User talk:CactusWriter

Welcome! If you need help with something, feel free to ask. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" tab at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages. If you are requesting administrative help and I am not currently active, here are some other options for you: If you need to get a repeat vandal blocked, report them to Administrator Intervention against Vandalism. If you need a page to be protected from editing, use Requests for page protection. If you would like to request rollback rights or account creator rights, ask at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. If your problem does not fit into any of the above criteria, and your issue is urgent, make a post on the Administrators' noticeboard, the Incidents noticeboard, or one of the other noticeboards. If you want to ask for help, you can ask at the help desk for questions about Wikipedia, and at the reference desk for more general questions. You may also simply ask a question on your talk page and add {{helpme}} before your question. This will attract the attention of experienced users who will most likely be able to help you. Administrators, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it. I will not consider it wheel-warring if you reverse my admin actions, however I do expect you to leave a message here explaining your reasons.

edit count | edit summary usage Archives Apr-–July 08 Aug–Dec 08 Jan–Apr 09 May–Aug 09 Sep–Oct 09 WP:FILMS October Newsletter The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC) Sockpuppet alert SylvioGreene (talk · contribs) Katr67 (talk) 02:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC) Thanks, Katr. I wondered where he would pop up again. — CactusWriter | needles 16:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC) When convenient And no rush whatsoever, would you mind looking over Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins? I've done a major overhaul to that today (used to look like this), and feedback would be welcome. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 03:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC) Hi, Mrg. It's looking good. I made a few tweaks to the language in spots where I got a bit confused. The one section I didn't follow was the last part of "handling copyright violations" where it reads: :Move the salvageable content to the temporary subpage /Temp linked on the copyvio notice or another subpage, being careful to provide proper attribution to the authors of that content in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, and follow one of the processes below. I wanted to add something there, but I'm still not quite sure what you were getting at. Seems to be missing something or "the processes below" is the wrong direction. Other than that, I think the entire piece works great. Thanks for all your work. — CactusWriter | needles 13:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC) Oh, yeah, one other thing. I don't know if you want to add a sentence about briefly checking the editor's other contributions for other possible violations (with a link to WP:CCI perhaps). I know it is something that you and I and others always do, so it is part of the process -- on the other hand, I would hate to open up another big can of worms on the page. Keeping it relatively simple would be ideal. Thoughts? — CactusWriter | needles 13:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC) You made some great changes! Thanks. :) Thanks for pointing out the unclear directions. Some of that was an artifact of earlier versions of the page, and some of it was my moving stuff around and forgetting to update. :) Does it make more sense now? Yes, I think that should definitely be added. Great idea. I've done so. Seem okay? Too wormy? :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC) Ah, okay... now I understand what that part meant. And the CCI addition is just right. Well done. — CactusWriter | needles 14:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC) WP:FILMS' Tag & Assess Drive and Roll Call Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome. For the Arbitration Committee, Risker (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC) page restore Hey CactusWriter, how you doing these days? A page you correctly deleted Mitchell Wiggs is the reason I'm here. Unless you have any objections, I'd like to restore the article, and userfy it for the article creator. He claims that he is not "the" Mitchell Wiggs, so indeed the user name is something that will have to be addressed as well. Rather than just "doing" it, I thought I'd prefer to get your input on it first. The article creator is discussing this at: User talk:MitchellWiggs. Do you have any insight on anything here that might be of value to me? Thanks for any feedback. — Ched :  ?  08:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC) Hi, Ched. A reread of that article shows the A7 speedy was correct. The bio has no "actual" assertion of notability for this person. Being at the same parties as celebrities or meeting celebrities at an event does not make a person notable. And suggesting he is a notable musician and music producer but has never been on any record label and has no notable music is a clear contradiction. However, I have no problem if you wish to userfy the page to allow the editor to make another attempt at providing any significant references. Thanks for asking for my input. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 18:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC) Hi Just wanted to let you know that I've taken the situation at Susan Hutchison back to ANI. :) It's at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_editing.2C_Chimes_in_SF. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Hi right back at ya. And, sigh -- but some things will never change. I've recommended a lengthy semi-protection at ANI. — CactusWriter | needles 15:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC) WHO updates and Fair Use. CactusWriter, I ask that you work with me if at all possible. The baseline of people dying from influenza is 500,000 persons a year. In pandemic years like '57 and '68 that can double to the a million, and these are merely 'average' pandemic years. Now, that doesn't settle the copyright question, but it does lend some weight to the education side! In addition, I don't think WHO has a profit motive in holding press conferences, so we're not interfering with their ability to make a profit. So, if we can make the case, say the civil standard of preponderance of evidence, more likely than not, 51%, I ask you to be open to the experiment, in fact welcome the experiment precisely because we are trying something new. You mention substantial portion. The last time I looked at fair use, I was surprised at how much lattitude it gave, it was either 250 or 500 words. But it's not absolute, which makes the whole thing slippery, yeah, it does. I think there's a famous case in which one of news magazines like Atlantic or New Yorker had interviewed President Ford. Someone else republished the excerpt where he was explaining why he pardoned Nixon, and even though the excerpt was under the normal size threshold, a court ruled that it substantially enough interfered with the profit of the magazine. Again, WHO doesn't have a profit motive. It may even be public domain. I'm not going to base it on that. I'm going to look at fair use. And I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility to take excerpts from newspapers (probably shorter excerpts). It is dicey, the newspapers, I'll acknowledge that, but I still want to take a look at it. Cool Nerd (talk) 21:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC) (also to be posted on my talk page) PS We can't help everyone likely to be affected by this year's H1N1, but if we do our best intellectual work, we might be able to save several dozen lives. And that possibility should be taken very seriously. Although I can appreciate your desire to provide accurate timely information, you must understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia -- it is not a news service. Additionally, we must adhere to strict legal guidelines for copyrighted material. The text that you are copying from the WHO website is definitely not Public Domain. Please notice the copyright notice found on the bottom of their website and as explicitly stated here. Our WP:FAIRUSE criteria permits only brief excerpts, properly attributed. Editors cannot create entire articles by copying other people's copyrighted words. It is illegal -- and allowing it can jeopardize the entire Wikipedia project. Therefore, we take copyright violations very seriously -- deleting copyright violations when found and blocking any editor who persists in infringing on copyrights. Several editors have already explained all of this to you on your talk page. If you wish to add updated text to Wikipedia articles, please write the information in your own words and cite the sources. It is as simple as that. In the time you have taken to write large comments to several editors, you could have written the information into the articles. If you are concerned about adding timely information, I would suggest that you consider contributing to Wikinews, which functions as our online news source. If you have further questions about whether text will pass copyright criteria, please feel free to ask. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter | needles 11:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC) OTRS check Hello, CactusWriter. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Responded there. — CactusWriter | needles 14:22, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Talkback Hello, CactusWriter. You have new messages at MLauba's talk page. Message added 16:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. MLauba (talk) 16:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC) Replied. — CactusWriter | needles 08:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Office of Elementary and Secondary Education Apologies I was unaware of the public domain status, thanks for putting me right. Regards. Paste Let’s have a chat. 22:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC) No problem. Good luck with the editing. — CactusWriter | needles 08:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Interestingly it has now been SD'd by User:Jimfbleak as a copyvio? Paste Let’s have a chat. 14:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Okay. I'll find out the story right now. — CactusWriter | needles 14:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Sheer stupidity, I'm afraid, I overlooked the fact that the text is USPD, restored now, sorry Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC) No problem. Partly my fault. I should have added the PD-GOV on it rather than just the reference. Thanks for the quick restore. — CactusWriter | needles 15:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC) copyright infringement issue Hi,a copyright infringement issues has been flagged on the Aberdeen Asset Management page. The entry was added by an employee of Aberdeen Asset management and was taken directly from the Aberdeen Asset management site. Can you please advise this article can be restored. I have removed the entry in question from the article.. Thanks -- 20.56 6 December 2009 (UTC) AberdeenManagement ([[User talk:AberdeenManagement|talk] Okay. Thank you for deleting the copyright violation text. I have once again removed the CV template. During the past year, that article has had problems with the persistent addition of copyright infringements from numerous new accounts. Because the new accounts have user names associated with the company, these appear to have a conflict-of-interest, which runs counter to Wikipedia's policy on neutral point-of-view. Your own username is problematic as well. Please read WP:ORGNAME for the relevant policy. I see that a note has already been left on your user page advising you how to deal with this. If you have any questions about this, please ask. — CactusWriter | needles 09:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC) Two for closure at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 November 30 Global University Ranking and Global University Ranking, 2009 are both ripe for closure today, and it isn't so clear cut that I want to bang the gavel alone. I have failed to attract more attention to the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Global_University_Ranking in spite of publicizing it at WT:C and WT:COPYCLEAN. (The conversation primarily consists of a contributor who says the list is creative and unusable and another who's claiming WP:OTHERSTUFF.) I'm not quite sure what to do with it. We haven't had a good debate about lists in quite some time, and the admin who added the most to the last one has gone inactive. :) Are you able to help out? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC) No problem. I'm off to have dinner now -- but will take a look right afterward. — CactusWriter | needles 15:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Thanks. Should you look at it and decide that on second thought you want nothing to do with it, I'll understand. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Oh my. I wanted to walk away from that one. I can understand the confusion. I would have to go with deletion of the large list and reproduce only a Top Ten list under fair use claim. I left some comments at the discussion. Hope I didn't add to the confusion. — CactusWriter | needles 20:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Oh, I saw that you had weighed in, but did not notice you had written me back here. :) Thanks. You didn't add to the confusion at all; as you can see, I did pretty much that. I really prefer straightforward cases, with an occasional backwardscopyvio to make me feel like Sherlock Holmes. It's a good day when I find no listings that leave me going, "Well, um, well...." :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Copyright issue for eGovernment in Europe Hi, First, thank you for the provided information. Please note that the copyright infringement issue was nowhere near my intentions, and I apologize for it. Concerning the way forward, and since I definitely want to see the article back online as soon as possible, I intend to move in two directions: First, I will ask the ePractice owners to send an email to wikipedia according to the instructions (send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en at wikimedia dot org or a postal letter to the Wikimedia Foundation. These messages must explicitly permit use under CC-BY-SA and the GFDL) so that the copyright issue can be settled properly. In parallel, I will remove direct "copy-paste" content from the page and leave only the content that has been generated by me summarising the ePractice factsheets. Please indicate whether the second option is considered acceptable (as it will result in information missing about many countries), so that the page can come online again. This will also allow the continuation of my work in order to create summaries for the rest of the countries. Best regards, Rentzepopoulos (talk) 13:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Hi, Rentzepopoulos. Thanks for replying. I appreciate your willingness to resolve the issues. I will make a note on the CV report that you are seeking permission for use of the copyrighted text. In the meantime, if you wish to reconstruct the page without any of the copyrighted text, that would be fine. Please use this temporary page, Talk:EGovernment in Europe/Temp, which is created specifically for that purpose. You can certainly add in any original text you wrote from the original article (Be careful not to add any copyrighted text -- we can't allow those additions anywhere on Wikipedia. That is one reason that I needed to delete the text at User:rentzepopoulos/eGovernment in Europe) Also, you may wish to read WP:Close paraphrasing which talks about the need to avoid copyright infringement even in summarized text. Your new Temporary article will be checked by an administrator in 7 days -- and, if compliant, will be moved back into the mainspace. Or you can notify me if it is ready earlier. — CactusWriter | needles 14:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Image Here is a tough call, use your own opinion. Stacia Napierkowska has a few pictures in commons to draw from. Should we use the erotic sepia toned image, even though it is so compressed you can see pixellation in it. The compression is so high that the text cannot be read. Or should we use one of the less erotic but more detailed images from the Library of Congress. I guess the best compromise would be to find a newer version of the erotic one. What do you think? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Looking at the group of photos available at commons, my personal choice would be File:Stacia Napierkowska 001.jpg. It is the finest and clearest reproduction of the group. The File:Stacia Napierkowska.jpg would make a better encyclopedic photo -- I think it is a superior pose and presentation -- if only it is was higher quality. If we could find the original, rescan and restore it, that would be wonderful. User:Durova is a WP expert on old photo restoration. She could provide you with better advice on this. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 09:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC) Alma White College Thanks for your observations. It seems like a total waste of space to keep an article of an insignificant defunct college that faded away after the campus was flooded. Its enrollment was always less than 100--at times when a friend of mine attended it was only 25. Can you give me directions to properly redirect it to Somerset Christian College? Thanks for your kind assistance. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC) You will find the information you need at Help:Merging. To start the process, you should add the template "Mergeto" to the top of Alma White College, directing the article to a discussion at Talk:Somerset Christian College. Open the discussion at the talk page with your reasons and allow plenty of time for comments by interested editors. You can also place a WP:RFC tag on the page requesting neutral to contribute to the conversation. If you need further help with the process, feel free to ask. — CactusWriter | needles 12:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Okay, I see you have started it up correctly. I have fixed the mark-up on the merge template. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 12:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Jamil Ghanim Hi. :) Could use a second set of admin eyes at Jamil Ghanim and at Talk:Jamil Ghanim. I believe the article constitutes an unusable derivative work and, not unusually, its creator does not. He is also quoting the entirety of the source on the talk page in spite of my informing him this is problematic under WP:NFC. Sometimes a second opinion is very helpful in such cases. Have you got time? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 03:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Thanks. As you may note, I've just removed the quotes again. I counted. The article is 382 words. The quotes? 382 words. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Yeah, I was twiddling away with writing something and by the time I pushed save, you were back. The exact word count? Even after the rewording -- that is funny. — CactusWriter | needles 11:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC) No, his side-by-side examples. :) He copied the entire article to the talk page--twice. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Oh, okay. Yeah, that ain't allowed. — CactusWriter | needles 11:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:VeggietalesPirates.jpg ⚠ Thanks for uploading File:VeggietalesPirates.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC) DVD cover is now replaced with the theatrical poster, preferred by WP:MOSFILM. I have deleted the upload. — CactusWriter | needles 08:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC) Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan This arbitration case has been closed, and the final decision may be viewed at the link above. User:Arab Cowboy is prohibited from making changes to any article about a person with respect to their ethnicity or nationality for one year and is placed on a 1 revert per week restriction for one year. User:Supreme Deliciousness is prohibited from making changes to any article about a person with respect to their ethnicity or nationality for one year and is placed on a 1 revert per week restriction for one year. Asmahan is placed under article probation for six months. Any article within the scope of this case, where an extended dispute related to the national or ethnic identity of an individual is occuring may be placed under article probation by an uninvolved administrator for up to six months. Uninvolved administrators may perform escalating blocks on editors who do not abide by these remedies. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk|WikimediaUK 00:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC) Thanks for the notice. The results seem fair. I appreciate the Arbcom's work on this. — CactusWriter | needles 10:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC) Reverting Thank you for your kind threat " I want to make it clear that another reversion at List of evangelical Christians will be considered a violation of WP:Edit warring. And will result in you being blocked from editing." It was the other party who reverted my edit, and who instigated the deletion of an article about the person whose name I included. There was diversity of opinion toas the the notability, but the one who reverted my edit has reverted other names as well, and seems to regard himself as the final authority. Again, thank you very much. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 16:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC) I hoped the entirety of my message to you would be taken as a reminder to avoid more edit warring. I left a similar reminder for the other editor -- as I know you are aware since you left a note stating an intention to continue reverting under mine. I do not want to see either of you blocked from editing. Please discuss edits and seek outside opinion before making more reversions. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 10:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC) Sorry if you took my note as meaning that I would engage in an edit war. "I intend to keep expressing my judgments, which seem to differ from yours. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)" I simply meant that this editor seemed to be trying to intimidate me, and that I would continue to make meaningful contributions. I certainly would never lower myself to get in such a war nor would I intentionally violate Wiki standards. Regards, R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 07:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC) Take a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Asmahan#Nefer_Tweety_re_adding_copyrighted_material --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC) I see that Nefer Tweety has self-reverted their accidental re-introduction of the copyright infringing text. I have left notices about the continuing dispute on Asmahan at the talk page and a cautionary warning to User:Nefer Tweety on their talk page. Supreme Deliciousness, considering that it just took a dozen arbitrators and several weeks to resolve your arbitration case, it would be in Wikipedia's and everyone's best interest if you refrained from editing Asmahan or the related articles. Jumping back in there, making accusations and restarting the old disputes isn't wise. I would strongly suggest you step back from there during your probationary period. Allow other non-involved editors to develop that article during the next months. Thanks and good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 14:17, 25 December 2009 (UTC) Cactus.... Supreme Deliciousness is acting up at Asmahan again, bringing back potentially copyrighted text that had been removed. For the sake of peace on WP, please stop this. -- Nefer Tweety (talk) 10:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Okay. I have filed a ANI case (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Supreme Deliciousness ban violation) concerning Supreme Deliciousness requesting that SD be blocked for ban evasion. Although I am probably still "uninvolved", I do not want any possible question of it to cloud the issue. Therefore I am asking for a review by an uninvolved administrator — CactusWriter | needles 13:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Thank you. HAPPY NEW YEAR :) -- Nefer Tweety (talk) 09:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC) Thanks. A happy new year to you, too. — CactusWriter | needles 10:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC) A second opinion, if you can? Hi. :) Might I trouble you to take a look at the situation at User talk:Dirk P Broer#Copyright concerns, No. 107 Squadron RAF? The article was originally tagged by CorenSearchBot. I am concerned that revisions may not clear copyright problems and have set out the problematic passages I picked up in the latest version there. I would greatly appreciate a second opinion. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC) No trouble. Let me take a look. — CactusWriter | needles 13:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Your assessment was correct -- the article matched the source so clearly as to be certain derivative. I've left my comments there. — CactusWriter | needles 14:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Thank you. I appreciate your time. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Anytime, as always. As you wish. — CactusWriter | needles 10:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Asmahan I replied on my talk page, but the gist of it is that I dont think that my looking at sources provided by SD and deciding on my own what changes are needed (and making those changes) is editing on SDs behalf. I also do not think that the edit to the talk page by SD was a violation of his topic ban, he is only prohibited from making changes to articles, not providing sources on talk pages. nableezy - 16:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC) A review at ANI affirmed the conclusion that SD is attempting to stretch the boundaries of the ban -- in essence, violating the spirit -- and has violated the sanctions. A brief 12hr block has been given as well as a second admonishment (after mine from last week) for SD to stay away from Asmahan. It is hoped that the brief block will get SD's attention so that edit wars and further sanctions will not occur. I am not questioning any edits which you undertake of your own volition -- the article certainly needs some care and attention from neutral editors after the several months of POV warring. Good luck with it. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 17:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Cactus, my topic ban and restriction is this: [1] I still have the right to edit the article and post things at the talkpage. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC) I am well aware of your ban. In addition, Asmahan is also under special restrictions for you and all editors. You invited me to review the new edit war there and I warned both of you of the restrictions on that particular article. You then asked another editor to proxy for you to make edits about ethnicity -- a violation of your ban. (I know that you are now aware that proxying is improper since you asked Nuclear Warfare about the same problem with Nefer Tweety.) I took no administrative action but asked for an independent review. The administrator who took action reviewed your recent edits and confirmed you violated the sanctions. The arbcom case allows administrators to place further blocks and restrictions on banned editors who violate the spirit of the sanctions. The results of this latest skirmish between you and others was: you were blocked for 12 hours and again warned not to make any edits which could possibly be construed as violations; Arab Cowboy has now been banned from Asmahan for ban evasion; Nefer Tweety is being questioned about canvassing, and Nableezy has been warned about acting as a proxy. Please take heed of the warnings because I expect any further battles at Asmahan will be dealt with more harshly. Good luck with your editing in the new year. — CactusWriter | needles 10:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC) First of all, do not accuse me of inviting anyone to proxy for me, this is not what I did, I asked another editor (an Egyptian) to take a look at certain issues that I pointed out and then that person could do the edits that he himself feel are appropriate. This is not a violation against anything but only asking for a second opinion. The evidence that you gave to the second admin was false, you told him that I carried out the edit that I asked wizard about, which is false, next time you want to accuse me of anything I have done at Asmahan, take it to A:E so I will have enough time to respond.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the reminder about WP:AE -- I certainly hope a "next time" will not be necessary. If you have any problems with my actions, you are welcome to open a case at WP:RFCC. — CactusWriter | needles 18:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC) article regarding Larissa Shasko (speedily deleted as Larissa shasko) Hey there... cool that you deleted the Larissa shasko (small s), I was trying to create an article for her with proper capitalization "Larissa Shasko" and couldn't get past the auto-reference to 2008 election candidates... As per the copyright infringement... I had used larissa's own website, and could easily attain her permission (we are close friends and colleagues)... The only reason I left the copied and pasted short bio was because I didn't want to edit the small s article while the large s wasn't allowing me... so how can I start on a large s, Larissa Shasko article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Treesforourchildren (talk • contribs) 07:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Hi, Treesforourchildren. I am sorry that we had to delete the article, but Wikipedia doesn't allow the addition of any copyright infringing text -- even briefly. But I have now deleted the redirect to the 2008 election candidates page, which will free you to create the Larissa Shasko title. I suggest you use the Wikipedia:Article wizard 2.0 which is a step-by-step process for creating the new article. It will be helpful in determining whether or not Larissa Shasko will meet the WP notability guidelines. And because this is a close friend of yours, I also want to suggest that you first read the Wikipedia policy page about conflict of interest, which explains the need to write from an entirely neutral point-of-view. This is especially difficult for people writing about themselves, friends, family or colleagues. If you have further questions, please ask. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 11:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks CactusWriter... the reason I had initially copied the bio was to paraphrase what others had said about her... but I have no doubt she meets notability requirements, both with her role as leader of the green party of saskatchewan and her trailblazing founding of fairvote saskatchewan and a sincere attempt to create a left-wing coalition during the last election. To ensure neutrality, I will use as many primary and secondary sources as I can find... thanks for your help, I'll read the article wizard too ;) I (heart) open-source! Treesforourchildren (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Treesforourchildren CactusWriter... ...are you in? (there's a reason I'm asking in this way) Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 12:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC) In fact, never mind. It was to do with page protection and outing, etc. I think I've dealt with it, more or less, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 12:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Hi, Spongefrog. Sorry that I wasn't around. Looks like you did everything right on your own. And Tiptoey and WP can be grateful for your efforts. Have a good new year. — CactusWriter | needles 09:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC) The The Third Man Welles arguer is back... Hello, Cactus Writer. I was a brand-new editor back last summer when an individual, perhaps using several accounts, persisted in vandalizing the The Third Man article, contending that Orson Welles had written and directed the film. Eventually he went away. 'Cept now he's back. He's been copy-and-pasting his arguments from July back into the article in the same spots. He's as tenacious as I am, and one more round of pasting-and-undoing will put us into edit war status. I'm confident in my edit skills, but not so much in my battle skills. Any chance you could help out on this? --HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Ack! Okay, no problem. There's no need for you to risk an edit war status -- so no more reverts. I'll watchlist the article and step in if problems persist. — CactusWriter | needles 09:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks. I feel like a kid on the playground, running for Teacher. Thanks again — HarringtonSmith (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC) Ha! Yeah, I know that feeling. Wikipedia's new slogan: welcome to your 2nd childhood. — CactusWriter | needles 13:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC) Wow, I'm impressed. He seems totally humbled. One off-stage whisper of your name and he folds up right on the spot. You're a regular Wyatt Earp of the Wiki. I left a suggested paragraph — refreshingly brief! — on the talk page that might plug in and put this to bed. Thanks again! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Looks fine to me. But something tells me this will never be entirely asleep... — CactusWriter | needles 16:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC) Image resize I don't think that the resolution would stay that high anyway if one of the dimensions is reduced to 300px. Usually the image is rendered in the infobox at 200px anyway, so it usually doesn't need to be much bigger than that. I've been running across a lot of images that are above 300px, but I've usually been tagging only 350 and above. I believe that there is some page somewhere that talks about resolution as well, but again, it shouldn't be an issue with the reduced size. Let me know if you need further clarification. Thanks for taking the time to resize them. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)  Done - — CactusWriter | needles 10:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC) why?? why did you delete united atists??? its my dads team i hate you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feargondeoin (talk • contribs) 17:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC) Sorry, but casual amateur "Astro league" teams and players are not notable. You might want to read about our WikiProject Football -- especially Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability. When Dad starts to make his living as a professional footballer than Wikipedia will include his team. — CactusWriter | needles 10:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Baseball cards If you can delete them that'd be fantastic. I added them before I knew all the ins and outs of the system here. Alex (talk) 18:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks for your quick response. And no problem -- I understand that these were uploaded back when you were just learning the ropes. This kind of fair use error is fairly common. There is a big learning curve on all the rules and regs. I have marked the above for deletion. But it would be very helpful if you could review the other files that you have uploaded during the years and check them for proper use. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 09:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC) Re:First Crusade reference Hello, CactusWriter. You have new messages at MC10's talk page. Message added 17:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Dave Sharp Thanks for your polite posting on my web page. Please check the comments page where the subject Himself clearly states He has no issue with text being used from His web site and in fact encourages the use. Whilst I appreciate the policies in place, surely common sense should prevail? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevorsem (talk • contribs) 12:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC) Trevorsem, because of the anonymity of internet accounts, it is unfortunately impossible for us to accept permission from any registered account simply on their word alone. This is because anyone can state that they are anyone else. Therefore, Wikipedia must use specific procedures to allow any use of copyrighted materials. The simplest method is for the website owner to replace the copyright notices on their own website with a CC-BY-SA free sharing license. Permission also can be granted by Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials through our OTRS office so that the website owner's identity can be confirmed. These methods are outlined in the message on your talk page. This not only protects the legal standing of Wikipedia, but just as importantly, they protect the hard work of the original authors of the text which is to be copied. I'm certain you can understand the common sense in that. If you have further questions, please ask. — CactusWriter | needles 16:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC) A question Hi, I'm working at spanish version of Masada, and saw this edition you did long ago. Do you have any reference that could hold that assertion? Because I'm not sure we were talking about only one person. I really need one solid reference to prove that fact. Thanks and regards, Kordas (sínome!) 22:44, 26 January 2010 (UTC) Wow, that's from a long time ago. I can't remember how I ended up on that page -- but is was probably through my work at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Biographies. I am definitely out of my depth with this subject matter, but I think that you are correct: Eleazar ben Simon and Eleazar ben Yair -- although both Jewish revolutionary leaders at the same period -- are definitely two different people. Eleazar ben Yair was the leader of the Sicarii at Masada. I am redirecting the ben Yair page to Sicarii. Thanks for helping to correct my mistake. — CactusWriter | needles 17:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks for your fast answer. I'm going to investigate this a little deeper, but I'm afraid the information is really poor at this point. There are few sources (e.g. Josephus) we could handle to fill this lack. Thank you so much again, Kordas (sínome!) 00:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC) Great work on the Lise Nørgaard article! You are a worthy addition to the land pickled herring and atrocious weather. Favonian (talk) 19:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Tak, men det var så lidt. Og denne uge er jeg faktisk lang væk fra det koldt og mørkt. Jeg hygger på en dejlig strand in syd Californien -- men jeg savner en god sildemad og Tuborg. Skål! — CactusWriter | needles 19:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Very speedy delete Please see here Respond on my talk page if you would like to contact me. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC) No problem. The page has been now redirected to The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis. (I myself kind of wonder whatever happened to ol' Dobie Gillis from back in the days of B&W TV?) — CactusWriter | needles 22:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Sarah Roberson Why was the Sarah Roberson page deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HeyitsSarahKate (talk • contribs) 22:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Unfortunately, Sarah Roberson did not meet the strict notability criteria for a biography of a living person. As stated in the article: as an actress, she has had no roles and as a model she has yet to receive any significant notice. Requirements for a biography are that an individual has significant coverage in press and media. As it was, the article was written solely to promote a possible career for this young person. As such it was speedily deleted. If and when she receives significant attention for her work, than an article about her would be welcome. Regards. — CactusWriter | needles 23:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Re: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Grant Bell Hello, CactusWriter. You have new messages at Mattlore's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. replied. — CactusWriter | needles 04:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC) Thanks Thank you for the welcome! --Cucumberkvp (talk) 16:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC) No problem. I've left a couple of other tips for you on your page concerning editing. Let me know if there is any help you need. — CactusWriter | needles 16:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC) Supreme Deliciousness Violating Arbitration Again Hello Cactus… Supreme Deliciousness is acting up again. On 30 December 2009, you filed this AN/I report against SD for meat puppetry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive588#User:Supreme_Deliciousness_ban_violation. SD was soliciting User:Nableezy to edit Asmahan on his behalf as a way around his ban from the Asmahan arbitration case. SD was found to have violated his ban and was blocked very briefly. SD is now doing it again on Omar Sharif. Again, he is posting the references for Nableezy on the Talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Omar_Sharif#Omar_Sharifs_lebanese_background and Nableezy is doing the editing using SD references: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omar_Sharif&action=historysubmit&diff=341729948&oldid=341725654, again as a way around his ban. SD is prohibited from influencing the nationality or ethnicity of a biography on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan#Supreme_Deliciousness_topic_banned. Not only is Omar Sharif a biography, it was also part of the Asmahan case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan#Statement_by_Arab_Cowboy and again, SD is using a meat puppet to do his editing in violation of his ban. I ask you to please take action again, this time to block him indefinitely, since he has been violating his ban so many times. Thank you. Nefer Tweety (talk) 20:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC) Okay. Let me take a look. — CactusWriter | needles 21:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC) Nefer Tweety, I don't see this as the same blatant case since I do not find any direct request from SD to Nableezy to make edits. Nableezy is not under any editing restriction that I am aware of, and is certainly permitted to edit any article of their own volition. However, I am going to ask for a clarification on something before making a response. I will let you know once I hear back about that. In the meantime, I see That SD has opened a case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Nefer Tweety to which you may wish to respond. — CactusWriter | needles 21:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC) I requested clarification of SD's topic ban -- which was a one year ban from making edits concerning ethnicity. I wanted to make certain that it did not include article talk pages. As you can see from Wizardman's response below, the edits at Talk:Omar Sharif are not specifically in violation. However, if SD continues to create battles over ethnicity and nationality, and stirring up fires at various WP venues, than an amendment to their topic will need to be imposed. At the moment, I am going to let this ride in hope that you and Nableezy can find common ground, and any provocation by SD can be ignored. I will try to keep a general eye out for how things are proceeding. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter | needles 03:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Cactus, thank you for looking into this. However, this is incorrect. SD is not permitted to edit the Talk pages of biographies to influence their ethnicity or nationality. This privilege was voted down here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan/Proposed_decision#Supreme_Deliciousness_topic_banned. The privilege of editing the Talk pages was taken away from SD and therefore his edits on the Talk page of Omar Sharif were a violation. Moreover, it is clear that Nableezy was using SD's specific sources to edit the article for SD, as per SD's original request on Asmahan. SD did not have to repeat the request Nableezy; Nableezy is complying anyway. It is clear that SD and Nableezy have learned from the meat puppetry lesson of December 2009 when they got caught, and they are now doing it in a more subtle way. -- Nefer Tweety (talk) 12:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC) The opposition to the first proposed topic ban does not mean that things allowed under that proposal (such as editing talk pages) are now not allowed -- it only meant the wording of that entire proposal was decided as incorrect. Once a proposal is rejected, the specific wording becomes meaningless. The only topic ban proposal which has true relevance is the one that was finally accepted -- and it did not mention talk pages. If talk pages need to be added into a topic ban, than a request should be made at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment. Notice that this is different than Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. For approval of amendment, however, it must be clear that an editor's talk page edits are disruptive to other editors. — CactusWriter | needles 18:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC) Re: clarification If talk pages was not written in the remedy, then I would say that it's not a violation. If you feel topic banning the talk pages as well is necessary then you can request an amendment. That's how I read the remedy. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC) btw, your talk page background looks quite familiar ;) Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC) Nadkarni Sundar Vithal It was not my intention to delete S. V. Nadkarni just like that - several readers are also responsible for that. At the same time, I had also marked one of my articles B. A. Uralegaddi to be deleted as I thought it is not worth keeping on wiki. He may be notable somewhere else. Yes, Nikil Dutt, D. S. Nadkarni were my mistakes. S. V. Nadkarni was not understood by many. The others are marked correctly – votes are coming in. Thanks. In summary, this notable stuff on wiki stinks. I have been seeing a lot bias in that process. I’m some what close to what David Eppstein’s speaks though it differs sometimes from others. --DoNotTellDoNotAsk (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)