User talk:Bridge Boy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello, Bridge Boy! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Dianna (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Hi, Bridge Boy. Here is an overdue "Welcome" message for you. It provides links to many useful policies and guidelines and noticeboards. Please feel free to put a message on my talk page if you need anything. -- Dianna (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Template talk:Infobox Motorcycle club's talk page. benzband (talk) 09:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Yup yup, happy easter! happy i could help with the infobox, looking good now! :) benzband (talk) 19:33, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Social effects of rock music, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mods, Punk and Rockers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed (diff :-) benzband (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Infobox[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Benzband's talk page.

Yes, you have some more messages :-) benzband (talk) 08:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Free Souls Motorcycle Club (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Washington
Reading Motorcycle Club (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Drag strip

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed (here and here) benzband (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion[edit]

See the talk page for this article that you recently edited. Cheers! Garth of the Forest (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

There is no need to be sorry or to apologize for making changes that you think improve an article. Thank you for removing the dead links; however, at the same time you also made some edits to the article that changed the wording, meaning, and introduced inaccuracies.

While removing dead links (the Canadian HAMC sites are no longer active, for example) or correcting punctuation or spelling errors or other similar minor edits - do not require explanation - removing large chunks of text or substantially changing the wording of an article does, in my opinion, warrant a bit more input (and perhaps a discussion on the talk page prior to making the changes).

I am going to assume good faith. In future, it would be much appreciated if you would explain the reason you feel the article will be improved by changing the wording of a section, or for removing large chunks of text or moving it around from one paragraph to another for (what seems to me to be) no apparent good reason.

I have reverted some of your changes, but do appreciate the removal of the dead links (this is the problem with many internet sources rather than published books), and invite your feedback and discussion prior to making any major future changes to the wording.

The reason I have reverted some of your changes is because they have changed the meaning of the text from a context that was historically accurate to one that is misleading - or at best, in my opinion, is poorly structured and confusing to the reader. Garth of the Forest (talk) 20:19, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Good faith, indeed. Farewell, Bridge Boy. Garth of the Forest (talk) 20:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Vagos Motorcycle Club[edit]

I have reverted your edits here. Changes to established infoboxes require discussion before changes are made. You may start a discussion about the things you feel that need to be changed on the article's page and reach a consensus for the changes. Mlpearc (powwow) 07:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:04, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit summaries are neat. They keep other editors happy. Please start using them. — Brianhe (talk) 21:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
When do I start getting paid for this? --Bridge Boy (talk) 21:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


The checks int he mail barnstar 200px.png The Check's in the Mail Barnstar
In partial compensation for your invaluable contributions, please accept this barnstar while your check is, one would hope, one would like to think, in the best of all possible worlds, in the mail. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Ha! Someone's been there and thought that before then? Thanks. --Bridge Boy (talk) 07:13, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Made just for this occasion. You're the first recipient. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kawasaki H2 750cc Orange.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Kawasaki H2 750cc Orange.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 03:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:MOVE before you try to move a page again[edit]

Your cut-and-past movement of Straight-two engine has been reverted. To change the title of an article, please follow the instructions given in WP:MOVE. This will ensure that the edit history of the article is preserved, as required by the terms of the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL, under which Wikipedia operates.

Please also discuss possibly controversial (and complicated) moves on article talk pages before moving the articles.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 18:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

June 2012[edit]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Parallel-twin engine. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Parallel twin. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at Parallel-twin engine, you may be blocked from editing. Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

By the way[edit]

My name is Dennis, not Daniel. It's embarrassing for all concerned so please try to get that right at least. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Johnny Stuart[edit]

I suggest you move the unnotable Johnny Stuart to another page while the notable one uses the current Johnny Stuart page, via a page move request for both pages. Sorry for my mistake, it's 1:30 AM here at my house. --J (t) 06:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Johnny Stuart (author), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian Orthodoxy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This edit is not in the spirit of Wikipedia editing. It would be in your best interest to retract some of the things you say and apologise. Biker Biker (talk) 13:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Violation of WP:OWN, WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. The thread is Bridge Boy.The discussion is about the topic Straight-two engine. Thank you. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

In response to your feedback[edit]

Hi, according to your talk page, you seem to be attacking uninformed editors. Please don't bite or attack uninformed editors, but welcome them and tell them what you believe is wrong of there work. Thanks and have a good day! (:

Webclient101 (talk) 01:37, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

 

July 2012[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Vivian Bales. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Annie Seel portrait Alexoch Martin.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Annie Seel portrait Alexoch Martin.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Biker Biker (talk) 15:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Annie Seel.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Annie Seel.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Biker Biker (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Triton wearing Dunlop TT100 tyres.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Triton wearing Dunlop TT100 tyres.jpg, which you've sourced to Flickr = CC BY-NC 2.0. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:28, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Images on Japanese WIki[edit]

As you said, you can't link to ja-wiki, you have to move the ja images to commons, where both wikis can use them, and delete the en and ja versions - it's not that easy though, but I've done the 3 Meguro images.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Inline-twin engine[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Inline-twin engine. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Straight-two engine. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Straight-two engine - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Copy of Inline-twin engine talk page[edit]

It seems all record of the page and the proposal has been erased from the Wikipedia.

Nomination of Inline-twin engine for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Inline-twin engine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inline-twin engine until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:17, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Block[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive editing, continuing the problems that were discussed at ANI.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dennis Brown - © 22:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bridge Boy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Could you, Dennis, or someone tell me what specifically it was I am blocked for now? The ANI discussion closed without any such conclusion. Bridge Boy (talk) 12:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Reading the lengthy ANI discussion makes it clear that not only is the block appropriate, it is generous. --jpgordon::==( o ) 14:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

Excuse me, but are you passing on a message from Dennis that the reason I was blocked was for the ANI? It would probably be better for Dennis to say himself as I don't know how to appeal if I do not know what it was he specifically blocked me for.

Please note, I did not and I am not intending to request to be unblock with these posts, I am only used the form I am told to use to ask Dennis to explain specifically why he blocked me now, as I was not during the ANI. He followed by edits after the ANI and I am wondering if it was one of them.

The Policy Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks#Understand your block states that a reason should have been given.

TIA. --Bridge Boy (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

  • WP:DE violation is the reason, as I said in the block notice, and detailed at the ANI. There are three, yes three ANI discussion on the same page right now that cover this. I will leave the unblock at the discression of the reviewing admin and not taint the discussion by commenting further. Dennis Brown - © 19:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not asking for an unblock it just was not clear what I was specifically being blocked for, and I noticed you were following my edits since and wondered if it was one of them. "Disruptive" is very vague.
I'll go and read ANI now I have the time and see what you wrote there. --Bridge Boy (talk) 19:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Had you been reading my comments all along at the ANI, you wouldn't be blocked now. This assumes you would have paid attention, I suppose. As others have already noticed, I'm not quick to block and gave you every opportunity to "get it" that I could. I've been exceedingly generous here, but if you can't figure out what the problem is, I fear that the next admin will not be as patient or restrained with the block button, and it will be difficult for me to blame them. Again, there are three ANI reports on you, not just one. Dennis Brown - © 02:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please point out what the "three ANI reports are? I can see only the one [1] including subsections I set up myself. --Bridge Boy (talk) 14:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bridge Boy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

This is very bizarre. Dennis Brown states that the reason I was blocked is on ANI and on ANI, he states as the reason [2] :"User blocked 48 hours - Looking at what he has been doing since the ANI started, I see he's moved more articles this poorly, completely ignoring the issues raised. IE: Presenting problem -> Chief complaint and then said "It is commonly used but, due to my lack of expertise in this area, I am happy to defer to others wisdom." No discussion, no consensus and isn't wise enough to create a redirect pointing to the existing article, and instead moves a long standing article without any regard to consensus." * This is completely false and opposite to the truth. * It was DENNIS himself who moved the topic [3][4], and deleted my contribution. I DID create a redirect at "Presenting problem" and then flagged it up on the talk page, [5] Talk:Identified patient page, [6] WikiProject Psychology [7] and WikiProject Medicine. My contribution log proves this, "14:36, 4 July 2012 (diff \ hist) . . (+497)‎ . . N Talk:Presenting problem ‎ (←Created page with '(WPMED\class=Stub\importance=Low) (WikiProject Psychology\class=\importance=) I've redirected this to Chief complaint, as it included the British term ...') (top)" And yet, mysteriously, my creation of the redirection page at the same time has been Revision Deleted. [8]. This is what actually happened. a) I searched for "presenting problem" as it is a common term and discovered it had no page on the Wikipedia b) I searched for alternatives or pages that included it. c) I created a redirect to the most likely one d) I politely flagged it up on all the related talk pages and related project talk pages. e) Dennis came along and moved the Redirect page over Chief complaint and then accused me of doing so. There is nothing disruptive or improper in what I did. I did it the correct way and DID NOT move any page as accused. From Dennis's logs: "22:53, 5 July 2012 (diff \ hist) . . (+32)‎ . . N Chief complaint ‎ (Dennis Brown moved page Chief complaint to Presenting problem over redirect: Moved improperly) (top) 22:53, 5 July 2012 (diff \ hist) . . (0)‎ . . m Presenting problem ‎ (Dennis Brown moved page Chief complaint to Presenting problem over redirect: Moved improperly) (top)" Therefore I do ask for an unblock at the reason given by the blocking admin was completely false and untrue. Technically, I don't think I even have the privileges to move pages over another. --Bridge Boy (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2012 (UTC) (BTW, strictly speaking I think 'presenting problem' is not the same as 'chief complaint' nor 'identified patient' and I am surprised it does not have a topic of its own. Normally, and in references, you read of "an Identified Patient with a Presenting Problem" underlining that they are separate and hence my comment to raise the issue and engage others in discussion on the project page [9]).

Decline reason:

I've reviewed the ANI thread, and I agree that this block is justified. I also agree with jpgordon's comment above that you're fortunate to have only been blocked for 48 hours. I'd suggest that you take the time to read WP:NOTTHEM and take a collaborative approach to editing when the block expires, otherwise you're likely to end up being blocked for an indefinite period. Nick-D (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

A show of even handedness would be greatly appreciated Nick. Can you, as an administrator, confirm whether this accusing of moving a page (Presenting problem) was true or not?

I am happy to accept a block and censure for what I have done, but it would not seem fair to have a false accusation on my record.

Thank you. --Bridge Boy (talk) 14:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know, your new ANI report will get ugly if you're at all wrong: you're making serious accusations, and if those accusations turn out to be incorrect, this will lead to rather long term problems for you. Stop fighting a fight that does not exist - we get it; you don't like someone. Drop the stick and move on (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern but I am utterly confident. Given the situation at the time I was VERY careful to the right thing which is why I take so seriously being accused of doing the opposite by an admin falsely. --Bridge Boy (talk) 10:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
No, if you think you did not deserve the block, then you clearly were not reading the same ANI reports as the rest of us. Dude, you were blocked by a neutral admin. More neutral admins declined your unblock. You're dead wrong on this, and dead wrong with the way you've decided to move forward. Anyone with a brain who reads that ANI will have the exact same conclusion here ... this is misguided, and to say it again: you are wrong. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I did not question whether I deserved the block or not. That is history now.
I am questioning whether it is acceptable for an admin to accuse someone of doing the opposite to what the individual actually did, especially when it was the admin themselves who did it.
In the real world, that would be called "Offering false evidence" is generally through of as reprehensible.
Of course, police department and so on the world over do try it on and that is why laws, codes or policies have to apply equally to all, regardless of their rank or position, and we have to defend such principles. --Bridge Boy (talk) 11:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Note to you then: this is not the real world, it's a private website. And having looked at the links you provided, there's no false evidence provided at all. However, like in the real world, the accusation of such is actually a worse action. What are you trying to gain in ANI? An unblock ... nope, already unblocked. The block removed? Nope, it was valid. De-sysop of Dennis Brown? Nope, can't be done at ANI. Just want to bitch and whine? Wrong place. So, I ask again: what was the purpose of your ANI posting - what were you trying to gain? Did you mean to file an WP:RFC/A? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I was editing as you replied and did not know about WP:RFC/A. The bureaucracy of the Wikipedia is impenetrable to newcomers and I will have to have a read up about it. It really needs to help newcomers better as, whether they be right or wrong, they are obviously at a great disadvantage to older members who can throw around policy acronyms and play the system to their advantage. --Bridge Boy (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Buraucracy or not, the fact of the matter is that you are disruptive - even now on the discussion related to engines you're being extremely disruptive. Those discussions are not continue to argue ad infinitum - make your point based on policy and back away. Don't restate the same thing over and over, or badger other !votes. Dennis Brown's block was NOT related to those moves: it never was - it was related to disruptive editing as a whole, as evidenced in ANI - there was no question about it. The admin did nothing wrong as an admin. All you're doing now is bringing disrepute to yourself by continuing to highlight your overall level of cluelessness and disruption. Again, this is not going to go well for you - oh, and by the way, neither would an RFC/A. If you don't back down, get the chip off your shoulder, and start back with the 5 pillars of Wikipedia and learn both how to edit AND how to get along with others, you WILL be indefinitely blocked very soon. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:49, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

File upload issues[edit]

While reviewing this whole situation above, I took a look through some of your other deleted contribs ... please tell me that you're not taking Photos off of Flickr and uploading them? Flickr is NOT a free/published site, and Flickr photos should not be uploaded to Wikipedia ... (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

If they are released under a compatible licence though they can be uploaded - but Wikimedia Commons is greatly preferred. Take a look at the upload Wizard there, but consider using a tool like Bryan's - http://toolserver.org/~bryan/flickr/upload It has the advantage that it will only upload images that have the correct licence. --Biker Biker (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Good link to know, BB. Thank you.
Yes, some Flickr photos are released with CC licenses and I used them, BW.
Given the size of the resource and community, it would be a good thing if someone from Wikipedia approached Flickr officially to encourage them to them to encourage their users to upload images with Wikipedia friendly licenses, e.g. making it the first choice and even marking them "Wikipedia friendly".
There is no reason why 99% of what is on Flickr should not have a free license because no one is going to pay for them. I have no idea who to speak to. --Bridge Boy (talk) 15:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Speak to the photographer. The reason 99% of the photos are under full copyright is that most Flickr users default to all rights reserved, and never give it a moment's thought. Many, many times, I have added the photographer to my Flickr contacts, then sent them a polite note asking them to please change their license to CC-by-SA or CC-by for use on Wikipedia. About 1/3 to 1/2 of the time, they say yes. Often they're flattered. All you have to do is ask about four different photographers and usually at least one of them will give you the photo you need. Be sure you carefully check the new license after they change it. Often they change it to No-$, which is incompatible with Wikipedia. Because Jimmy Wales wants it that way, unfortunately. Different kettle of fish. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Changing Article Name Without Discussion, Again! (Yamaha Rz350)[edit]

Bridge Boy,

Unless the discussion is on another page somewhere, you appear to have changed the name of the Yamaha Rz350 article without any attempt at discussion or achieving consensus. Even if you are quite certain your name change is correct, you really should bring the matter up on the article's talk page before changing the name of an established article. Thanks, Ebikeguy (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Seems like a reasonable rename to me. Is there any controversy here, or any evidence that a naming other than ALLCAPS has been used for these model names? Andy Dingley (talk) 19:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Andy.
Ebikeguy, Yamaha RZ350 is an entirely unreferenced topic, would you help us to enhance it? --Bridge Boy (talk) 20:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
One would think that the Wikipedia readers of the world could have somehow survived one more week with Yamaha Rz350 having capitalization hat was just slightly different than Yamaha uses for the sake of a pro forma note on the talk page requesting consensus. It's compelling proof that Bridge Boy isn't capable of understanding what other editors are trying to tell him about his behavior. He will never get it because some kind of mental filter prevents any form of criticism or correction from getting through to him.

The only other logical explanation is that this is all one big joke Bridge Boy is pulling to troll Wikipedia and see how much he can get away with before being blocked. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Dennis, your language, "He will never get it because some kind of mental filter prevents any form of criticism or correction from getting through to him" seems to constitute a personal attack. I suggest you strike through that language and offer an apology. You know the consequences such behavior. Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Ebikeguy. I think most people will see Dennis's comment for what it is.
On the move note of the topic I referenced two examples of original marketing documents for this vehicle which both substantiate the renaming.
You might also like to check the article itself, the category of Yamaha motorcycles for the company's common usage [10], list [11] or template [12], and check any good references, e.g. American Motorcyclist - May 1984 - Page 35, American Motorcyclist - Jun 1989 - Page 26, American Motorcyclist - Feb 1985 - Page 72 etc [13]. The vehicle was known as RZ350, named after the company's racing vehicle Yamaha TZ350. The move was entirely uncontroversial.
If there is a question about the naming convention of Yamaha's it is whether there should be a space between the consonants and numericals or not, e.g. XS750 or XS 750 as at present there is some inconsistency in the titling. --Bridge Boy (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Ebikeguy, absolutely not. This silliness is out of hand and somebody has to stand up and make it stop. It is not a personal attack to state that no amount of persuasion works with Bridge Boy. Something like six different Admins at ANI said exactly the same thing: WP:COMPETENCE is the problem. For whatever reason, he lacks the capability to edit Wikipedia because he cannot work collaboratively. He cannot comprehend what others tell him. That is a fact. It doesn't matter why he can't work with other people. It doesn't matter why he can't hear correction. It matters a great deal that we be willing to say it and take appropriate action. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and I forgot to say, RZ was written on the side of the vehicle; [14], [15], [16]. All capitals. So what is Dennis saying? --Bridge Boy (talk) 21:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I wiki linked Pro forma. Did you click on it and read? Do you have any inkling why a pro forma move discussion might be called for under the current circumstances? Any at all? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
@Dennis - Is there any suggestion that this was an improper move? Is there any suggestion that if another editor had made it, it would have been anything other than a trivial cosmetic fix? (If I'd done it, I wouldn't even have bothered to leave a redirect behind.) It is only an issue here because it's Bridge Boy that did it, even though it's an entirely proper change. That's awfully close to hounding. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I must take issue with your accusation that I somehow engaged in hounding by politely bringing this matter up on Bridge Boy's talk page. I am not an expert on the subject of motorcycle names, but I did see Bridge Boy engage in behavior that got him blocked before (changing article names without discussing the change first). I did not threaten him. I did not attack him. I merely suggested that he discuss changes like this before he implemented them. My post was a long, long way from hounding. Ebikeguy (talk) 22:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
It wasn't you I was thinking of. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


He was talking to Dennis, EB. Do you see the @address at beginning of the line?
EB, Dennis Bratland is just on my case and wants me off the Wikipedia. Even if what I did was 100% correct - as this was - he would still try and use or distort it in some was. As he probably will do with what I have just written to you now. Expect to read it copy and pasted onto ANI with all the rest of his stuff.
I appreciate you meant well but I think that, unwittingly,1980 two-strokes not being your métier, you just gave him more material to try and use against me. --Bridge Boy (talk) 22:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Some advice[edit]

Bridge Boy, I'm going to try and save you a crapload of grief. First, some of your moves HAVE been controversial, so here's an idea: don't move anything for a period of 3 months. Second, your edits often don't have consensus, so here's an idea: discuss major changes on the article talkpage - ALWAYS (because that's how we do things around here). Third, understand this policy ... for example, sometimes two things are close enough that they don't need separate articles, but maybe only a redirect and information in the source article to explain the minor differences. Finally and most importantly: learn to get along nicely with others at all times. If you cannot contribute without a) getting angry/sad/defensive, or b) blaming others for your own errors, or c) editing according to consensus, or d) editing as part of community and its policies, then Wikipedia may not be for you (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I understand, BW but, as another editor also pointed out, it was not "content forking" (as in "the creation of multiple separate articles all treating the same subject"). The well referenced topics were about quite two different subjects, or engine groups, from an engineering point of view. They may be "close enough" to a non-specialist eye but to someone involved with them professionally they are quite different, and there are good references to substantiate that.
A horse and a pony look exactly the same to me, the difference between all their sub-pages even moreso. They are even identical species, so why separate topics? (A serious question). If we can have additional pages for all the equine variations, even groups of different breeds, why not engines?
The base problem, as we have discovered, was the original poorly written and unreferenced topic standard by a non-native English speaker with an uncommon terminology.
Can I ask you one other honest question without 16 other unknown individuals I am not addressing jumping on top of me (we call that "rat-packing" where I come from, and it is not well respected) or picking over it for the merest infraction to exaggerate?
Is it really such a big deal to use honest down to earth profanity around here? From my point of view, far more devious and malicious invective can easily be injected into the cleverest of personal attacks. I am not offended by someone swearing at me whereas I would be by someone ratting on me. --Bridge Boy (talk) 23:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
It's a shame you've been blocked (although you will be able to get it overturned I would think if you say the right words, email me for advice if you want) but to answer your question - it is not in the abstract offensive and I personally couldn't care less if someone called me a cunt or whatever. However, it may be indicative of an attitude that is incompatible with editing here. If someone is predisposed to finding that you are a problematic user then their seeing profanity is going to reinforce that impression of you. I also reckon that like me you're a Brit, in general there is a cultural difference between us and Americans about this, they are far more sensitive for right or wrong about such things. Egg Centric 16:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Inline-twin engine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Square engine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

ANI - FYI[edit]

Thanks. Dennis did not inform me even though one is supposed to. It seems that the case is to be decided in an entirely one sided manner, and that I am to being disallowed from defending myself.
He got the kneejerk reaction he hoped for and must be gloating now. --Bridge Boy (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding disruptive editing, continued personal attacks, failure to assume good faith. The thread is Bridge Boy will not drop the stick. Thank you. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:51, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for Wikipedia:Disruptive editing, WP:BATTLE mentality and personal attacks. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bridge Boy (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

BWilkins has provided precisely the kneejerk reaction Dennis Bratland was hoping for, and gaming towards for sometime.

Yes, issues need to be discussed but probably at Wikipedia:Mediation and between Dennis and I, as they are not as one sided as they have been negatively presented. There was a lot of truth to what I said and the quality of content really has to come above personality related issues.

To be honest, you don't want to encourage an environment where individuals are encouraged and rewarded to WP:GAME in this manner.

It is a shame that the previous ANI was closed prematurely and I was not able to put into context the fixation Dennis Bratland has had with me. Bridge Boy (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

WP:NOTTHEM. We don't want to encourage an environment of WP:BATTLEFIELDs, personal attacks, and disruptive editing either, but that seems to be where you prefer to reside. --jpgordon::==( o ) 16:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

No, I followed your previous ANI, and your disappointing behaviours both before and since then. You have no concept of the community nature of this project, and this is no knee-jerk reaction (although one of those words probably could fall into place quite readily). Your type of behaviour cannot be either tolerated nor encouraged/rewarded on this project. You'll also want to review WP:GAB before some passing admin sees the request above (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I was still editing when you replied.
BWilkins, you have no idea about what the ANI was really because I never put my side of the story. Why Dennis did what he did now was because I did underline where it all started and how silly it was.
Dennis knew he could depend on a kneejerk reaction from someone and he knows that he can rely on some completely involved admin coming along next and saying, "WP:NOTTHEM" - because that is the way the game works. It has all be a WP:GAME. We all saw how it was acceptable for some other admin to construct a false blocking statement above, where it remains to prejudice others, and for it not to be removed.
Given the Wikipedia's influence across the internet, our primary responsibility to accuracy and the quality of content. The petty dispute over the incorrect titling of Straight-two engine has only and always been an artificial distraction Dennis has concocted to achieve this aim. If you choose to pander to such scheming then you are the one damaging the Wikipedia. --Bridge Boy (talk) 16:30, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
We don't need your side of the story: I also looked through the contributions of your "nemesis" (as has almost every other admin at ANI) - all the required proof was in those two sets of contributions. The fact that you want to tell things about him based on your personally-twisted interpretation is further proof of the battlefield mentality you hold. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:37, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
It is sad and a bit ironic that, after having been indef'd for disruptive editing and not dropping the stick, you respond with a emotional plea for other editors to understand that it's really everyone else's fault, that you haven't done anything wrong, that the blocking admin's don't understand, and that you really should have been given the chance to pick the stick back up and keep flailing away at the dead horse. Bridge Boy, you clearly have a good understanding of motorcycles. You are intelligent and eloquent. You could contribute mightily to Wikipedia. I sincerely hope that some day you will decide to put your ego on the shelf and come back to edit productively. Until that day, good luck to you. I hope you find another outlet to share your knowledge productively. Sincerely, Ebikeguy (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
BB, please understand that it isn't just Dennis who thinks badly of you, so it is wrong to say that just one user has a vendetta against you. --Biker Biker (talk) 17:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
@ Bridge Boy:
Two good things have resulted from what you have done at and around Straight-two engine: Firstly, you have initiated a discussion about changing the name of the article, a discussion which may very well result in an actual change of the article name. Secondly, you have created content that has been useful in expanding the article.
Both of them, however, were done in a truly shameful manner. The cut and paste move may have been an honest mistake, as was my attempt to put everything right again by revert and redirecting; I didn't realize that those actions alone could not put the histories right again. You then started to do the cut and paste move *again* after having been informed that it should not be done, and along with that you came into the discussion ranting and raving. The new content that now graces the article started out as part of a content fork you created as a back-door plan to recreate the article the way you wanted it to be.
This makes me wonder just how far the article might have gone if the energy you put into, and caused others to put into, your gigantic *war*, had been put directly into building the article.
I hope one day to see you back as a contributor here, willing to work with the community to build the encyclopedia. However, your combative attitude is not welcome here and, unless and until you let it go, neither are you.
Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Triumph Owners Motor Cycle Club logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Triumph Owners Motor Cycle Club logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cafe Racer show logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Cafe Racer show logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:26, 4 October 2012 (UTC)