User talk:Leebo/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive Navigator
1 2 3 4 5 6 7


No hostility intended, but I will not use profanity in the future.

Unknown Source

Dear Sir,

I am getting the message "Unknown Source "How i can remove this.

Article "Bajaj Ecotec- Pvt. Ltd.

Thanks Kapil Rana —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 06:05, July 1, 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA. It was successful, and I am now, may God have mercy on us all, an administrator. Look at all the new buttons! I had heard about 'protect,' 'block user,' and 'delete,' but no one told me about 'kill,' 'eject,' and 'purée.' I appreciate the trust the community has in me, and I'll try hard not to delete the main page or block Jimbo. -FisherQueen (Talk) 17:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


Hi, for helping me with my userpage, I gave you a "Thank You" Barnstar. It's on your page right now. WikiTaco 22:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Darren Shan

Is it worth getting the page at least semi-protected, given the amount of vandalism it seems to be attracting at the moment? Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 13:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It's borderline at the moment. It's getting a good amount of anonymous vandalism in the last 3 hours, but about half of it is from repeat vandals who can be dealt with via warning and blocking. I'll be watching it now, and I will probably only protect it if we see several different new IPs vandalize within the next few hours. Leebo T/C 13:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, it only took about 20 minutes for it to get vandalized by 3 different users again. Semi-protected for a couple days. Leebo T/C 14:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Look on the bright side - it frees you up to go off and do something better! Will keep an eye on it. Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 14:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Although it would appear as though User:Ernestolynch is not a fan of Mr. Shan's either... Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 16:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... I blocked him for 48 hours. I was torn, because he's been around for several years, and this was his first block. But I'm also shocked it's his first block, as he has a history of pushing the envelope and just barely not being blocked, and also waiting long periods of time between vandalism. Leebo T/C 16:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I was a little surprised on looking at his history to see that he'd been around for a while, but saw from the warnings on his talk page that there was a history of problems...guess he just woke up in a bad mood, I suppose! Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 16:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Addleshaw Goddard

There's been some subsequent vandalism since User:Ernestolynch earlier in the day - single purpose accounts, by the look of them. I and other have reverted and warned, but it's the same vandalism we saw with Darren Shan - more than a coincidence, I guess. Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 18:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense Pages

Hey I read your rant on nonsense pages, and I admit I do mark neologisms as nonsense all the time. In this case what CSD criteria should be used? Wildthing61476 18:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, also (and I probably should check the the talk page for this!) has there been any consideration given for creating a CD category for hoax/neologism articles? Wildthing61476 19:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Getsumen_to_heiki_mina.JPG

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Getsumen_to_heiki_mina.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 18:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fair use rationale for Image:Getsumen_to_heiki_mina.JPG

Resolved: The fair use rationale was there, but a more substantial one has been added in the {{non-free media rationale}} template

Hi ShakespeareFan00. In the warning template you left about the image I uploaded, it indicates that there is no fair use rationale or explanation of fair use. There is one, below the licensing template, but are you indicating that this is insufficient? I can write a rationale that uses the {{non-free media}} template, but it will say generally the same thing. Thanks for your input. Leebo T/C 19:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The boiler plate tag is not the rationale, There needs to be an IN DEPTH rationale. You might want to see what other uploaders have used. ShakespeareFan00 19:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


Dear, Leebo you are not an administrator please stop pretending to be one Physik

I am an admin. You can verify this here or see my successful request for adminship. Leebo T/C 13:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Me As Admin

Leebo can you make me an admin User:Physik

Only bureaucrats can make another user an administrator, and this is almost exclusively through the requests for adminship process. As others have said, I think you should refrain from requesting adminship at this time, since you do not have sufficient experience in administrative areas of Wikipedia. Leebo T/C 13:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin Part 2

But how did you become an admin? User:Physik

If you read my request for adminship you will see that another user, Merope, felt I was qualified to be an administrator and offered to nominate me. After I answered the questions on the RfA form, other users commented and enough supported my request that a bureaucrat made me an administrator. If you mean "how" as in "how did I gain the experience", read the answers to my questions in the request. Leebo T/C 13:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin Part III

you know i wanted to become one and i asked them on the request for adminship board and they wouldent promote me--Physik 13:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It's unlikely that your request would succeed as of right now, because you have a small number of edits and very few are to the encyclopedia or administrative area. Most are to your user page. I would advise reading the page that describes what admins do to see why you would likely not be ready to fulfill these tasks. Leebo T/C 13:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


Say how long have you been on the wiki and if you really were a buracrut will you promote me User:Physik

I've been a regular editor with this username since December 2006, though I edited anonymously from several different IP addresses before registering. I can't really answer the second part of your question, because I am not a bureaucrat and do not see myself wishing to take on that role in the foreseeable future. Leebo T/C 13:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Lewy

No one has yet done anything about "kingseason's" additions about himself to the Dr. Lewy. entry. He has re-entered his entire bibliography and a lot of other extraneous material. I have refrained from doing anything after your last note to me, but nothing has been edited. Thank you. Marciamaria 14:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


I suggest that you should sign up for madnesswiki if you made you name put it on my talk page my user is User:6mile--Physik 14:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


Dear, Leebo i have adopted you as well as User:Evilclown93 i have put in one tab that says that youve been adopted--Physik 14:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the gesture, Physik, but as an administrator and experienced Wikipedian, I don't really have a need to be adopted. If you meant for me to adopt you, that would be something I might consider. I think you could use some assistance in learning more about Wikipedia. Leebo T/C 15:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Experienced User

Lebo how did you become an experienced user you just signed here in December 2007 oh and how do you know how to do like <dive and a bunch of other stuff now how did you learn that and why can i be an admin User:Physik


Hey, leebo, thanks for getting rid of what i said on that page... that would of gotten me in alot of trouble, and i did manage to fix the article, so do you know how to mark a article as a "stub" i need to mark that article as such, and i would apreciate it if you, or someone else could tell me.

The Editing Barnstar

Leebo for all the edits you done i shall give you "The Editing Barnstar"--Physik 13:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Mike Stowell

Mike Stowell from the USA deserves his own page on Wikipedia. Please allow this. He is an extraordinary pastor and entrepeneur.

Loading the new page for the American Mike Stowell.

Could you please do this for me now? Thanks

Mike Stowell

Mike Stowell meets the notability because he has education accomplishments that are incredible. He also is a very well known person in West Michigan and in Christian circles all over the country. His ability to build a church from the ground up to where it is now is very rare. He also is a very respected businessman in the West Michigan area. He has several articles that have been published in the newspapers. His messages are broadcasted on the internet and sold.

taomaster123Taomaster123 15:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I was trying to start a page for Ipernity it is a social content sharing site.

On the flickr wiki I found the following: "Of the sites that offer free photosharing, most can be broken up into advertising-supported media plays, such as ipernity, pxSpot, Pikeo, vMix, AlbumTown, Flickr, FotoFly Twango, Euro Photo Club, Fotki, Fotolog, Fotopic, Ringo,Webshots, Zooomr, Photobucket,,Woophy,, pix01, ComBoost, woophy and KlikShare and online photo finishing sites, such as ImageStation, Ofoto and Shutterfly, where photo sharing is a vehicle to sell prints or other merchandise."

some of the above have wiki pages, some do not. does wiki recieve money from yahoo? (parent of flickr?) is this why there is no ipernity wiki page?

Recently, many members of the flickr community have migrated over to ipernity. I was suprised that there is not an ipernity listing in wiki. (although there is for flickr).

please note also on the flickr wiki: Censorship controversy On June 12, 2007, in the wake of the rollout of localized language version of the site, Flickr implemented a user-side rating system for filtering out potentially controversial photos. Simultaneously, users with accounts registered with Yahoo subsidiaries in Germany, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Korea were prevented from viewing photos rated "moderate" or "restricted" on the three-part scale used. Subsequently, many German Flickr users in particular protested against the new restrictions, claiming unwanted censorship from Flickr and Yahoo. [2]

Flickr management, unwilling to go into legal detail, implied that the reason for the stringent filtering were unusually strict age-verification laws in Germany. The issue received some attention in the German national media, especially in online publications. Initial reports indicated that Flickr's action might be sensible, if unattractive, precautions against prosecution[3], with later coverage implying that Flickr's action may have been unnecessarily strict. [4]

On June 20, 2007 Flickr reacted by granting German users access to "moderate", but not "restricted" images, and hinted at a future solution involving advanced age-verification procedures for Germany, though no mention was made of Singapore, Hong Kong or Korea.

Apparently unrelated to the above, users in mainland China have been denied access to Flickr by Chinese ISPs since early June, 2007.

The site is also completely blocked in the United Arab Emirates.

Agitation (film)

I have started a page called Agitation and its true ive read that there will be a movie like that so do you believe me or are you going to delete it--Physik 17:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think it would have been better to ask me first before creating it? I think you know the answer to your question, which makes me wonder why you came and told me about the article... but anyway... It's not a proper article, since it cites no sources and states that no details are known... not even who's making the film! How would you have a source that states a film will be made without it saying who's making it? It should be deleted unless you can provide some sources. I think the main issue with this can be summed up by this. Leebo T/C 17:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Mike Stowell


You didn't respond to the last message I had sent. Mike Stowell in Michigan has a lot more notability than the Mike Stowell in England. No one has heard of the English Mike Stowell. Please reconsider the credentials for the American Mike Stowell, he deserves to be listed here in this encyclopedia. I hope this isn't an issue of religious discrimination -- I thought you guys were supposed to be openminded.


ive finally discovered that Wes Craven is directing it and i also here a rumor on some kind of website that David Spade might be one of the actors of the film

Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis

After Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Wikipedia rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Wikipedia rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 04:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for letting me know I wasn't using the tag correctly. IPSOS (talk) 14:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Shared accounts

Sorry, we had no idea. We actually started this account after we found some very dubious "vanity page" type information on Wikipedia and went to what I think was some place on "village pump" to report it. The person there knew they were talking to two peope and suggested we get an id. So we did.

If only once person only actually contributed (it must be admited that I have become interested in cleanig up some articles while my writing partner thinks it's all a bit of a snoozer) and the other just kibbitzes vai IM is that ok? We'd note it on our user page and all. BiAndBi 16:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

If you both have access (i.e. are aware of the password) then it's disallowed by the username policy. If you want to change the password so that only one of you knows it, and still contribute collaboratively, I suppose there wouldn't be anything wrong with that. That would pretty much be the same as helping a friend contribute. Leebo T/C 16:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
OK will do (but I'll hold you responsible when I forget my new password and can't log in - smile).
BTW something I don't understand, I didn't see your reply for a while, wasn't it supposed to go back onto my discussion page, so that little reminder pops up? BiAndBi 18:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I have a note on the top of the page saying I'll reply here. Sorry if there was confusion. Leebo T/C 19:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


Thank you so much for blocking User: Angel Of Sadness T/C 13:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


hey leebo are we friends?--Physik 15:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


just keep on doing it right. I've sometimes used the phrase, "so that other people could check as well". As a reason, SNO was appropriate. DGG (talk) 22:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't want to fall into a practice of deleting hoax articles, blatant or not, under invalid speedy reasons. That was a particularly frustrating one. Leebo T/C 22:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

It's up!

Ready for it? The Suikoden Task Force is now up and running! bwowen talkcontribs 05:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


You can edit the blacklist at User:DeadBot/UAABadwords. Feel free to refine it how you want. I am working on a whitelist. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 20:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Since many people are invlovled, and its a pain to keep going through pages, I will now be responding on my talk page only. Please watchlist it if you want to stay in the discussion. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


come on please--Physik 21:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Please, what? What do you want? Any further comments from you on this talk page that do not relate to writing an encyclopedia are going to be removed. I've been patient for quite some time with the irrelevant comments. Leebo T/C 21:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Come on Leebo we're very close friends im talking about me as becoming an administrator i just want to be one to stop everything thats going out of control--Physik 21:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Molly McGinn

So her page was taken down yesterday due to her apparently not being "significant." I edited down the page to be explicit to what she's doing/has done with both innovating children's education via music and her music career and then linked off to three articles from independent sources that supported the page... and it was deleted again. What exactly constitutes a good Wikipedia page about a person? spcoon 14:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Saw V

why is this article blocked--Physik 15:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It was repeatedly recreated and deleted through discussion (see the first discussion and second discussion). You would need to request that it be reviewed at deletion review before it could be recreated. Leebo T/C 15:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Hi, thank you for earlier removing a deletion from one of my articles - I appreciate it. I have a question, I was looking through some random articles and noticed that this site Band From TV had a link to MySpace. I cehcked the rules and it said to avoid that but did not say it was forbidden. Can you clear this up if it should be removed or not? Again, thanks for everything Sphufounder 21:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"You" Time Person of the Year

I have to contradict you on your interpretation of the "You" for Time's Person of the Year. The TIME magazine gives the meaning of you as people:

And for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game, TIME's Person of the Year for 2006 is you.

BBC gives the interpretation as:

...growth and influence of user-generated content on the internet.

That appears to have absolutely nothing to do with the planet Earth. So the template is inappropriate. Sorry. — RJH (talk) 19:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It sounds like this has been straightened out on the talk page. Leebo T/C 23:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Iabci at it again

He just created another hoax article, Cartoon Network BLOX. It's currently up for deletion, and I've slapped an IAR speedy tag on the logo. I reported it to IAR, but thought I'd bounce it off you as well in case you're around and can zap him. Blueboy96 21:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Never mind--SirFozzie zapped them both. Blueboy96 23:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for participating in My RfA which closed successfully. I am honored and truly more than a little humbled by the support of so many members of the community. It's more than a bit of a lift to see comments on my behalf by so many people that I respect.

I appreciate your support! - Philippe | Talk 18:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


Notability is asserted through providing sources to verify that a company meets the guidelines for notability of companies. It is not a factor of the kinds of ingredients the company uses. None of the articles tagged for deletion have independent sources for any information. Leebo T/C 16:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Which article are we discussing - which company? Noles1984 16:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Fromm Family Foods, By Nature, and Addiction Foods. It applies to all 3 of them. Sorry for not being more specific. Leebo T/C 16:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Addiction Foods I'd like reinstated. It is the only pet food manufacturer on the planet that uses kangaroo and common brushtail possum as lead ingredients - helping the ecology of New Zealand and Australia. That's notable. Fromm Family is an old company, a leader in holistic foods manufacturing and The Fromm Family introduced the first canine distemper vaccine. By Nature uses unique ingredients in their formulas as well. Noles1984 17:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Those things are interesting, but they don't establish notability, as defined by the criteria. You may disagree, but that's the definition. All that is required is for independent sources to be added to the article. Without them, not only do articles not assert notability, but they're also not proper encyclopedia articles. Encyclopedia articles rely on what reliable sources have recorded about a subject, not just information from the subject. Leebo T/C 17:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Can't do that for Addiction Foods since someone deleted it :-) I'd like to expand on the ecological benefits of that company. Noles1984 17:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
I've restored Addiction Foods and added a hangon tag. Please go to the talk pages for the articles and present your case for not having them deleted. Try to focus on adding sources rather than appealing to the interesting facts about the companies. Leebo T/C 17:38, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
My many thanks Sahib, great muhlah, oh great and wonderful Oz, I will begin on that today. Noles1984 17:53, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Complaint on conduct

Lee, I had a problem that did not seem to get addressed... that of poor langauge on a article talk page. Catahoula Leopard Dog#Photos returned The user is VanTucky. Now that you have the power to banish people to the hinterlands, please address my concern about language on article discussion pages or any pages for that manner. Being cussed at like that makes me look bad. Noles1984 18:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

The conflict was almost 3 weeks ago. Blocks are preventative, not punitive. If the issue has died down since then, a block would be punitive. If you have a conflict with VanTucky again it may be more productive to take it to WP:ANI. Leebo T/C 19:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Royal Exchange

Please explain exactly what was wrong with my edit of the article on Royal Exchange, London. I believe it to have been fair comment. It was certainly not intended as vandalism and I apologise if it gave that impression. Oinky.

Seasonal articles

Sorry if I "spammed", it's just your in the Yankee project, you might have been interested. And I use this account for talking specifically. The other account, the main one, is for mainspace contributions only Soxrock 00:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

You were attempting to steamroll over Jaranda with people you thought would be on your side. Even if I agreed with you originally, I want no part in that kind of treatment of other Wikipedians. I removed the comment that Jaranda removed and I'd ask that you leave it that way. Leebo T/C 00:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I did. I was just notifying users in the project of the controversy. I was trying to get people to know about it because this will likely require consensus. It was simply meant to get people in the know on this. Sorry if I committed some heinous crime that I later fixed after being notifed of violating policy. And I won't talk on this page the rest of tonight Soxrock 00:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

And it's not spamming. It's a relevant message. What is spam to you may not be spam to a bunch of people. So call it spam all you want, you are just wrong Soxrock 00:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Leebo T/C 00:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Notification on a relevant subject isn't spamming. And the canvassing was removed from the notices. Soxrock 00:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not relevant to me. I do not foresee ever editing a Kansas City Royals or Tampa Bay Buccaneers (?) article. On my page, it was spam, and it has been removed. That's all there is to discuss. Leebo T/C 00:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I apologize for getting you in this mess. I apologize deeply. Good night and have a better day tomorrow Soxrock 01:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I accept your apology. I believe that you didn't intend to cause this kind of problem and will consider a more productive approach in the future. No hard feelings. Good night. Leebo T/C 01:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

John Mustang AfD

Greetings! In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Mustang, if I read it right, you did a Google search and turned up nothing on the subject. Did I understand you right? I specifically ask because if you look at the contributions of the original editor, User:JohnMustang, there's a pattern of vandalism with everything except for this article. Did you find anything to suggest that this is an obscure topic and not something absolutely bogus? —C.Fred (talk) 02:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm getting the impression that the creator of the article has written some piece of fiction with his friends, and he's trying to use Wikipedia to document it. That's all, I expect. Whether it's an obscure topic or something completely bogus, the deletion process is going to be the same. Leebo T/C 03:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Not entirely. If it's completely bogus and a bad-faith edit, then I'm willing to speedily delete it as blatant vandalism. If it's a good-faith edit on a non-notable subject, then I'm willing to give some benefit of the doubt. —C.Fred (talk) 16:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with your assessment of possible situations, but I still think it was just a non-notable piece of fiction. I don't get the sense that it was a bad faith creation, even after the other nonsense that the creator did. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing the AfD snowed a few days early though. Leebo T/C 16:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Need help on editing issues

Hello. I was wondering if I could ask for your help in settling an editing matter. One editor proposes character name changes since he/she don't seem to agree with the official english version and prefers what he/she deducts as the right translation. For instance: english publication says Rubel, Japanese phonetics say Ruvur. Said Editor prefers to spell it as Louvr. Debate is on going at: Claymore Discussion. Thank you. -Mickey

Paul Mundt

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Paul Mundt, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. mms 16:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


Leebo why can i be an administrator?--Physik 16:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


Yeah, why can't Physik be an administrator? 03:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Because physik has not gone through the RfA process. --Iamunknown 03:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin 2

Come on, why can't Physik be an administrator? I'm sure that he could do the job as well as any of the others. Maybe he should wash Leebo's car or something. 15:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, because physik has not gone through the RfA process. If you wish to nominate physik, ask him or her, then read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. --Iamunknown 16:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Music Videos

I have questions regarding two music videos done by innosense (band). One music video (for "Say No More") has existed, but unfortunately does not appear to be linked to anywhere online. (Maybe one site; but I'm not sure.) And there's also another video done by them (for "Wherever You Are") that is watchable on YouTube (not the best source) and unfortunately I can not find if this song was a single or what. I have my doubts I could include the second, but is it possible to include the Say No More video? Or would it be mostly original research on my part? -WarthogDemon 19:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


oops. I do not know how I missed that it was a user page I was tagging. Mea culpa. --Evb-wiki 15:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

<Long Sigh>

Actually, yes the "Game-Screenshot" template is by definition a fair-use rationale. It explains why the image should be used, by providing three provisions (out of many more) that are almost always met, and justify the "fair-use" of an image. One may even conclude that this is why the rest of WP recognizes this fact by listing that template under the "Fair Use" heading over here.

You may also notice that, if you bothered to read the history of that template, some "well-intentioned" person decided that add that "please add a more detailed rationale" blurb of nonsense to the template, which in previous incarnations, did not have it. Perhaps that's why this image doesn't have one...and perhaps why your "project"'s goals are a bit...short-sighted?

Oh, and for the record, I accused you of not being able to read for content, not at all. It would just be plain old silly if I were writing to you to tell you that you couldn't read, right? Interesting, though, that your inability to discern that difference in my message is something of a confirmation of that. Sorry if you're offended, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong. IMO, WP:SPADE trumps WP:CIVIL 9/10. 20:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not interested in getting into a discussion about the semantics related to your comments. You're not "wrong"; many users perceive the boilerplate template as adequate. What you didn't have to do was leave hot-headed comments in all applicable areas as though everyone is out to get the image for no reason. That's not the case, which is why your comments were perceived as condescending and rude. L2read? Blinded eyes? Anyway, you provided a rationale -- that was the goal. The matter is resolved. Leebo T/C 20:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
And in turn, you're calling me a hot-head (weaseling that my "words" are hot-headed, yet somehow I am not, is bound to be your it) and accusing me of being paranoid ("as though everyone is out to get the image"). That's hardly WP:CIVIL and certainly not WP:AGF. Welcome to the club! Civility is BS, don't cling to it...and definitely don't cling to it and then throw it off in a half-hearted and hypocritical retort such as this.
In any case, I am copying what I wrote on the Mortal Kombat 4 article's discussion page here. Good luck in your project, and I really hope you do a better job down the road.
If indeed your project's goal is to make Wikipedia a better place, you'd do a better job by taking the bigger picture into account, looking at cases in question and discerning which is a careless violation of current policy, as opposed to images like this which obviously grandfather that policy. Perhaps a better approach would be to do what I did for this older image, and provide a (self-evident) rationale. It took me all of a minute to satisfy the request. Of course, this is more time than it takes to automatically flag images en masse for deletion, and this will probably result in a less boast-worthy number in the future (if one wishes an adminship, for example), but it will result in a better WP, and not one barren of useful images. A better WP should be your goal. 21:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I stand by my comments about your demeanor when handling this issue. It was inappropriate. Wikipedia has required detailed fair use rationales for longer than the template was updated to remind people. I have no particular interest in this issue outside of the fact that I saw your comment to the tagger and got involved. I have no plans to pursue other images, or flag them "en masse for deletion." I rarely handle image deletion, it's not my favorite area. I attempted to clarify the situation and it was eventually resolved. Leebo T/C 21:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
My misunderstanding then. I took EVula's comments about "our project" to mean that the both of you responding to my deletion in less than the glacially slow wikipedia turn-around times for such things to mean that you were both actively engaged in this sort of thing. For all I know EVula was referring to all of Wikipedia as "our project" which is a nice way to look at it, but a bit confusing considering some people actually engage in subprojects here. In any case, I still meant nothing personal by my harsh statement, and I apologize if you were bothered by them. Angry is my default "voice". And more importantly, good luck in working on WP, whatever your favorite area of work is. 21:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
That's an understandable misunderstanding to make. Good luck to you as well, and I'm glad to hear that we mutually bear no ill will. Happy editing. Leebo T/C 22:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


OK... I need help. i think that my page shouldnt be deleted. Could you help me out so that it meets the standards?

Thank you

Thank you for the information. the pageant just took place on this past sunday. Can I have time to wait until everything is published?

Wilderness (Wisconsin Dells)

I was the one that tagged it for deletion. Trust me, read the history, I had nothing to do with it's being whittled down to nothing. I tagged it because IT WAS whittle down to nothing.

I realize that it was not you who whittled article to nothing, but you should check to see why an article that has been around for several months is suddenly nothing but red wikilinks. You should check the history before tagging any article for speedy deletion. Leebo T/C 02:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


I let him know on his/her user talk. Cheers! Navou banter 12:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


I am good, i been here for over 2 years, and you say that im a noob. Sorry, I cant be obn the computer all the time. Also I try my best. I have the knowledge of a trustful person. Also how can i get a cool webpage like yourds. That what i need to be admin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by N3mm (talkcontribs) 20:01, August 1, 2007 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Leebo T/C 20:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


thanks for helping me. I will never be a admin at anywebsite that is active. oh well, i should make a website that is no one that is going to. YA!!!! NO DREAM FOR ME!



I'll send you an email in a few 16:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to be able to respond until tonight, as I don't have access to my email from this computer. Is that alright? Leebo T/C 16:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah thats fine mate. 16:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I tried that

I just tried right now by putting in a picture I got from Wikimedia Commons; but it still doesn't work. I think it has something to do with the page. The way you put it in there? I don't know let me know if you find out. Thanks. þ 20:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey Im extremely new to this and need help

Hey my name is Roby and I live in Los Angeles. I just wrote an article stub about a hip hop group with a lot of credits thats rising in popularity and doesn't have a wikipedia article. I was wondering if you could help me format it or possibly look over it and tell me where to start fixing it. The band is called Elevaters. Thanks! Filmrebel 12:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey again from Chuck aka Noles1984. I have a sticky situation. I put together a los-res graphic image from several existing photos of dog food bags. Image:Blue Buffalo Company logo2.png and flagged it as fair use. However, since it is unique and cannot be found elsewhere, I retagged with a PD-Because because it is my creation or a hybrid of sorts. Kind of baffles me. Have you had similar experiences with other users? Noles1984 17:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment

Thank you for your comment on my RfA, which was successful. LyrlTalk C 00:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Stephanie Abrams photo

You're a lucky man again, Lee. I return with a question. An article on Stephanie Abrams contains a photo which I scanned from the publication Florida State times. Now, this image has absolutely no copyright information within the publication nor on the Online edition of Florida State Times pdf] article and nothing is stated at FSU's College of Communications. I think it can be very safely assumed that it's a promo photograph give to Florida State University. The problem is with Valrith who has removed it twice. It has a tag Replaceable fair use disputed on the page. Until this is resolved, I don't want the image removed so that it's orphaned. Leave message on my Administrators I Consult page, thanks, Noles1984 16:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

For reverting the vandalism to my user page I just noticed today. Thanks, Carlossuarez46 16:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

soapboxing from Emelmujiro

User:에멜무지로 still has some soapboxing left: User:에멜무지로/Sandbox --Kjoonlee 08:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Um, I was thinking it was left-over from before the temporary block he got, but it was actually added after the block. --Kjoonlee 08:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
And he tried to get away with it by commenting it out! Trying to hide it by moving it, and then trying to hide it again by commenting it out.. *shakes head* --Kjoonlee 09:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
He did remove it, but he used bwelk as an edit summary: this is a neologism which was first used to mock a Korean singer: not a serious profanity, but an insult, nonetheless. --Kjoonlee 09:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

And he's at it again, on his user page now. --Kjoonlee 12:26, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Uncertainties of the limits

This problem exists because when students are learnin' limits they may meet these uncertainty and if they don't know about these they can write : "No limit" or "Limit is " that is incorrect. Abbat D'Erble 03:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the help —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pheonix15 (talkcontribs) 14:39, August 29, 2007 (UTC)