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.

Sorry

I was trying to link to the notes on Patterson's page. Thanks for the tip.

IdLoveOne 21:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)

Vandalism

You said that, "Deleting well-sourced information is vandalism". No matter how well-sourced, if the information is unrelated to the article and counts as propaganda (not accepted globally) then that is cleaning up the article not vandalism. If I include literature sourced from Taliban in the 9/11 article and you delete it, that won't be vandalism. Indian Air Force(IAF)

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)[reply]

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)

Image..

Is this picture appropriate? http://i16.tinypic.com/405hz15.jpg. If it's not. How can you tell? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.154.16.203 (talk) 20:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Unless you have specific reason to believe an image is appropriate, it is not. This looks to be a professional photograph and as such, would certainly be copyrighted and probably not freely-licensed. As such, it may not be used to depict a living person. So in summary, unless you have reason to believe an image is okay to use, please do not. --Yamla 20:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok what about this one? http://i12.tinypic.com/433k5g0.jpg. He's performing at a club, and he's a rapper. I think this picture will look good on his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.101.42 (talk • contribs)

What evidence to you have that this image is freely-licensed? Without any evidence that this image is freely-licensed, we cannot use it. Over 99% of the images you find are not freely-licensed. --Yamla 04:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know what freely-licensed is..what is that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.220.101.42 (talk) 05:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Public-domain image or one licensed under the GFDL or some versions of the CC. --Yamla 16:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

debra lafarve guy

hey there, i was just seeing if you could really edit pages anywhere... its my first time, i'm going to make an account and all, but don't ban me. My roomates all laughed like a bastard, but I promise not to be a vandal. WP rules. Don't Ban. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.89.143 (talk • contribs)

Yeap, you can. Happy editing! --Yamla 21:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement

I've retired from Wikipedia. Thanks for being such a kind editor. Regards,--Tennislover 22:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear that. I hope one day you reconsider. If not, though, I wish you all the best. --Yamla 22:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert to my talk page. That was the first time any of my personal pages has been vandalized - I don't know if I should feel disappointed or honored to have finally become worthy of vandalism... Anyways, thanks! --TheOther Bob 00:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Penelope Cruz

Excuse me, first of all, may I ask why you edited my talk page with not one, but two violations, including a warning? I made one edit, and I did not exactly consider it a violation as it is a screenshot of a film, and is more than likely owned by the production company of that film and was uploaded with the appropriate license. However, please explain why you slapped me with a secondary violation warning of "damaging the work of others". I made one edit, not two, perhaps you should become familiar with WP:UTM. I am whatsoever NOT a blatant vandal. Nikki88 06:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image is a blatant violation of WP:FU. The article itself specifically warns you to check out WP:FUC as only freely-licensed images may be used to depict living people. You chose to ignore this policy and this specific warning on the very line you edited and put Wikipedia directly at risk for a copyright-infringement lawsuit. Please do not do this again. Thanks. --Yamla 15:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan

Please explain how adding information about Lindsay Lohan's feud with Paris Hilton is "vandalism." Is the wikipedia only supposed to print "nice" things about celebrities - that is ridiculous, and against the spirit of wikipedia in my opinion.--68.40.181.28 13:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drunken rants are not notable in an encyclopedia. --Yamla 15:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of 138.38.32.84

Thanks for your judicious blocking of 138.38.32.84, while I understand that we've been the source of some persistent vandalism, this IP is a proxy address for the University of Bath UK (which is noted on the talk page (although with the wrong template (which i've updated))), which currently has over 20,000 users. While I understand we have had multiple blocks (4 x 24 hour blocks in the last year) I am not sure if this necessarily counts as persistent vandalism given the size of the university. Would you consider dropping (or reducing the duration) of the current 1 month block on these grounds? Zootalures 15:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC) (Sysadmin, University of Bath)[reply]

No, I will not consider this. However, I will soften the block so people can edit from a signed-in account that they have created elsewhere, as is common practise with school blocks. This will allow anyone with an account to continue editing the Wikipedia. Note that there is a good chance the block was already "soft" and so would not have prevented signed-in users. --Yamla 15:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Block of User:Danny Invincible

This block seems like an overly strict interpretation of WP:USERNAME to me. Danny Invincibile is not particularly well known, his unusual name is probably the only reason a lot of people have heard of him. Would a simple note atop the userpage such as the one on User:John Reid not suffice? Oldelpaso 18:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This suits me. Note that I am not the blocking admin, however. --Yamla 19:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image source

Yamla, I've noted that Image:C plus plus book.jpg, an image you uploaded (the first one actually), does not provide its source. Can you please add it under the image summary? I've tagged it with speedy deletion for now, I hope you can add it quickly. Thank you. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the image does identify the source and copyright holder. It is a picture of the C++ Programming Language by Stroustrup. I do not specifically list the publisher, mind you. Note that although I routinely patrol images for source and license, I commonly accept book covers and album images provided only this much information is listed. For album covers, I'm happy if the image itself shows the name of the album. As such, I may be missing what specific information you are looking for. If you could let me know what else you need other than the author of the book and the book title (which were there from the beginning), I'd appreciate it. Note also that this image was uploaded before detailed fair-use rationales needed to be given. --Yamla 20:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstand what I meant by "missing source", it means that the image does not provide where the image itself came from, rather than its content. Did you scan it? Or did you copy it from some random website? I would like to see more information. Please reply on my talk page. Michaelas10 (Talk) 20:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The particular source is not relevant. I can not recall where I grabbed this image from but regardless, this would not change who owns the copyright. Source information must be provided so that the copyright status can be verified by others. Sufficient information is presented so that the copyright status of this particular image can be verified. Regardless of whether I took this photograph (I did not) or someone else scanned the book cover, the copyright status would not be altered. Copyright would remain with the publisher or author. --Yamla 20:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. I've proposed a change in the guidelines on Wikipedia talk:Uploading images to avoid further misunderstandings. Please comment about it there. Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u (Checkuser)

Just so you know, the checkuser came back Likely. G e o. 21:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Pahuskahey

This unblock review was rather unhelpful. Assuming that this guy is an innocent newbie, what do you expect him to do with that (lack of) information? -- Netsnipe ► 05:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. If it helps, I think I found the autoblock that was stopping him. --Yamla 05:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Chad Bryant sockpuppet account

[1] TruthCrusader 14:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copy vio image

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

ciara discovery

If u knew anything u would know they gave her, her 3x plaque on 106 & park U are so damn mean i ask everybody to take it easy on me im a newbie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorge527 (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:V. Also, WP:CITE and WP:RS. Thanks. --Yamla 17:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My own two eyes saw it they gave it two her as a birthday present i dont even care bye dumb ass

what are you talking about?

how dare you accuse me of vandalism! I have done no such thing so dont accuse me of such acts sfry.jpg was an image i uploaded which is all i did. So dont start threatning me or ill report you for vandalism of my user page as well as threatning tones! Dont think you're the owner of this site just because you've heard from a few famous peopleTad102

Your deliberate removal of the no-source and replaceable tags from Image:Sfry.jpg is completely unacceptable and puts Wikipedia at direct risk for a copyright-infringement lawsuit. Please refrain from further such acts. --Yamla 19:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This is for being such a great editor. Keep up the good work with your editing! Tennislover 18:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:70.48.232.59

Just a note, this was an autoblock placed as a result of a checkuser - see [2]. It was set for "anon. only, account creation blocked" for one week starting yesterday (UTC), and should not be lifted without a discussion with Essjay.

I still don't know what happened to the block message (the "block message" field should have the contents of {{checkuserblock}}, as that was the block summary), but anyways, just a FYI :) Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 23:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lleyton Hewitt

Hi, would you mind reviewing an article that I deleted a small portion of text on? This article before didn't have a NPOV, so I made some deletions of text and added a controversey section. Could you see if I made the right adjustments and could possibly get the tag at the top removed of Lleyton Hewitt? Thanks.--Tennislover 01:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]