User talk:Yamla

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 3 days are automatically archived to User talk:Yamla/Archive 8. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archive

• Archive 1 (from Dec 16, 2004 - April 17, 2006)
• Archive 2 (from April 17, 2006 to May 31, 2006)
• Archive 3 (from June 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006)
• Archive 4 (from July 1, 2006 to August 14, 2006)
• Archive 5 (from August 14, 2006 to September 2, 2006)
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8

67.163.235.67

All I did was an a link to a couple fansites I found, I don't see the problem. It says on that page you linked that fansites are okay, so I think you are really over reacting. It's certainly not innapropritate, and I don't have anything to do with them so take a chill pill. Don't be a link nazi just because you don't like them, it's perfectly valid to link sites that offer additional information on the subject. - 67.163.235.67

image

you can just delete this image Image:Famous logo.jpg, unless you could tell me what it needs. Sry for the inconvinence.

Please Block

This moron vandalized the Rolling Stones page. Please block him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75pickup (talk • contribs)

User:The exclusive bad apple=User:Mactabbed

Greetings Yamla, seeing as you've had contact with the first user above I thought it would be good for you to know about this user's sockpuppetry/block evasion. User:Pschemp indefinitely blocked Mactabbed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as well as Exclusive bad apple (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) a result of these ANI threads. Now this user is puppeting again as User:Juror 8 and has again been blocked by User:Pschemp. Given your negative interactions and prior blockings of this user I thought you should be aware of his continued disruption. Thanks. (→Netscott) 06:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ellen_Feiss.jpg

I'm hesitant to believe that this image is "replaceable". To begin with, I've yet to see an image of the girl that was not derived from one of the two advertising videos. This article is not really an "actress bio" of Ellen Feiss, it's more an article about an advertising character played by Ellen Feiss, as Ellen Feiss isn't notable for any other achievement, and wouldn't be notable for this one either if not for her cute, goofy, and slightly doped-up appearance in the TV commercials for Apple Computer. Even if she got cornered by paparazzi next week (not likely), she's like age 20 now and likely no longer resembles the girl in the video. —freak(talk) 23:54, Dec. 9, 2006 (UTC)

User:Made of people=User:The exclusive bad apple

Hello Yamla, I noticed your block review message and just wanted to let you know that you originally repeatedly blocked that user (under another sock) for fair usage violations. User:Pschemp eventually permablocked for the same reasons, etc. under another sockpuppet →User:Mactabbed. Hope that helps to jog your memory. Thanks. (→Netscott) 05:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Copy vio image

There's a copy violating image on the Ajithkumar page from the film Aalwar. Just thought you should know.

Hilary Duff's album covers

I added the Fair Use rationales for Image:Hilary Duff - Metamorphosis.jpg and Image:Hilary Duff Most Wanted.jpg is it okay to take off the No Fair Use templates now. Quasyboy 15:20 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ric.mc

About Nicole's image.I want that you he helps me in a photo for the page of the Nicole because when I you place the image in the same page of it strap with copyright certain.

PSP Protected

i think Playstation Portable should be protected...

Image:Vox-screenshot.png

How does this image have "no explanation as to why it is permitted under Wikipedia's rules for fair use." When the copyright tag explains why it is fair use. Cavenba 06:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

It has a license but not a detailed fair-use rationale. Please see Help:Image page for information on fair-use rationales. Thanks. --Yamla 16:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

" It is believed that the use of a limited number of such screenshots

• for identification and critical commentary relating to the website in question
• on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." Cavenba 22:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

yes, and in order to use them on the Wikipedia, you must adhere to WP:FU which requires a detailed fair-use rationale as described on Help:Image page. We require additional steps over and above what the law requires. --Yamla 22:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

deactivate

Please deactivate my user. Thanks. Morris Munroe 16:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Complaint from User:Sumit Desai

I added a photo to Aishwarya Rai which i thought didnt carry a copyright because an experienced wikipedian told me you were allowed to use photos from Flickr!! However after a talk with Rüdiger Wölk <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sumit_Desai#Flickr_pictures><http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:R%C3%BCdiger_W%C3%B6lk#My_Images> he - unlike you - sensibly and intelligently told me we can only take photos from flickr with Creative Commons-license. I understood this.

I'm not pleased with the manner in which you just laid down some kind of template on my talk page without even taking the time to doscover what's been going on... i DID NOT vandalise ANYBODY'S WORK, i ADDED a picture. even though the history has 2 edits, it was just anaddition of an image caption, so i made ONE - as you wrongly/incosiderately call it- "UNCONSTRUCTIVE" EDIT !!

you may have made all these contributions and had recognition etc., or not, but you have a lot to learn from User: Rüdiger Wölk !

Please don't ad this rubbish on my page again because ironically it sounds like vandalism to me. Just unconstructive jibberish

Sumit Desai 22:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

In this edit, you specifically removed a warning not to add an image which violated WP:FU and to be sure you had read and understood this policy. By removing it and adding the image, you indicated that you had read WP:FU and you did understand the policy. And then you blatantly violated it! If you had a question about the policy, you should have asked before you uploaded the image. When you upload an image, you are warned that you must include the source and accurate license, yet you did not. I don't know what additional steps we could have taken to ensure that you didn't do this. If you have any constructive suggestions, please let me know. --Yamla 22:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Mischa Barton Links

I'm sorry. I didn't know they were spam links. I didn't mean to any harm. Can you explain to me what spam links are and why those links were spam links? I have asperger syndrome and I get confused esaily. Neptunekh 23:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Best bet is to read WP:SPAM and WP:EL. Essentially, fansites are not appropriate. And in general, we are much better off with fewer rather than more external links. --Yamla 23:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This wasn't my fault

Are you blaming me? If you are please tell me. It wasn't my fault. I didn't know they were spam links. Neptunekh 23:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not clear to me that I have ever warned you about inappropriate links. Even if I have, it's just a warning that you are violating policy. Only if you keep on doing it does it become a problem. No worries. --Yamla 23:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I won't cause trouble. I'm don't want argue. By the way do mind me asking is wikipedia an American website, europeon or international one? That's one questions I can't figure out. Neptunekh

You can read about the Wikipedia at Wikipedia. Its primary servers are in Florida, U.S.A. --Yamla 00:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Shaericell/Name for mom's triplets

Hello, Yamla. Could you explain to me why you want to delete it? Ravedave had one as well; no one wanted to delete it. I do not see what you want in mine. If you wish to delete I'd like to have a restored history, all I ask. I don't want to argue with you so I will ask you. Could you explain? Thank you, --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 01:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia is to be used for an encyclopedia anyway. It's not the right place for socialising or naming your mother's triplets (congratulations, by the way). --Yamla 02:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I am sorry. Once you delete could I have its history at least? --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 02:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you interested in the current version? A specific older version? All older versions? Let me know, I'm sure we can work something out. No problem. --Yamla 03:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Yamla, received your message. What is wrong with the image, sourced it, proper copyright, but I see nothing wrong. I would like all the previous versions and the current. Thank you. --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 03:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that this is a promotional image or some such and we are only permitted to use free images to depict living people. Free here does not mean "distributed for free" but rather, licensed such that people may freely reuse the images. Basically, what this means is that well over 99% of the images you find on the Internet are unsuitable to use to depict a living person. Only images released to the public domain or licensed under the GFDL or CC licenses are appropriate, and almost never will you find such an image. WP:FU has more. --Yamla 03:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets.

I believe I have found three possible sockpuppets: Subcard123456, Subedar123456, and Subintern123456. I believe they are sockpuppets of Subuser123456, which itself is a sockpuppet of Himalayanashoka. The three sockpuppets have similar names, and similar edits to their User and Talk Pages, which is my proof. Plus, Subintern123456 has "remove British POV" on the User Page, so I definitely think these are sockpuppets. Acalamari 18:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use?

Why is it all of a sudden that there needs to be additional fair-use rational (other than what it states in the license)?

• Image:PeterMacKay.jpg is to illustrate the person in question
• Image:NRHS2.jpg is to illustrate the school in question
• Image:New-xplay.jpg is to illustrate the show in question
• Image:CKEC.png is to illustrate the radio station in question
• Image:Vox.png is to illustrate the service in question
• Image:Vox-screenshot.png is to illustrate the website in question

Cavenba 19:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

There's no sudden need. This has been Wikipedia policy for quite some time. In fact, the license text has long spelled out this requirement explicitly. Additionally, please note that fair-use images may not be used to depict living people, so for example the image for Peter MacKay cannot be used here. --Yamla 19:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Why are you using tags that say "This image is tagged as being allowed under "fair use" with a generic fair use template such as {{fairusein}} or {{fairuse}}, and was uploaded after May 4, 2006." When I have NOT used either template for ANY image Cavenba 19:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Because these are not the only fair-use templates. They are two of the possible fair-use templates. logo and Canada-policitian-photo are two others. Also, just in case you didn't catch it, an item released under crown copyright is by the very definition not in the public domain. --Yamla 20:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hey. Could you offer your opinion at Image:3x07.jpg#Licensing please? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 00:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:71.221.99.183

So he's now unblocked and vandaled 9 times but I can't warn? And I can' turn them in for reblocking since there is no final warning showing. What can I do? Please let me know. Thanks.--Xiahou 00:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Frightened of you? Not me. :)

No, I had to go. Maybe it would help if I created a status bar thingy. Okay. I'll see if I can do what was requested. Good day! --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 03:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Unblock of User:32.97.110.142

Hi,

I noted that your recently refused to unblock User:32.97.110.142, stating that there was vandalism, and that users should get an account. Please note several things: 1) There is no evidence of vandalism that I could find coming from this IP address. 2) When this router is blocked, all users are blocked, not just anons. Even if one is logged in, one still can't edit. 3) This router is part of a pool of routers for IBM North America, serving 110K employees and contractors. Blocks will be ineffective, because there are other routers in the pool. 4) Vandalism and bad conduct are against the IBM Business Conduct Guidelines. Misbehaviour of employees (provided their identities can be found out) can and should be reported. linas 15:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for unblocking!--Eukesh 17:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Image help

Hi Yamla, you participated in a discussion about the fair use of Canadian politician images some time ago. You agreed with my suggestion that non-free images of living politicians from the past when their appearence was different were acceptable. No one disputed this. However, a user, Abu badali, disagrees. I wonder if you could offer your input, one way or another, at Image talk:Bobrae-premier.jpg. Another administrator, Zanimum actually closed the discussion and said the image should be kept, but Abu badali has reverted the closure and indicated on my talk page that "Zanimum is the admin that had committed most image abuses ... avoid his guidance", though I had sought no guidance from him. - Jord 18:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:TNTfan101

It's a direct block on his IP for 6 months: [1]. I don't know the circumstances, and I know when you asked to unblock you thought it was an autoblock. I'll let you decide how to proceed. —bbatsell ¿? 19:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

Why do all my pictures have those stupid deletion tags on them because of fair use? I told you guys why I believe it is under fair use, so what's the problem? I've seen other pictures with that exact fair use reasoning and those pictures haven't been deleted, so why are mine? - RYANonWIKIPEDIA

All fair-use images must have detailed fair-use rationales. Additionally, we are not permitted to use such images to depict living people. There are many images which violate Wikipedia policy. If you find any, please tag them appropriately. Thanks. --Yamla 15:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding my blocking

Hi, I'm writing about the 24-hour block on me yesterday. I just want to apologize for any legal jeopardy I may have caused to Wikipedia. I really thought that the images I uploaded were OK. I realize that lately Wikipedia has been getting more strict when it comes to uploading images, so I'll never upload any copyrighted image ever again. My only goal is to help enrich Wikipedia and make it as informative and useful as possible, with absolutely no bad intentions whatsoever. I guess I'll just stick to text. Thank you for your kind attention. Chris1219 13:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Help - Someone has left a threat on my User page

Hello Yamla, someone has left a threat on my page to tell me not to edit the Ajith article.

I know who it is and they are editing without a name. The user I presume is User:Anwar_saadat. The unknown user's contributions are [2], which are similar of Anwar Saadat. The talk page [3] shows that he has recieved several warnings for vandalism. It also shows that others such as User:Bhadani also think he is actually User:Anwar_saadat.

By the way he left me a comment ' Please stop vandalising Thala article. Illena un thangatchiye soothadippen.'

This means ' Please stop vandalising Thala article. Or I will rape your sister.'

The thing I am not pleased about is the fact that I have never vandalised any articles in my time on Wikipedia!

I believe this behaviour should not be tolerated on Wikipedia.

Thank You for your time, I hope justice is done

Pokkiri 18:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding my unblocking

Thanks for taking the time. I will follow your advice. Best regards, --Abu Badali 19:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should have read Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abu badali before unblocking him. Badali has a bad history of the sort of edits he was blocked for. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 19:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

"The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This is distinct from following a contributor in order to clear repeated errors."[4] It seemed to me that he was blocked for leaving templated warnings about legitimate errors. This may not have been the most civil approach and I do know this has been an issue before, but he was not blocked for that, he was blocked for WP:STALK and WP:POINT. --Yamla 20:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:24.236.237.88

May I, with all due respect, ask you to wkeep this page protected, remove the unblock template but keep the warnings in place? Computerjoe's talk 21:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Unblocking of Dino

Are you aware that you helped unblock a user (Dino) who claimed that he called the author of a particularly contentious article, and then claimed that this author said that he never wrote said article here (when he did write the article - and it's even archived on his website!) - and based on this info a Wiki Foundation employee (who is not an especially active editor) User:Carolyn-WMF edited a contested article and removed critical material based on these false claims by Dino? proof here I look forward to a complete investigation of this matter, and find the utter unresponsiveness of this WMF employee and another Foundation member, Danny Wool, when questioned about this matter by two Admins and two editors more than a little troubling. Fairness & Accuracy For All