User talk:Herostratus

I will usually respond to your messages on your talk page unless otherwise requested.

Copyvio on Justin Berry and an urgent BLP issue at Timothy Ryan Richards

The Justin Berry copyvio text was added by JustinBerry, Berry himself, and was brought to Berry's attention in his talk page. I've resisted deleting it out of respect for Berry & concern over how the deletion would be perceived. Instead, I put some orange pylons around it & left it as is. The current talk page discussion is moving toward restoring the article as it was before Phil Sandifer "nuked" it, which will take care of the copyvio right there.
On the Timothy Ryan Richards article, I sympathize with your concerns vis a vis notability. Leaving that aside, this revision is an unsourced negative screed about Justin Berry, just short of a complete hatchet job. It commits all the classic libels: accusing Berry of criminal & moral wrongdoing and claiming victims waiting in the wings. If you could nuke that revision, it'd be a good idea. I already reverted it. If you reply on my talk page, I'll continue the conversation there. If you reply here, I'll continue it here. --Ssbohio 21:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re #1, right, I personally don't get too upset if the copyrighted text is posted by the original author of the material. However he should realize that by posting it here he is automatically releasing it under the GDFL. If the article was to stay in that version he would have to get a WP:OTRS ticket. I doubt it will stay in that version, but I don't know the article well enough to change it.

Re #2, only the few admins with Oversight privilege can remove selected edits from the history. See Wikipedia:Requests for oversight for the procedure. Herostratus 22:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, belay that. I was able to delete it; not having oversight I can't erase all trace of it, but only admins will be able to view it, which I guess is good enough. Herostratus 22:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, per Wikipedia:Oversight oversight is generally only used when the person has complained or something... never mind, consider it done. Herostratus 22:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will Beback restored the article back the way it was before the "nuking," so the copyvio is gone.
Perfect... It looks confusing with my revert still there, but the version with the strong anti-Berry language has been done away with. While I hope the AfD closes a keep, I thank you for your help. --Ssbohio 04:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Ryan Richards AfD

I'm concerned about the implications of your speculation about why the article exists in the first place. On Talk:Justin Berry/Archive 4#Prosecution of Richards, the decision (mostly between me & Will Beback) was to spinoff the Tim Richards content to shorten up the main article. The intent wasn't to proselytize on behalf or Richards but to decrease the weight given him in the Justin Berry article. I hope this allays your concern over the creation of the article. --Ssbohio 15:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering your new understanding about this article, I was wondering if you might be persuaded to change your connects on the AfD? --Ssbohio 16:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of article Nudity and children

I noticed you just deleted the article I was collaborating on Nudity and children. I would like to have a chance to contest your opinion properly. Why did you not nominate this for deletion? I can't say that I appreciate your use of WP:IAR to move around establishing a consenus. Please provide me with the wiki markup for the page so I can save it. User:Dandelion (talk|contribs) 03:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lolicon image

That's absolutely overly-sensitive. Why not delete all the Wikipe-tan images, especially this one? Seems to me much more risqué. Do you dare not call that cheesecake? She may not even be wearing anything under that beach towel! --Merovingian (T, C, E) 05:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, child status is relative. The character in the image I referenced could be any age, and from all sorts of anime/manga/H-games it is well known that characters can be and regularly are portrayed as being any age, regardless of appearance/development (or lack of the latter). Second, this would not be the first time an image was used against Wikipedia; I'm sure you've seen that (possibly faked, I don't know) picture of Jimbo on a boat with a couple of babes hanging off his arms? And, of course, there are many other pictures on Wikipedia I would rather not have people know exist, simply because they are of an inappropriate nature. However, what you are proposing is nothing short of censorship. There is no guarantee that one image of a fictional character will portray all Wikipedians as dirty pedophiles. We have much worse things to worry about. --Merovingian (T, C, E) 06:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can actually understand your opposition to the picture, and you are no doubt not the only one who holds that view. There is a deletion debate on Commons. There is, as I believe has been pointed out, already an image of Wikipe-tan in a swimsuit; you may say that its nature is more innocent, but I doubt it would make much difference to a lolicon. I just want Kohikki's hard work to be respected, regardless of its nature. (Being inept at any kind of visual art, I tend to take this side.) --Merovingian (T, C, E) 19:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, if you think the image of Wikipe-tan in general could be infringing on the trademark of the Foundation, you are welcome to email the Foundation and ask for clarification. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We may be able to ascertain some good tips on how to use (or not use) trademarked Foundation elements in the future. --Merovingian (T, C, E) 20:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can give you the first tip for free: no Foundation emblems on kiddie cheesecake pictures. I don't need the Foundation to tell me that one... Herostratus 20:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And which policy would that "tip" be supported by, exactly? WP:IDONTLIKEIT? --tjstrf talk 20:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please demonstrait that the foundation has trademarked puzzel pices with letters on them.Geni 00:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good call on this one, come to my talk page if you need anything. Hypnosadist 01:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sara Dylan

Hi Hero, will you please take a look at the latest addditons to this article, as I've had two IP's inserting an assumpton from Clintin Heylin, contradicting a sourced statement from Jakob Dylan. I've reverted the latest one twice, and it's now back in. I'll be greatful for any help you can give! Hope your'e well, Lion King 19:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heylin has written a Dylan biog, (one revised version of same) he considers himself to be an expert on the meaning of Dylan's songs, although he has never spoken to Dylan or any member of the Dylan, Lownds, Zimmerman or Rutman families unlike Howard Sounes, who was told by Jakob Dylan that the songs on Blood On The Tracks, "were his parents talking" Cheers, Lion King 21:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Irish Famine (book)

Hello Herostratus, just letting you know that I have decided to re enter the Book under AFD. Thanks for all your advice in the past, and hopefully it will generate a bit more intrest than the last time. Kind Regards --Domer48 19:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Again Herostratus, I have been trying to do this AfD, and can not bring up a new discussion page. Could you have a look at it for us, sorry for the trouble. Regards --Domer48 20:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that.

Hello Herostratus, thanks for the help there, if you would not mind could you check it over and let me know if I have it all done right. Thanks again, Regards --Domer48 20:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really appreciate that, I was starting to panic a bit. Regards --Domer48 20:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: You are the subject of an AN/I post

I was really hoping to avoid this, but now that you've started acting on your threat of disruption, to a wider forum we go. --tjstrf talk 00:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Herostratus

Thank you.
That is all. Bladestorm 00:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your efforts

I, SqueakBox, award you this Hero of Belarus for unending dedication and persistence in fighting pro pedophilia activism. Not being an admin isnt so bad though God forbid it should happen to you for your PAW contibs.

Advice Please

Hello Herostratus, I was just woundering if you could keep an eye on this [1], for me. I may have went overboard, I will let you be the judge, any advice how I should proceed would be welcome. Thanks in advance, Regards --Domer48 20:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WDefcon Templates

Add <BR />{{{sign}}} to the templates to display the sigs.
Hope that helps Tswsl1989 11:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advice please

Hello Herostratus, could you please have a look at this page, [2],Paxse has turned my AfD into a farce. They have chopped up my last contribution to the discussion, rendering it incoherent and disjointed. One would not know were their contribution ended and mine started. They have attempted to justify there actions in the last AfD, and the contributions that they made. It takes years for a book to appear on any college curriculum, and only then, when it has assumed considerable notability. My motivation for resubmitting the article has been questioned which is clearly assuming bad faith. On your suggestion, I considered WP:DRV, and raised it with you, as a result of our converstaion I renominated it, with your kind assistance. This is now being used in such a mischievious was to detract from my AfD nomination. Your help, advice or suggestions would be most welcome. Regards --Domer48 15:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on L. image

Nice work there. DPeterson^talk 23:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cradle of Humanity

Though I wound up !voting to Delete, I agree with your closing. The article has changed drastically since then, and looks to be a lot better. Good call! -- Kesh 15:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that.

Thanks Herostratus, that’s ok. We have agreed to suspend the heated discussion till another time. In addition, we have removed the conversation to the Articles discussion page. Since you are mentioned, [3] I wanted to point it out. Thanks again, Regards --Domer48 17:39, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I'm curious here, but what's the your reasoning behind removing the prod on Hurricane (hovercraft)? No offense to you, just would like to know why. Kwsn^(Ni!) 15:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, will do. Kwsn^(Ni!) 15:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cradle of Humanity

Hi. I have to say that I strongly disagree with the way you closed this AfD, as there was a clear consensus to delete, and in my opinion there is no way this can become a good article. I followed your advice in the closing statement and re-nominated the article for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cradle of humanity (2nd nomination)), and there's a significant amount of pushback from editors who think that it's "too soon" to put the article up for deletion again. Perhaps you would care to comment, or otherwise advise. Thanks. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Confederate States of America currency

I replied to your comment about the move. I'd like to move it back, but will wait a bit longer to see if you reply. Sorry I didn't think to post to your talk before right now. Ingrid 23:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buena Vista Resort afd

I'm not arguing against the final decision, but the statement about the "keep" arguments surprised me. It is true that one person in his keep argument urged us to give the author a break, but that was an aside -- hardly the thrust of his argument. Every keep argument there appealed to the fact that multiple independent sources attested to the notability of the resort. The deletion rationale did not address why the sources were found to be inadequate. Capmango 20:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism Information Templates

I got the signatures to show up on the templates. Oh, regarding the "broken" link, when they moved the template from Wdefcon to Vandalism Information the link didn't change and people got a protected redirect page. --ROASTYTOAST 03:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My recent RfA

Thanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inquirer

I felt that I should note that your account is linked to from an article in 'The Inquirer'--NeoNerd 13:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed: The link for some reason takes you to the Inquirer's front page. The article in question is "I got Whacked by Wikipedia twice".--NeoNerd 13:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Shahi

I have drastically stubbified the article in question...I wonder if you might give it a look. Thanks, — Scientizzle 16:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough on the link thing--I came to the conclusion that having both would be the best solution while I was offline and now I find I don't even need to make the edit! There seems to be some sort of division within Shahi's sect that I fear will cause continuing problems as each tries to claim the informational upper hand... — Scientizzle 02:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Magee quotes you

Hi Herostratus. FYI, journalist Mike Magee quoted your participation at Mike Magee AfD#3 in Magee's article here. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Lear

If every person considered to be excentric, "far-out", freaky, etc, is to be excluded from Wikipedia, certainly we'd have at least hundreds of articles deleted! This is the reason I believe the exclusion of John Lear to be biased, unfair and totally contrary to the popular appeal his ideas have in the mind of a LOT of people.

League of Copyeditors

I'm very sorry I haven't had a chance to welcome you earlier, I have been incredibly busy lately. We are glad to have your help. Currently, we have really cut down the backlog of articles in need of copyedit. Therefore, a major goal at this moment is to identify new articles that are in need of work. When you run across them, be sure to tag them for copyediting.

If you have any questions at all, do not hesitate to drop me a line. Trusilver 00:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

?

Richmond, California id like to make a request for comment in the 80 image section please. Cholga saYS THANKS!^{Cholga is a SUPERSTAR}¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 01:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kent FAC

Hi. I'm sorry to bother you, but as a LoCE member, I just wondered if you would be willing to have a look through the Kent article. It is currently a Featured Article Candidate and needs a copy-edit for grammar by someone who hasn't yet seen it. Any other ways to improve the article would also be welcome. Thank you very much, if you can. Epbr123 16:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Service Awards

Here you go! (you don't have this one yet)

		The Special Barnstar
		In appreciation for conceiving, designing, and establishing the Wikipedia:Service awards, it is my pleasure to confer this barnstar upon Herostratus. --BrokenSphere 17:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't notice you were gone, I just thought you were quite busy! :p BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 16:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Wikipedia book.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wikipedia book.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot 21:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Wikipedia goldenbook.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wikipedia goldenbook.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot 21:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Welcome template?

Just a heads-up, we may have a broken template here. Your Welcome to DJSpyro had a stray {{{1}}} and a stray |} near the bottom:

{{{1}}} Again, welcome! [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 03:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

|}

I couldn't find the original template or I would have fixed it myself. davidwr ^(talk)/_(track) 13:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Battlefield 1942 mods

You may be interested in the List of Battlefield 1942 mods AFD. Bfelite 23:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Book cover - robert's rules of order orig 1876 edition.jpg

Hey. I realise this will be a 'blast from the past', but I've just come across this image you uploaded last year. You originally tagged it as public domain, but this is not the case. The subject of the image has had its copyright expire in the US, but the image itself must either be placed under fair use (in which case its usage in each article must be justified) or have permission for its use sought from the creator. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 21:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need your comments

Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I need your comments on this page. Your views with regards to this would be valuable. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 07:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Editor - bronze star.jpg and etc

I think all of these should be uploaded to commons. Also would you mind recreating these images with transparent background? -- Cat ^chi? 18:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Mosquera

FYI: Another self proclaimed Complete and Perfect Tutnum.--Dr who1975 00:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:72.128.82.211 too.--Dr who1975 00:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guest9999 three.--Dr who1975 00:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A star for you

It takes balls—y'all out there hear me? it takes **testicles of steel**—to do what you've been doing here on Wikipedia (you should know what I'm talking about), and to work on one of the few subjects still existing where people automatically put miles of barriers up and suspect the slightest tone of sympathy or even curious interest to be a negative straight from hell (which it isn't), and to be able to retain sanity while you're at it. Every edit I see you make to a related article is like a ray of sunshine in a black fog. Thank you for your work. — **$PЯING**εrαgђ 04:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following pages have inapropriate use of the service awards

User:SandyGeorgia - Image:Editor - plutonium star.jpg - somebody gave him the award and neither of them bothered to check the criteria
User:Guest9999 - Image:Editor - plutonium star.jpg - does not actually claim the award itself so maybe he's ok
User:Mosquera - Image:Tutnum6.jpg - even says on the page he's not supposed to display it
--Dr who1975 15:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:The Buggs.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Buggs.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hanegraaff comment

Hello Herostratus, Regarding the entry on me: since I now seem to have passed the professor test :), perhaps you could delete that comment in the discussion? It just doesn't look very nice at the very top of the discussion... So much for vanity. Thanks & best wishes, Wouter Hanegraaff —Preceding unsigned comment added by) 13:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Shame to spoil the fun but...

You might want to fix Image:Editor - bronze ribbon - 1 pip.jpg at some point. I have a feeling those aren't the "two pips" you had in mind. — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikpedai Service award image

could you reupload Image:Wikipedia book.jpg as it has been deletedBlacksmith^talk 05:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Wink williams

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Wink williams, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Wink williams is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Wink williams, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 08:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Image:Face_icon_bland.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Face_icon_bland.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. OsamaK 20:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

Please use the Sandbox. Thanks! Emsley (talk) 03:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]