiliated with the show.

No as you said "proprietary browser plugins" (I dont even know what those are) are required. I viewed the pages and I dont have shockwave ( I think that is what a proprietary browser plugins is right?

Since we are not going to agree, & I dont want to get into an I edit-you revert-I edit-you revert wiki war, who do we take this to for a decision to be made? Is there a wiki arbitrator?

The Noel Crane website requires flash. That makes it inappropriate to link in to any page. The fansite is inappropriate (see WP:EL where fansites are generally not permitted, though an exemption can be applied). And the tv.com website has nothing to do with KR. It is an episode guide about the t.v. show. Hence, it may be appropriate in an article about Felicity but not about KR. Someone looking for information on Felicity episodes would presumably go to the Felicity page. If you still disagree with this, feel free to bring it up on the KR discussion page. Note which sites you want to add and why you feel they add content about KR rather than just content about Felicity. Also, you'll have to add rationale for ignoring Wikipedia's prohibition on linking to sites requiring browser plugins if you want to link to the Noel Crane site but maybe now that you've seen it requires the Flash plugin, you'll change your mind on that particular site. :) --Yamla 16:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

208 says: Yamla, What are you seeing on noelcrane.com that I am not? I dont have flash ( what is that?) But I am on a cable hi speed internet connection so may b that's why I see the site/ the site loads?

Bots

Can I create a bot?I need more infomation.-- Cute 1 4 u 22:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can but you'll need to learn computer programming first. --Yamla 22:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that'd be quite a feat for you to accomplish. =] --Die Hard 2k5 22:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compter programing?Why can't I just create one?(just asking)-- Cute 1 4 u 22:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bots are computer programs. In order to create one, you need to write it. --Yamla 22:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

okay.I was just curiuos.gotta go.Thanks. Cute 1 4 u 22:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Archive

Do you think you can archive my talk page? It's getting pretty long. --S-man 00:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The Werdnabot will do this every six hours, moving content older than seven days. See the links I added for more information. --Yamla 00:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pinkpromo.jpg

Can you please tell me how you want me to sort this problem? I found the image as part of a press pack to accompany the music video, which I assumed was allowed under "an image freely provided to promote an item, as in a promotional photo in a press packet", but as stated, I couldn't find a relevant title in the drop down menu. Thanks! HamishMacBeth 01:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Images

Excuse me but all my images have sources. You cannot put "no source" on the image when it does have a source. Please take out all the "no source information" I've added a source from where I found the picture on every image I've uploaded. --StolenHearts511 03:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but this is inaccurate. For example, you claim that Image:Litapinsmickie.jpg appears on this page but the image does not appear there. Just identifying the site is insufficient. You also need to provide a detailed fair-use rationale for each use of a copyrighted image on the Wikipedia. --Yamla 03:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please check again. The image is on wwe.com go to SHOWS>>RAW>>PHOTOS you will find it there. Please check twice before accusing of no source. --StolenHearts511 03:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. So you are admitting that the images are not on that page but instead, are on a subpage. --Yamla 03:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check this page out [6] the image has been there for quite long and I don't see you making any warnings or "no source info." --StolenHearts511 03:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I added a warning to that image. Please note that I monitor less than 1/10 of a percent of Wikipedia articles so pointing out other images in violation is not sufficient grounds to justify another image. --Yamla 03:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I have to do to the WWE images is adding the exact page where it is, right?

No, you also need a detailed fair-use rationale. And for images that you got from the wwe website, you need to include your scanned and signed letter from the WWE allowing the use of the images on the Wikipedia, or provide some other evidence that the image is fair-use as promotional material. --Yamla 03:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um

How many users can one ip have? We plan to have 9 users on our IP. 71.231.130.56 04:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no limit. However, essentially all users sharing the same IP will be held accountable for the actions of a single one of them. If any of the 9 are blocked, for example, all nine will be blocked automatically. --Yamla 04:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. My mother was trying to make an account on simple Wikipedia for my five year old sister, and she kept on getting it wrong (six times to be exact) and when she finally got it right, they said it's too late because it counted six tries which they think made six succeses. Then they said we can't make one and boy was she mad. Just curios. 71.231.130.56 04:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's possibly a daily limit. Tell her to wait 24 hours and then try again. :) --Yamla 04:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering

How many edits do you have to have (at least) in order to become an admin? --S-man 16:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether or not there's an official standard. I suspect 2,000 edits would be considered a reasonable minimum though there are probably some special cases where only a thousand edits would be sufficient. On the other hand, I've seen people not nominated until they went over 10,000 edits. --Yamla 19:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. --S-man 20:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qmwnebrvtcyxuz

Hi, Mr.Yamla, my friend User:Qmwnebrvtcyxuz is no longer existing. Why? Did he all of a sudden leave Wikipedia? Did one of the administors ddecide to delete the user? Did a user delete him? Whta happened? I want to talk to him! --Bethicalyna2 00:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't know very much about that user. It appears that the username has been blocked indefinitely for being gibberish. However, it could also be that the user was using Wikipedia simply as a place to chat (WP:NOT points out that this is not what the Wikipedia is for). Anyway, the admin who dealt with that user is User:The Anome so I suggest you check with him or her. --Yamla 00:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ATTENTION YAMLA

Will you please get off my tail feather about this wikipedia rampage you are on. I have better things to do than: 1). Read your rants 2). Care 3). Engage in flame wars on this MMORPG, especially over a most petty, ridiculous issue regarding images.

Archive