License tagging for Image:ALSF.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ALSF.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, LibStu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! G'day. You might want to ease up on some of the rhetoric... everyone here, regardless of their political persuasion (and there is a good mix), manages to get along well. If you need any help with Wikipedia, don't hesitate to ask. michael ^talk 03:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian student unions

Depends on the current state of the article. Which one are you referring to? --El on ka 04:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NLS and GL were the two you prodded for deletion, no? Also i've attempted to improve the ALSF one slightly, unfortunatly most of the newspaper articles I can get through a database search, but they're not freely availiable online. As i'm relativly new to this still, how should I cite these?

Communications Director

That's right Ben is just joint communications director of the SULC and pretty active on Wikipedia. After all, you should know. Michellecrisp 06:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the two communications officers for the year are Sonia Lipski & Patrick Langosh, yet another example of sloppy research. See http://www.src.usyd.edu.au/HTML2/about_officers.htm LibStu 06:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sloppy research, Mr Potts? I'm talking SULC not SRC, reread the sentence above "joint communications director of the SULC". Michellecrisp 06:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My appologies, however, considering the sentance read "including one Executive Member, and the Communications Officer, jointly held by Ben Potts." it obviously implies the SRC Executive member and the SRC communications officer. I shall ammend my comment from 'sloppy research' to 'poor writing'. Incidently though, what on earth gives you the idea that I'm Ben Potts? Do you have any evidence for this, or are you pulling names out at random?

I have my sources. But as you said before you didn't feel compelled to reveal your real name so I'm not revealing my sources. Michellecrisp 06:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using anonmyous sources now are we? I must say, I do think the word "obsession" is in order, do you not agree? LibStu 06:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're like a politican, you're not denying it Ben, in fact if I call Ben and ask him if he's Libstu will he tell the truth and ask him to spell VIOLATE? The obsession of Libstu to only edit and skew one topic of Wikipedia is obsession. Does the President of SULC know of this identity on Wikipedia? Michellecrisp 06:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to break it to you, however if you call Ben he will tell you he has no idea what you are talking about. LibStu 06:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Ben no need to deny. My objective assessment of LibStu's 99.9% pro Liberal contributions indicates someone from the 2007 executive of SULC, I doubt the other executive members are involved in Wikipedia, who has been heavily involved in writing the glowing testimonial of SULC. perhaps I should ask them all (except Ben) who is LibStu? Or is the person that was leaking to ABC last year? Michellecrisp 07:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what would make you deny any of the other members would be involved? LibStu 07:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying you're not Ben, now? You wouldn't lie and put your fellow executive in hot water would you by claiming they're Libstu when they're not? I don't think they'd like false accusation. Ben you need to come clean, I thought the Liberal Party weren't liars. Michellecrisp 07:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have provided no objective evidence of your claim whatsoever. You have simply picked a member of SULC at random and are making baseless comments. LibStu 07:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great politician's answer Ben Potts. Come clean and I'll call it a day or more will be revealed. Michellecrisp 07:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reveal more. I challange you. LibStu 07:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ben, this post by Ben "Libstu" Potts, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney_University_Liberal_Club&diff=prev&oldid=100654203 is identical in text to page 7 of this http://www.alsf.org.au/alsf/docs/230435.pdf written by none other than Ben Potts! What's more only the author of such text would go around defending that original text as much as Ben did in the ensuing months on Wikipedia. I also heard Ben has a habit of making typos. Perhaps I'll email this whole conversation to Tim Andrews to find out who in the executive is denying they're Libstu. Michellecrisp 07:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and email it to him. I'm quite sure he shall quite rightly respond to you by saying that you are suffering from extreme obsessive delusions. LibStu 07:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see my accusation is far from baseless but based on a very credible coincidence. But anything you say Ben, you're avoiding the question, are you Ben Potts of Sydney University? you once said you were going to email me a DVD of some video http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney_University_Liberal_Club&diff=120124812&oldid=120013429 I would have wanted it by registered post, would you reveal your real name? I'm disappointed that SULC has some liars on its executive. Michellecrisp 07:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tire of this. Either email Tim Andrews and post the response you receive, or stop clogging my talk page. LibStu 07:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why do you tire Ben, sometimes people tire of the truth because it hurts, you even offered to send me something, so I presume you would have put your real name right Ben? If you don't answer the question and go on the record, I'll presume your name is Ben Potts of 2nd year Ag at Sydney Uni. How do I know that Tim might be in collusion with you, Ben? you're avoiding the question, are you Ben Potts of Sydney University? Michellecrisp 07:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Collusion! It's all a big conspiracy! The Evil Right Wing Death Beast Conspiracy shall strike again! Be afraid! Be very afraid! LibStu 07:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I quote from WP:Username Policy "The choice of username might be based on your real name or a familiar Internet nickname, or a new pseudonym that you use only for Wikipedia, depending on how much anonymity you want to preserve while editing. Some Wikipedia editors have been subject to severe harassment outside of Wikipedia as a result of their contributions on Wikipedia. For some people this is a reason not to use their real name or any previously used username or nick name that can be tied back to you."LibStu 07:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suddenly you go all defensive. No conspiracy Ben, it's pretty obvious that LibStu is a member of the SULC executive, just had to work out which one. There's nothing to be ashamed of unless you don't like admitting outside the club that you're a Liberal, I do feel sorry if you feel you think you will be harassed Ben on the basis of wikipedia posts. You should be proud of your work on Wikipedia, such as copying articles you wrote and turning them into new Wikipedia articles. Shame you can't take the Wikipedia recent version of Sydney University Liberal Club and put it into the next newsletter as more NPOV because the original one was biased to the hill. Hang in there Ben. Michellecrisp 07:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some heated debate here but given the evidence that Michelle presents you'd have to say that LibStu is Ben Potts. After all being a Communications Director is about promoting your organisation and affiliates like ALSF in the highest possible light http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Liberal_Students%27_Federation&diff=101023569&oldid=100459904 whilst the NUS should be seen as negative as possible. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Union_of_Students_of_Australia&diff=99579116&oldid=99546657 Talk about obsessed, Ben Potts last 500 posts are totally dedicated to this cause. The bias of being a Communications Director shines through. He has not bothered to contribute to any other topic in Wikipedia. Steven Fitter 11:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do you explain then the the fact that if you look at the the first two months of this account being active, all the edit were dedicated to the NUS Annual Conference, a conference Ben wasn't at? Similarly how could you explain the general edits on the Grassroots Left, Student Unity, National Labor pages which have nothing to do with SULC? But, most importantly of all, why should anyone care about the identity of the creator of this account? LibStu 14:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

really Ben? Grassroots Left, Student Unity, National Labor is almost all about youth politics, in fact your efforts like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grassroots_Left&diff=100654419&oldid=100651241 or http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Student_Unity&diff=100802322&oldid=100798491 relate to the Liberal Party. not everything you edit is SULC but everything is related to Liberals, ALSF or "correcting" the Opposition. The identity is relevant because it's your job as Communications Director to make anything SULC, ALSF related positive. There is NO discussion on any other topic from Wikipedia from LibStu. So Ben if you weren't at this conference, it must be someone else from SULC? methinks not. Steven Fitter 14:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And why, prey tell, "methinks not"? LibStu 15:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, should you not perhaps think I am the ALSF Communications/Publicity Officer? LibStu 15:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ben, Doesn't the ALSF Publicity officer go to Macquarie? why do you continue to lie and misrepresent others? You claim at one stage that you're another member of SULC "we have a SULC member" [1] now you're claiming you go to Macquarie uni, how come you haven't done the Macquarie Uni Liberal Club page then, surely you would have a more intimate knowledge of that club? And to think you have aspirations to be SULC President, this whole episode has been a test to see how well you handle difficult issues. as an aspiring future politician you might consider the notion of truth. I'm not sure why you're exactly scared of being harassed for Wikipedia posts, the article here has your picture and name http://www.alsf.org.au/alsf/docs/230435.pdf and is freely available on the net. I'm sure people don't stop you on campus and insult you on the basis of it. Ben give up before you dig a deeper hole for yourself. Have a nice day Michellecrisp 00:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ben just an example of how originally lacking NPOV the article was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sydney_University_Liberal_Club "improve the painfully smug tone. We're an encyclopedia, not a recruitment brochure" That's why I think LibStu is Ben Potts not anyone else. Michellecrisp 00:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Benjamin, did you know Wikipedia isn't a soapbox [2]. Also check out [3] A Wikipedia conflict of interest is an incompatibility between the purpose of Wikipedia, to produce a neutral encyclopedia, and the aims of individual editors. These include editing for the sake of promoting oneself, other individuals, causes, organizations (such as SULC), companies, or products, as well as suppressing negative information, and criticizing competitors (such as those in NUS) 210.56.70.37 11:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potential defamatory comment

Dear LibStu, I draw attention to an unfounded and baseless comment you made here with wrong accusations of my identity, suggestion I use multiple aliases and an accusation that I have been involved in criminal activity. This statement is defamatory and a violation of Wikipedia policy on off the topic attack and being a soapbox for airing personal vendettas. I ask that you retract and delete this statement as per It is Wikipedia policy to delete libellous material when it has been identified I look forward to your co-operation otherwise the matter will be taken up with Adminstrators. Michellecrisp 01:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Defamation against a username? Libel? Oh dear. Well, at least we know you have no legal training. And there was no suggestion of criminal a ctivity. As I stated, it was not a comment I should have made and I appologised for doing so. I see no reason to do anything further. LibStu 02:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am Michelle Crisp (clear from my username), to suggest I am involved in harassment that is being investigated (I presume by the police, I may be wrong) is smearing my name. This is libel as you attempted to insinuate a number of unsavoury things. I will delete the statement if you won't. Michellecrisp 02:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what sort of condescending statement is "Well, at least we know you have no legal training". My username and profile clearly indicates a real world identity (unlike you) and my location. Michellecrisp 02:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am entitled to my beliefs. I believe I have sufficient evidence to have made that comment. I also do not believe you are a Michelle Crisp from Queensland, and believe I have sufficient evidence for that. For that matter, I also believe you are the "Mark Crisp" from Ashfield NSW who has been emailing SULC President Tim Andrews at the same times michellecrisp is online, using identical words as your writings - these things get forwarded around you know. I also note that your very first actions using this site before I pulled you up was editing the Sydney University Liberal Club, using the same name as the girlfriend of the former president. I do not believe this is a coincidence. Your obsession with the NSW Young Liberals and liberal students, as well as your intricate knowledge of many of the things going on, shows the inaccuracy of your claims to impartiality. I do not intend to discuss this further. My beliefs are mine and mine alone, and I apologised for stating them on the site. I shall not post my beliefs on your identity again, and again apologies for doing so. Having apologised, I do not believe there is anything further I need to do. LibStu 02:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that virtually ALL of your edits to Liberal things have been putting negative information up. Whilst it is true that most of mine are putting up positive information, I do not go around to the sites of every other political party and put up every single minor little piece of negative information I can find to distort it and make it completely unbalanced, contrary to Wiki policy, as seems to be your desire. LibStu 03:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and I need to get started on the juvenile LibStu = Ben Potts tags you put everyone? Grow up. You have no evidence I am Ben Potts. LibStu 03:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have no evidence I put those juvenile tags. check the isps. your evidence is weak and circumstantial, there are literally millions of people on the internet at the same time, is it possible that more than 1 person may question policy/motives. although I will say here that I'm interested in making Wikipedia more objective which at times mean questioning your overly positive edits. I've said before I am Michelle Crisp nee Timmins. I do not know any Mark Crisp and I've just asked my husband if we're related to any Mark Crisps no. I have no connection to Ashfield. I used to live in Newtown, hence my heavy editing of the Newtown entry.

I've done many edits simply seeking more clarification to claims made on Liberal sites: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney_University_Liberal_Club&diff=122980931&oldid=122752745 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Liberal_Students%27_Federation&diff=119672479&oldid=118420911 and why didn't I introduce negative comment on Coalition Senator Barnaby Joyce http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barnaby_Joyce&diff=133338417&oldid=128773957 how is this disruptive or "virtually all" negative edits, please check your definition of virtually all? I will take up the matter of libel comment with the Adminstrators. Michellecrisp 03:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC) or removing union advertising on Workchoices http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WorkChoices&diff=132855746&oldid=132660364 as for my initial edits of Sydney University Liberal Club, I can say this comes from knowing of people indirectly involved with the club such as my brother. he is not a student politician though. Michellecrisp 03:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe you. Simple as that. Brother? Come on. Get real. Like Mark Crisp claims in his emails, again, using the exact same wording as you, that he find things out from his girlfriend. However, I have said I am willing to put this petty behaviour behind us and focus on editing and trying to reach some sort of compromise. I have appologised for my previous comment, and I believe there is nothing else that is required of me. If you wish to continue, that is your prerogative. If you wish to complain to the admins, that is your prerogative. You can drag this on for as long as you like. Personally, I am happy to let the matter rest and move on. LibStu 03:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may not believe me but it's based on pretty loose assumption based on emails from someone with the same surname as me. I've refuted your "virtually all" edits claim and that I live in Ashfield. interesting how the Liberals forward emails to an entire group, isn't this an invasion of privacy? and is this paranoia to prevent leakages? such as the persons who were leaking to the ABC last year from Young Liberals/ALSF? again this diverts attention from your real identity which is relevant to your bias for encyclopaedia editing. one stage you say you say you're the ALSF publicity officer (who goes to Macq) and another you say you go to Sydney Uni. make up your mind. we know who you are, why else would you create the original http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney_University_Liberal_Club&diff=prev&oldid=100654203 Michellecrisp 03:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never said I was the alsf publicity officer. You said that since I edited the SULC page I must be the SULC publicity officer; i retorted that by your rather perverted logic since I edited the ALSF page why do you not claim I am the ALSF Publicity officer. I have never stated my identity, you just seem obsessed with it. I also have no diea what you are talking about regarding privacy. Regarding the fact that I have my own motives, I have never denied them and my actions are perfectly consistent with Wiki guidelines. Stop making this personal. LibStu 03:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look above, you said "Indeed, should you not perhaps think I am the ALSF Communications/Publicity Officer? LibStu 15:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC) " as a way of diverting attention from the mounting evidence. I for no reason believe you are Mr Chiang, I'm sure he's offended by your insinuation. It is clear at the very least it's someone from the executive of the Club. secondly, this is a bit of a coincidence but Ben Potts isn't the best speller either, and I don't mean typos. Your identity is relevant because of the conflict of interest you have. There are plenty of other forums like create your own blog for promoting your own causes or softening criticism of your political interests, maybe you could set up www.benpotts.blogspot.comMichellecrisp 04:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As per [WP:USERNAME]: "A single-purpose account is an account that only does one particular thing on Wikipedia, or only exists to push a single opinion (as opposed to regular editors, that tend to edit and discuss in a variety of areas). Such accounts are not forbidden" . I am perfectly within my rights to "push a single opinion". If you have a problem with Wiki Policy, then take it up with them. LibStu 05:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you don't contradict NPOV or conflict of interest guidelines which I believe you have:

"Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit," but if you have a conflict of interest avoid, or exercise great caution when: Editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with" Doesn't that apply to you? Michellecrisp 05:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. And I have used great caution. I have not removed negative information, nor have I constantly posted glowing praise. LibStu 06:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes you have removed negative information: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney_University_Liberal_Club&diff=prev&oldid=118384438 and putting some criticism of your opponents here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Labor_Students&diff=prev&oldid=101544615 and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Union_of_Students_of_Australia&diff=prev&oldid=99681017 Michellecrisp 06:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

do you think I'm User:Alans1977 as well? because I agree more with him and we both seem to editing the same days? oh gee. Michellecrisp 04:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No LibStu 05:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

interesting the username policy also says "indeed may be novice editors who will grow interested in other topics over time"...seems like you haven't grown interested in other topics hence my belief that you are an active executive member of Sydney University Liberal Club. Michellecrisp 05:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What, retracting your 100% dead-set believe I am Ben Potts now? I believe your words discussing whether I may have been another exec member were "I think not"...LibStu 06:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

where's the retraction, I think not that you are Mr Chiang or someone else from the SULC executive besides Ben Potts. We can move on if you come clean and admit it like any future aspirational politician would. I won't pester you about this again if you do. Michellecrisp 06:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Message of Support

Dear Ben, please do not let these communists ruffle your fine Liberal feathers. We know you worked up about things easily but it's a sign of passion as a Liberal and when this passion is properly managed you'd make a fine leader. We will defeat these biased contributors and restore the conservative balance to this encyclopedia. Keep up the good work. 124.183.185.8 10:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice One

Good pick up on Socialist Alternative (Australia)Prester John 05:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ALSF.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:ALSF.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 '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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]