User talk:Crzrussian/Archive 24

Coats of arms

Hi Crzrussian

I just noticed your edit to coat of arms. I quite understand your motivation for removing the British insignia and the Polish one didn't look very appropriate, but what is the problem with the Australian image? The image is copyrighted, yes, but by vector-images.com which allows Wikipedia to use raster images of flags / coats of arms drawn by this company. These images are used in hundreds of articles, so if you think there is a general problem with images from this company, could I possibly persuade you to contact them in case we need a broader permission? I just figured that your Russian is better than mine :) The relevant talk page about these images seems to be here: Commons:Template_talk:Vector-Images.com, where I noticed that modification is discussed. Cheers. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 21:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no problems with only using the image you chose, I was just afraid if any problems had turned up with the images from vector-images.com. I just figured that we have a lot of them, and it would be a shame to lose them. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 05:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Promophoto massacre

How in the name of all that's holy did you orphan a dozen images of U.S. State Attorneys General of my uploading without as much as a hello on my talk page!? How exactly can a designated promotional image not be fairuse in the article about its subject? How the hell else can one illustrate a biography if not with a portrait? Is fairuse impossible in those articles? I eagerly await the your justification of your actions. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

See the edit summaries, and WP:FU, the page they refer to. ed g2s • talk 01:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Obviously, I did. You've cited me an assertion from a guideline, an assertion with which I vehemently disagree. What about my other questions? - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

If the person in question is living, then Fair Use is unnecessary. Send a polite email requesting a freely licensed image, or we can wait until a free picture is taken. ed g2s • talk 01:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Dude: they don't promote dead people. There are no {{promophoto}}s of dead people. Do you once again mean to tell me that {{promophoto}} fair use is impossible on a living person's bio? I am going to revert the whole set. If the truth is as you say, each image has no possible fairuse. Take one or more of these images to WP:IFD and solicit a consensus of your fellow editors. BTW, I am incensed at the way you've gone about obliterating large amounts of my work without as much as a courtesy notice! - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

One can release a promotional photo, and have the person later pass away. I have no need to take these images to IfD as they clearly fall foul of our (recently updated - with the consultation of Jimbo) guidelines. I urge you strongly not to revert any of my edits, as to do so would be in clear conflict with our Fair Use policy. Also do not take this personally, I was merely going through the category and your uploads were grouped together. ed g2s • talk 01:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I realize that you have no need to take them to IFD. However, I cannot accept your unilateral actions on the subject, guideline or not. I am entitled to request and receive full process. Note, that I am not dismissing the possibility that you are correct - but I am positive the case is not clearcut, and richly deserves that a consensus of users be formed before action is taken. Problem is, you've already tagged them for {{orfud}} and they need to be de-tagged and de-orphaned in order that they should not be deleted during the pendency of the IFD. In the interest of propriety etc. etc. may I ask you to roll your article and image edits back yourself? It'll take you a less than a minute with admin rollback. You may then pursue the deletion of the images through regular channels. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid it is clear cut. Such photos are clearly not allowed under out Fair Use policy as recent clarified in our guidelines by AlisonW ("Further to discussion on IRC channels between Jimbo Wales and verious [sic] admins and editors" Wikipedia talk:Fair use). An IFD consensus would not bypass our Fair Use policy. ed g2s • talk 01:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

IFD consensus will not bypass our fairuse policy!! It will determine what that policy requires!! If an IFD consensus decides our fairuse policy permits such use, then that will be the right thing to do!! You are driving me up - the - wall!! - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

So you are claiming that the guideline does not apply here? Have I misread "An image of a living person that merely shows what they look like ... would almost certainly not be acceptable as fair use"? What is so special about this case that an exception should be made? ed g2s • talk 01:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

This may also be of help:

Should the currently used unfree images of cars, celebrities and buildings be deleted? Should only the ones uploaded after this clarification (September 9) be promplty deleted? --Abu Badali 10:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Generally speaking, yes, and those that can more easily be replaced (current cars, buildings) sooner than later, but all will need to be eventually in the interest of having an open and free Wikipedia. Whilst this 'clarification' has only recently been added it is only making more explicit a requirement that has always been there and the date of upload of an image makes no difference to our Fair Use policy. --AlisonW 12:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If you believe an article I wrote fails WP:V and wish to have it deleted, you can propose it for deletion, but if I object (reasonably or not!), you have to build consensus for your action, just like any other editor. You've read the guideline correctly. I dispute the validity of that clause! I dispute the application of that clause to the images I uploaded, even if the clause itself is valid. I am not on IRC, IRC is not Wikipedia, I have no idea what took place there, and shouldn't have to. Your last posting on my talkpage was unresponsive. I believe you have been unilateral and obstreperous. On a personal aside, you have also seriously pissed me off. I am not going to revert you yet, and will now take this whole discussion to WP:ANI. - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry you have taken this so personally. If your dispute of my actions comes down to a dispute with the clause I quoted then I suggest that you take up your problem at Wikipedia talk:Fair use as it is far beyond the scope of an IFD, although seeing as the clarification came from Jimbo I don't see you getting very far. ed g2s • talk 02:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Crzrussian. If you allow me, I'd like to leave an opinion on the ongoing dispute. Since the September 9 clarification of the Fair Use policy, the use of unfree images of living persons is unambiguously against the policy. Two weeks ago we would have to argue about the reach of the statement "No free equivalent is available or could be created..." on item #1 of Fair use criteria. But since September 9, there's no more room for interpretations. It is clear cut now. I hope you understand. Best regards, --Abu Badali 02:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Crzrussian -- removed personal attack. Try to make Wikipedia better in other areas and let them continue to degrade it in the name of copyright law ignorance. Cheers. Woodshed 02:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

My two cents. Although IANAL I have a fair amount of experience with intellectual property law (copyright, patent, trademark, service mark and trade secret). I've also read the Wikipedia Fair Use guidelines and my opinion (FWIW) is that your pictures should be reinstated. Fair use is fine in this circumstance. I believe we need two refinements to current guidelines and policy. In the case of public figures BLP may be too restrictive. Public figures are far less able to successfuly assert libel (at least under U.S. law) than non-public figures and BLP does not distinguish. Second, our copyright / fair use should be extended to create a bias for *replacing* pictures with "more free" pictures rather than deleting pictures that are acceptable under the fair use provision of U.S. copyright law. I wish I had more time to help with this (see my User or Talk page) but felt I should at least offer this opinion. When I'm past the issues taking up my time in Real Life I'll check back in and see if I can help some more with this. Brian 07:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)btball

This is not a matter of whether the uses are legal or not, so your analysis of the situtation is somewhat irrelevant. ed g2s • talk 22:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but I believe current Wikipedia fair use policy is, in fact, driven by legal concerns. Brian 00:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)btball

Legal concerns and the goal of building a free content encyclopedia. For instance, legal concerns alone can't justify our rejection of "by permission" image licenses. --Abu Badali 13:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Goy Advanced Automobile

G'day Czrussian,

Thanks for your message. I noticed that you have listed the article 'Goy Advanced Automobile' for deletion. I think the article should remain for the reason that Goy Advanced Automobile is a real company as listed in the Australian Securities and Investment Commisions (www.asic.gov.au). You may do a search if you please. It is as valid as other automobile manufacturers. I know this article doesn't reveal too much. The reason for that is because a lot of the work being done at Goy is still highly confidential and cannot be revealed to public at this point of time. Even the website will not be up until October. There are concept designs that will be revealed for the first time to the public later this year or early next year. But it is fair to say that it is still an automobile manufacture in the legal sense; it is a registered Australian motor vehicle manufacturing company. So instead of listing it for deletion, I would like you to give me suggestions how this article can be improved? I think that will be more fair. Thanks

My RFA

Thank you, Crzrussian, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. By the way, good luck on your confirmation —this is messedrocker (talk) 21:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Editing your comment to Jimbo

Crzrussian, I want to let you know that I have editted your last comment on Jimbo's page. I did that in good faith to add a link to the page I believe you were talking about, so that Jimbo (or the casual reader) would more promply know which "statements" you were talking about.

If you feel that was inappropriate for any reason, please accept my apologizes and revert it (or ask me to do so).

Thanks, --Abu Badali 13:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Belated thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA. Consensus to promote was reached, and I am now an administrator. I'll be using the tools cautiously at first, and everyone should feel welcome to peer over my shoulder and make sure I'm not doing anything foolish. --Robth^Talk 03:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Re : These instructions...

Thank you for your blessings, my friend! Really having a difficult time through this period IRL as mock exams are on before the real ones, and I probably expect a downsize of myself in the near future to be an exopedian. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 04:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Could use your help

Russian, my Floyd Abrams articles have been nominated for deletion. I explain the point behind them on the deletion page, but if you think this is important information I could sure use someone backing me up. I have spent so many countless hours working on it, that if it's deleted I'll have to taken an extended vacation from contributing, because I think it is very important. I'm all for deleting useless and vanity-fuelled articles, but this man is living history, and I took it upon myself to do this (after I read the book he gave me when I went to take his photograph for Wikipedia). I am writing a grant-proposal around the project; if it's deleted, well, that would hurt me a lot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Floyd_Abrams_and_the_Pentagon_Papers_case --DavidShankBone 03:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Warren Kinsella

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above. Arthur Ellis is banned indefinitely from Warren Kinsella and articles which relate to Canadian politics and its blogosphere. Any article which mentions Warren Kinsella is considered a related article for the purposes of this remedy. This includes all talk pages other than the talk page of Mark Bourrie. Arthur Ellis is required to use one registered account. For the Arbitration Committee. FloNight 03:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

NSW, UK

Methinks someone was confusing it with old South Wales :) Grutness...wha? 22:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 38	18 September 2006	About the Signpost

"Citizendium" project aims to rival Wikipedia	Report from the Simple English Wikipedia
News and notes	In the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Erin Fox

This is not a user profile.

I believe that your practices are discriminatory.

Mr. Fox passes the professor test easily.

Furthermore, no opportunity was given to appeal the matter.

Remove the user profile. Mr. Fox does not have time for wikipedia entries. He doesn't need a user profile. Frankly I am sure he would be embarased to have a user profile.

I submitted his biography independently because he is a relevant and significant author.

I'll re-sign up under a more proper name to post the information.

RfA thanks

Hey CrazyRussian, thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It finished with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your support. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 05:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully earlier this week with a result of (50/3/0). If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free to write me. I hope I will live up to your trust. Michael 19:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Redman

Just so you know. Redirecting doesn't require deletion. Only when something particularly offensive is in the history of a "to be redirected"-article, do we need to delete. Deletion is only for stuff that cannot possibly be kept. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

RE:Gay, Russia

You're right. I should have reviewed his other "contributions" and left a warning on his talk page. Ironically, I used to have a habit of "jumping the gun". Well, "forever live - forever learn"... --Chodorkovskiy ^(talk) 12:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Russian footballers

Hi. Regarding whether a player should be added to the Category Russian footballers, I think the general rule is whether the player can be called a "Russian", either through descent, citizenship, or representation of the national team. So Lev Yashin is in Category:Russian footballers, Andrei Kanchelskis is in both Category:Russian footballers and Category:Ukrainian footballers, and Owen Hargreaves is in both Category:Canadian soccer players and Category:English footballers, etc. Chanheigeorge 19:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Shanoh Tovoh

BS"D

Ah Gut yor, Shonoh tovoh sikoseivu v'sichosemu, shonoh tovoh u'mesukoh, and all that good stuff.

I might also add that on your user page it says "Happy 5757" It should say 5767.

--Shaul avrom 21:33, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Light relief

Have you seen this? Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tyrenius --Guinnog 01:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Aleksander Zaks Stub

Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.

Thanks!

NauticaShades^(talk) 15:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

L'shanah Tovah

Just wishing you a wonderful Rosh Hashanah, and all the best for the upcoming year (and beyond). -- tariqabjotu 03:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

And you, sir, have a meaningful Ramadan. - CrazyRussian talk/email 00:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I am from St. Petersburg which is 6 degrees south of the arctic circle. The longest day of the year is about 20 hrs sunup 4 horus sundown, and even when the sun is down, it never gets dark. And there are oodles of Muslims from the many Muslim provinces of Russia. What are they to do there? What about north of the arctic circle where some days don't end at all? - CrazyRussian talk/email 00:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

The ruling on those cases differs, but all basically end with "you have to fast for a very long time". If you're truly interested in the matter, I would suggest (mainly page four of) this article (note sahur refers to the time before the fast, and that the end of sahur coincides with fajr, which means dawn, when fasting begins). -- tariqabjotu 03:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Shchyokino

Hi there! Thanx for letting me know. Ezhiki merged the two of them together. Take care! KNewman 09:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Leonine facies

Give me a bit with this one. I'll try to turn it into a DYK over the week. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 11:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Finally

I finally figured it out. Look, before we start anything else, I'm not a troll or a sock. I do honestly love the admins that are here and I want to show gratitude towards them by showing how incredibly awesome they are. I thought about it real hard the last few days, but I think Alphachimp, Crzrussian, Yanksox, and Tyrenius are like the Deadly Viper Assassination Squad. They will kick yo ass and you won't know what happened. Of course, this leaves the opening for Bill. I think it's pretty damn obvious who Bill is, none other than Samir. Yatuern 11:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• See WP:ANI#Finally. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

User page

What happened to it? Or is it only temporary?--Andeh 14:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Open to Recall

I noticed your name wasn't in the Catagory Administrators open to recall. -- Lego@lost EVIL, EVIL! | 03:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Um...he's not an admin... Yanksox 03:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Yet if he did an RfA right now, it would conclude in the month of October, which I believe is the month he mentioned. NoSeptember 03:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

It will start in October, I'm drafting up my nom. Yanksox 04:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

My RfA will start most likely on October 9th. - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

oppose. JJ211219 17:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC) (maybe yom kippur will make me have a change of heart) :~)

Ha. Ha. ... Ha. - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

With a heart full of contrition and guilt at all my past misdeeds, and having said tefillas zakkai and now starting with a clean slate, I hereby change my vote and will definately vote for your re-adminship... :)JJ211219 03:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Sect of Skhariya the Jew

Hi Crz: Perhaps you can provide some perspective on this weird article that relates to Russian history: Sect of Skhariya the Jew. Is its information true and valid? Thanks for your time. 07:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 25th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 39	25 September 2006	About the Signpost

Erik Möller declared winner in Board of Trustees election	Wikimania 2007 to be held in Taipei
Arbitration clerk Tony Sidaway resigns	Report from the Dutch Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Mark Bourrie

Someone has nominated this article for deletion. I'm thinking it may be criteria for a speedy keep?? You speedy closed the first round. Stubbleboy 03:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

UNL College of Law categorization

I removed the establishment category from that article due to the fact that the College of Law is not an institution independent of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and I do not see the need for subsidiary colleges of a university to be given an "Educational institutions estabilished in (foo)" category tag. That being said, I really don't care that much one way or another; I am merely providing my thought process behind removing the tag in the first place. – Swid ^{(talk | edits)} 16:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re:Speedy deletion for Longtail stingray

Hey Crzrussian. I just wanted to let you know that another admin, aeropagitica, deleted Longtail stingray after you tagged it for speedy deletion. I restored the page because it was initially created as a redirect page, but only 2 days ago, someone had blanked the page and deleted the redirect.

I just wanted to remind you to make sure before you tag articles for speedy deletion.

Thanks a lot! --Nishkid64 19:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Woops, honest mistake I guess! My bad, Crzrussian. I really got to check my eyes. But actually...it shouldn't be deleted. It's a valid re-direct link, and I don't know why the creator blanked it. --Nishkid64 20:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well I didn't have to do much research here =]. The initial redirect link goes Thorntail stingray and the first line of the article says "The thorntail stingray, black stingray or longtail stingray...". So, I'm going to redirect that link then. Thanks for being patient and nicely telling me what to do. I'm still getting used to these new tools. --Nishkid64 20:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I did my research and found from this (and a few other websites) that they are indeed identical. --Nishkid64 20:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Dmitry Venevitinov

Your recent edit to Dmitry Venevitinov[1], in which you added the unreferenced template, was reverted by Ghirlandajo[2] with the edit summary "please learn to use the template correctly." I thought you should know. I believe Ghirlandajo's reason for reverting was that the article is "based on material from the public domain 1906 Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary." Regards, DRK 00:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ahhhh now I see. When I saw the disclaimer I was looking at the present state of the page. His (Ghirlandajo) edit summary, especially considering there was no disclaimer when you added the unref tag, sure was incivil. Cheers, DRK 03:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Apols for that, thought i sandboxed the changes and it would not be visible on the main page.

Lol. You not having sysop is creating backlog. Glad you enjoyed it. alphaChimp^(talk) 04:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Template:Unreferenced

Template:Unreferenced says:

• "There is currently no consensus about where to place this template; most suggest either the bottom of the article page (in an empty 'References' section), or on the article's talk page".
• "There is currently no consensus about whether this template should be used with stubs. Certainly all articles, including stubs, should cite references, but opinions vary as to whether the stub tag is sufficient notification of the need to improve the article, or whether there is a need for more specific notification via this tag".

These are very sensitive matters and I'm tired of: a) moving the template to the bottom of the page; b) replacing it with "stub" tags. People seem to be using tags (not only this, but others too) without consulting the rules. I hope you understand what I mean. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 06:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the elegant formatting!

From my talk page:

Incidentally, you ought to shorten your signature per WP:SIG. I did it for you: see here. The top is what you have now. The bottom is the same exact thing with a lot less code. Enjoy. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Your formatting is more elegant and concise. I have updated the signature file in my preferences and in a few recent edits. -DoctorW 06:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yo

'Sup. --Aguerriero (talk) 19:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Anything interesting going on? Heh, kidding. Looking forward to your RfA. Oh, I may be moving to Bronxville next summer - My wife is applying to grad school at Sarah Lawrence College. --Aguerriero (talk) 20:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Not quitting my career, no. I would just get a job in NYC! I appreciate the offer and will definitely take you up on it if I make a scouting trip. My wife is going to study to be a genetic counselor, and I understand they have a highly respected program at that school. I'm sort of anxious about the possibility of living in such a big city, although I feel comfortable in Chicago and Toronto so maybe it won't be that much of an adjustment. Grandpa is doing well - he actually got into a home that had a long waiting list and he was very enthusiastic about going. It was his decision, so I respected it. --Aguerriero (talk) 02:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Greenberg

I removed your WP:PROD and added some of his books. Well known author and educator. Nfitz 01:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Saryn Hooks

Hi Crazy Russian

You were very hot off the mark first noting the incomplete nomination before I had time to complete it, then closing down the nomination, all within minutes of my starting the process.

I felt rather bitten!

Regards

Springnuts 16:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

October Revolution

¡Viva La Revolucion! Fellow comrade, shall I have the honour to nominate you on the day of your upcoming October revolution? - Mailer Diablo 18:23, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

RE:Egyptian

You should be using [[Egypt]]ian, not [[Egypt|Egytian]] - CrazyRussian talk/email 06:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what the difference is, seeing as it will be viewed the same way when the page is normally viewed. It's a matter of preference, no? I skimmed Help:Piped link and found no indication as to a Wiki stance one way or the other. I'll just continue to use my way unless you can provide evidence for your claim. Thanks for the comment! -Oatmeal batman 07:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Yechezkel Levenstein

While I do hope for some reason to keep the article, I would be a little more hopeful if I hadn't asked for help in the very same place two weeks ago... Yours, Huon 08:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 2nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 40	2 October 2006	About the Signpost

New speedy deletion criteria added	News and notes
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)