User:Nixeagle/Talk/Archive/16

My Talk Page

Hi. Thanks for your input. (1) I am curious ... what makes you think I am referring to Real96? Also, (2) The issue is not how to archive a page. I have asked repeatedly -- still with no answers -- as to WHY one is not supposed to delete old "Help Me" messages. I still do not know the answer to that question, though I have asked it many times. And, after refusing to answer my simple (yet reasonable) question, a user takes the affirmative steps to revert edits on my Talk Page, without explanation? What is THAT all about? How about giving a newcomer some simple answers? Wiki is hardly welcoming ... and is starting to seem like a bunch of elitist snobs. How about some help when a newcomer asks? I am apalled by the behavior of some here. If you would like, please reply to my questions. If not, it would be par for the course that my actual questions do NOT get answered. Thanks. I'd appreciate any input. (JosephASpadaro 02:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

Hello again. I see that you posted some comments on my Talk Page. Thank you for getting back to me. I appreciate that. I am very busy tonight, and unable to (adequately) reply to you. So, I will reply (substantively) tomorrow. Thanks a lot. Take care. (JosephASpadaro 03:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

Hi again. It is now "tomorrow" and, as I said, I would get back to you. Thanks for your replies. You seem to be one of the few on Wiki who is actually out there to be helpful and to answer questions. Of which I have many. Let's do them one at a time. I find it easier to communicate that way. So, first ... you asked about wiki projects. My interest is in Academy Awards, right now. I just signed up for their Project Group. What do have in lines of that category for a project? Please let me know. Then, my questions will go from there. Thanks! (JosephASpadaro 14:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

Ok, what I would do is the following join Wikipedia:WikiProject Academy Awards, which I see you already have done. I don't know what you mean by category, but if I were you I would get involved with improving articles related to that wikiproject, just pick one of the articles at Category:WikiProject_Academy_Awards. You might also be interested in talking to some of the other members for ideas on how to improve articles :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 16:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. That clears up Question #1. I already did join the Academy Awards project, as you noticed. Is there anyone "in charge" of that Project? What I meant by "category" was this: You asked if there were any projects that I am interested in contributing to Wiki. And, I used the word "category" generically to mean that "Yes, the category / topic that interests me is Academy Awards." I assumed that you had a list of projects to "dispense" when you kept asking me what projects I am interested in. On to Question #2. Am I or am I not "allowed" to delete old "HELP ME" messages from my Talk Page? Thank you. (JosephASpadaro 17:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

Ah ok, I don't really have a list to dispense, but you can see the following:

• WikiProject Films
• WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers
• WikiProject Filmmaking
• WikiProject Television

All the above are related to the acedemy awards. As far as deleting old helpme messages, there is no "law" against it, though I personally would advise you to archive your talk page, and to archive those with the rest of your (hopefully) interesting dialog that you will accumulate whilist editing wikipedia. Most wikipedians don't delete things, they just archive them into subpages. So short answer, no its not "illegal" or anything :), but its probably a better idea to just archive it, in any case its all in your talk page history. (see the "history" tab). If you have any more questions just go ahead and ask them all in a bunch, and I'll give you a reply to them. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 17:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. There really is nobody in charge of much of anything on wikipedia, just contact a few of the folks that are a member of that project, one or two of them will have an idea of where you can help out :).

Thanks for the reply. I will check out those Project Pages. On to my next question. Why would anyone want to save old "Help Me" notices? Either on their Talk Page or in an archive? Once I ask a question, and someone answers it for me, the issue is resolved (in my mind). So, why would I (or anyone else) want to save that old clutter and keep it around? Furthermore, if all of that old stuff is already saved in the history tabs, why -- again -- would anyone want or need to affirmatively save or archive it? Why not just delete it and clear up all the old, unnecessary clutter from my Talk Page? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 06:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Quite frankly, it's been a while. And I still have not heard back from you. You have not replied to my message. I do see from your user Talk Page that you have been on line and on Wikipedia, as you have responded to others on your discussion page. Others who have contacted you after I did, that is. Please let me know if you plan to continue helping me -- and responding to me -- or if I should move on to another Wikipedian for help with my questions. Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 01:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC))

Its your choice to archive or not, see this. :) I'd recommend it, but you really don't have to. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 17:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. To be honest, you did not really answer my question. But, thanks anyway. Take care! (JosephASpadaro 01:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC))

I don't know what you are asking, all I will say is there is no rule that forces you to archive anything, but its custom to do so. :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 01:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hemoglobin article

Thanks for your help and swift edit. I think you've provided the solution to our problems. And for this I salute you! Mmoneypenny 20:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Random arbitrary section breaks

I agree that they make the noticeboard easier to edit, especially on a slow connection, but I've been thinking extra section breaks might actually discourage discussions from reaching a conclusion, like people subconsciously assume there is a posting quota to be filled. Maybe. Of course, maybe you ought to take everything I say with a gram of salt. — CharlotteWebb 07:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm it might be a problem, but I think easier to edit trumps in such a case. :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 08:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

OTRS

Just in case you aren't aware, a policy was recently implemented by the Wikimedia Foundation, regarding access to nonpublic data (see [1]) Please note if you do not comply with these rules you should remove yourself from OTRS volunteering where your name is listed. Otherwise, please ignore this message :) Kind regards, Majorly (hot!) 18:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

207.207.127.254

207.207.127.254 is still vandalizing his own talk page (check out this edit). Was the semi-protection you enabled really that short-lived? Xerxesnine 16:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I re-protected it. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 22:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Please unprotect my talk page. I wasn't aware that even editing other people's comments was illegal, especially since looking at WP:Talk, it clearly states:

"Editing others' comments (except on your own user talk page) is generally not allowed." I took this to mean that I could edit others' comments on my own talk page. I am sorry if I am in violation: it simply seemed to state clearly that I was allowed to do this. If it is in fact illegal, then I won't do it anymore, but please check with the rules before banning me. -N

I made it quite clear to this user that this is an IP address talk page, and that this IP address is from a potentially shared IP pool at a university. So this talk page is not "his" to modify anyways. I also suggested repeatedly that he register a username if he wants a talk page that is not shared, but he continues to claim that this shared IP talk page is his own, to do with whatever he wishes. ATren 01:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he made his opinion clear after I committed this 'transgression' Note that ATren seems to enjoy following me around, causing trouble and generally harassing me. I have asked him to stop on numerous occassions. This IP isn't shared, and is in fact tied to this computer. Attempts to edit this information on the talk page, however, have been met with threats and disdain.

Editing other people's comments very superficially (i.e., formatting) is generally allowed. Changing words, however, is not allowed ever, except in very obvious cases. It's just common sense; otherwise, I could make it look like you said that you knew what you were doing was wrong but you did it anyway. And educational computers are usually used by multiple people; hence, they're usually shared. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 01:48, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

HD DVD rubbish

At present the spam filter means it is not possible to edit Wikipedia:Protected titles/May 2007/List as an whole, only in sections and the Symbols section cannot be edited all. May I request that you transfer the HD DVD key stuff to a separate list? Please include this one. -- RHaworth 14:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Err, what do you mean? what is hitting? —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 17:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I imagine RHaworth wants "09 F9 11 02...C0" off the spam blacklist, since it is causing a problem with Wikipedia:Protected titles. Of course, an en admin could do this by using the whitelist, so... Prodego ^talk 01:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Except that they used $wgSpamRegex to set this in the database, so actually only a developer can do anything now. Prodego ^talk 01:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

This string was never ever on the meta spam blacklist :) Any block is developer implented. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 02:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I spent quite a bit of time trying to figure that out. I should have just read the talk page, which I did right after I thought of wgSpam... :) Prodego ^talk 02:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

No worries, you are not the first person to think that th != 1e list can block text. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 02:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Gosh. I thought I was up on Wiki jargon but I seem to have wandered into a corner where they speak a different language! I will repeat my request more carefully: I attempt an whole-page edit of Wikipedia:Protected titles/May 2007/List. When I try to save the edits, I get a message "The spam filter blocked your page save …".

Can you please move the items which are causing this spam filter block out to a separate list so that mere admins can use the list to create other, "routine" blocks? -- RHaworth 18:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There are no items that are causing this block on the spam blacklist. This was done by a developer. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 19:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom with regards to WP:CN

Since that section has gotten rather cluttered, I just wanted to copy the ArbCom response to User:Gordon Watts who had received a topic ban from WP:CN on articles relating to Terry Schiavo.

From: [2]

• Decline; I see no substantial reason to alter the community ban here. Kirill Lokshin 03:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Decline. The system appears to be working. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 07:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Decline; and support community sanctions. FloNight 20:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Decline and endorse both the specific community sanctions, and the right of the community to do so. Essjay (Talk) 00:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Decline; Essjay speaks my mind. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes

Can you make me a header? With my talk, user,Sandbox, amd autograph page links to it please? Wikiman53 t a 20:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC) PS: Respond on my talk. Wikiman53 t a

Um... I don't quite get what you are asking :) On a side note, could you modify your sig so it has a link to your talk page? Thanks :) (again I'd appreciate it if you replied back on my talk page). —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Kreis pages and linkspam concerns

Please see the discussions at the Kreis Wongrowitz article talk page my talk page and re-evaluate. I could care less about the links to my site (well, not enough to fight about it, anyway), but *do* care a lot about some several thousands of people who I know would want to have this data, this convenient. Your choices are: ignore their needs, create tens of thousands (there were some 8000 villages in Posen alone, and about at least 500 church districts in two faiths, civil reg. districts, etc. etc.) of replacement arcticles in WikiPedia, or revert things back to the way they were. You might consider getting some feedback from the Historical States Project itself. btw, by reverting back, the articles are now in another state of complaint, that is: not enough info. I'm so tired of fighting for the audience, against the editors, I'm about ready to mark every article in the project for deletion and let them die. Bwood 22:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any reason why you can't put that information on wikipedia, provided that you had some reliable sources, with decent citations. :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 22:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

BCbot

can you unblock it as I need to run some other tasks. (I will not be tagging ORFU until the issues are resolved) Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

sure. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 00:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been speedily approved. Please see the request page for details. ST47Talk 02:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Primoris Sanctus Ordo Of Sanctus Omnimodus Mens

I left a message on his talk page here. Blueboy96 05:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Jfkjr

Thats not a username violation. I'd suggest that if you suspect sockpuppetry that you request a checkuser to look into the issue. See our requests for checkuser :) Cheers! —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 05:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

You don't feel that it "Match[es] the name of a well-known living or recently deceased person"? Frise 15:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

What name would it match? —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 16:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Jfk_jr, a very common way of referring to the recently deceased person whose article he's editing. "John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr. (November 25, 1960 – July 16, 1999), often referred to as John F. Kennedy, Jr., JFK Jr., John Jr. or John-John..." Frise 17:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Note also the first Google results for "jfkjr" [3]. Those initials are as popular as his name, similar to his father. Frise 17:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - May 2007

The May 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

User:RMc

You blocked this user once before for repeated personal attacks and edit warring. Lately I've been having the same problem with him.

Since you are familiar with this user from before, can you look it over and take any action you consider appropriate? Had it just been his first post I would have let it go, but it seems to me that this guy's oppositional tendencies are going to be increasingly at odds with community values if he is allowed to continue as he has been. He should be strongly encouraged to change his ways or reconsider his future involvement with the project. Daniel Case 17:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Advice for mediator

Do you have any advice to give to a new mediator? -- Jac _roe 20:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

what's with the Gnome bot?

Hi, I noticed the Gnomebot keeps deleting my entire discussion page, and you keep reverting it. What gives? Abebenjoe 20:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

its fixed —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. ST47Talk 20:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome bot

Your "fair use" bot is removing public domain images. Fix it, and fix the pages where it screwed up. Thanks. SchmuckyTheCat 22:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome bot

Please see the not that I left at Gnome. Thank you, J Are you green? 01:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Erm... it did it again! Would you mind double checking that the problem is fixed? Thank you. J Are you green? 20:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... I restarted it with a new list, apparently its not doing all that much good. >.> I'll put in checker stuff again. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 21:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome-bot

you/your gnome bot messed with a page i am currently working on, i reverted the pages to what they were at prior to you editing them, please don't mess with my test pages:) thanks, Ancientanubis, talk 01:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Main Page

What was that? -- tariqabjotu 01:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Main Page

Not sure why, but you deleted the main page ~ Anthony 01:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

dunno some admin messed with it, I thought I had to delete to restore all the revisions. Then my browser crashed. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 01:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Let me clarify I thought some admin deleted it and replaced it with nonsense, so I was going to delete his stuff, and put the normal page back up, in the process my browser crashed.

Eagle was responding to another admin deleting the main page, he is not going nuts. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• Well you earned a mention on my list ;-). NoSeptember 05:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oh fun, though you might want to note at the time I deleted the page, all that was displaying was gibberish. I just took the wrong action to restore. I was thinking history merge, delete and restore all revisions. At the time I did not think of a simple "click history, click undelete deleted revisions". That was my error, things were going very fast. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 06:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
    • When the signpost article gets written I will include a link, as I try to do with all items on that page to add context to events. Plus you can tweak it as you like (just no verbiage). NoSeptember 06:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Blah I trust you to do the right thing :) I don't know if the short description of what happened above is verbage or not :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 06:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm just dying of curiosity

Why did you block User:MilkDrinker? Placeholder account 02:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC) I've unblocked the account, I don't recall why I blocked that as a username block. sorry for any confusion. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 02:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalproof

Hi there, I have a problem running Vandalproof. It keeps telling me that the userlist is corrupt and that I should contact a moderator to have it repaired. Please help. And for the record I am running on 1.36 --ROASTYTOAST 21:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Metropolis (English magazine in Japan)/Crisscross Merger proposal

Talk:Crisscross#Merger_proposal. There is currently a discussion whether the articles Crisscross and Metropolis should be merged. As a contributor to one or both of these articles, your input would be valued. Heatedissuepuppet 11:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank You For Your Action

Thank you for repairing and protecting Adolf Hitler from page move vandalism. Your quick actions are greatly appreciated. Xtreme racer 01:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I, Ryan Postlethwaite, award you this barnstar for all your work helping to get Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention up and running. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Almost Perfect (Even Stevens)

I didn't upload the image. I simply wrote the article so the image could be saved, and tagged it as a non-orphan. ---- DanTD 20:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Did you read what Peregrinefisher wrote about it? ---- DanTD 21:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I used it simply because it's part of the episode. The next time WGN airs it in a rerun, I'll post a comment for it. Right now, I'm too busy working on other episodes, so perhaps you should just leave it be, unless the user who originally posted it has a better one. ---- DanTD 13:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

MedCab cases

Please review your open cases and close any that are inactive. --McClerk 05:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:RM bot

The only reply to my suggestion for a bot was made here by User:Stemonitis, who is one of the most frequent closing admins there. Barely anyone else seemed interested in that whole section to revamp the WP:RM instructions and process, although it was partly in response to a bigger concern that WP:RM is too bureaucratic. I've started a section here to seek further consensus.

Yes, daily at 0:00 UTC please. All that needs to be inserted is

==[[{{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}]] [[{{CURRENTYEAR}}]]==

preferably with an empty line above it, like in this edit, assuming the ==[[11 May]] [[2007]]== below that would already have an empty line above it (from the bot edit made the previous day). As long as there is 1 empty line between each date section, just so the closers can find them easier to move to the contested section.

Optionally, move <!--- Please place new requests at the TOP of the list --> up from the line following the next section title, to the line under this new section title. But this second part isn't very necessary assuming people can notice the directions higher up the page. Thanks. –Pomte 05:45, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Right, they should be substituted. –Pomte 05:52, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks great. In [4] there are 2 not 1 lines between the HTML comment and ==[[11 May]] [[2007]]==, but that's fine. –Pomte 08:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Nick Baker (prisoner in Japan) Request for Comment

A RfC has been started regarding the use of sources (including Metropolis) as "exceptional claims" on the above article. As an previously interested party, your input would be most valued. Comment Talk:Nick_Baker_(prisoner_in_Japan)#Request_for_comments. Thank you. David Lyons 05:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, you persuaded me

m:Requests_for_adminship#Regular_adminship. Guy (Help!) 08:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

When you come back...

There is a message from me concerning your bot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gnome_%28Bot%29

-Dynamo_ace Talk

Image:WikiDiscussion Manager 0.8.14.JPG

Hello, Eagle 101. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:WikiDiscussion Manager 0.8.14.JPG) was found at the following location: User:Eagle 101/WikiDiscussion Manager. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 10:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

You didn't read the licences, did you?

And even if you did, I'm sure Betacommand didn't. I quote:

This image is a screenshot of a copyrighted television program or station ID. As such, the copyright for it is most likely owned by the company or corporation that produced it. It is believed that the use of a limited number of web-resolution screenshots for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, might be copyright infringement. For more information, see Wikipedia:Non-free content.

To the uploader: please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Wikipedia:Image description page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information.

I did just that for my images, and if you had read the comments on those other images, you'll find that the other people who uploaded them have done the same. The deletion of those images is unjustified. Now you claim you can get a free image of Tania Gunadi, but I just tried to find her image in the commons, and couldn't. I'll let that slide, but I still think her image is appropriate for the episode My Best Friend's Girlfriend (Even Stevens), regardless of the false accuastions of there being no rational. ---- DanTD 14:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied on Dan's talk page :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 15:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The rational for the image of Ren and Coach Korns is fairly simple. "Coach Korns" is played by Phyllis Diller. That and the fact that she was forcing Ren to become a pole-vaulter, was kind of important to the episode. Now my image for Stevens Manor is important, because it shows Ren flirting with a pair of twin boys staying at the Stevens household that she thinks are cute. Prior to that, she was ready to bust Louis for turning the house into a bed & breakfast, but her encounter with them makes her go along with his scheme. As I mentioned in a previous message, all relevant info will come in due time. ---- DanTD 15:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

all relevant info will come in due time. isnt good enough fix it now or loose the image. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I see that you have added a rational to two of the images, but I still do not see a reasoning as to why its needed in those articles, nor for which articles your rational applies to. If you fix that, and use the image for critical commentary in the article itself I have no objections to you readding the image. Keep in mind critical commentary requires some text to be written about the image. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 16:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was actually working on one the articles themselves, before I could revive the images. Frankly, I'm beginning to wonder what you define as "critical commentary." And as for you, Betacommand, I can see you tagged another image as being orpahned that should've been left alone. I added the Image:Maddie & London's Suite 16.jpg, so it could be used in the article Not So Suite 16. I thought your bot was on hold, but I can see that's not the case. ---- DanTD 16:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

In any case, thanks for working on the articles, I am glad to help if you can give me some reliable sources, I might even be able to help you with the critical commentary. —— Eagle101Need help? 16

Are you suggesting "EvenStevens.net" and "TaoD.com", and appropriate fansties aren't considered reliable sources? ---- DanTD 16:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any proper citations, so yeah I can't tell if they are reliable or not :(, sorry —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 16:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Check out My Image List. If you see anyplace where I haven't given a citation, I'll add that citation. ---- DanTD 16:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

No no no, the text needs cited in the articles! :) Use the sources you have on the page, and put some citatinos from them inline with the text, if you would like, link me to a couple pages of those sites that have to do with that episode, and I'll show you how to do it! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 17:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for pointing out my error - I only discovered it after examination of the image's edit history...

Booksworm Talk to me! 19:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image

If you read the whole article, it even contains a hyperlink to the article where it is used. D-Hell-pers 22:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:3 Vipers 1.jpg

(Copied from my talk page:)

Hello, Fyslee. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:3 Vipers 1.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Fyslee/Reindeer hunting in Greenland. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm certainly not interested in violating any policies and assumed that the image was available for use in articles. The image is still listed without any indication that it is problematic. Maybe I don't understand the rules well enough. That image is also used in the current article:

• Reindeer_hunting_in_Greenland

and another one:

• Ernest Emerson

I'm just interested in a good image of folding hunting knives and have no particular interest in that particle brand of knife. What needs to be done? -- Fyslee/talk 06:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep all you have to do is pick a free image, if you look at that one it has a non-free liscense, which means that you can't have the image in your userspace, its fine in article space with the proper rational, so if you plan on moving your copy of your draft to article space someday, just put a colon (:) before the word Image such as [[:Image:3 Vipers 1.jpg]]. I would suggest that you read our fair use policy, specifically the parts of it about nonfree stuff. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 06:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome bot removed buttons and banners

THe code you wrote for the gnome bot does not recognize that some images in wikipedia are intended to market wikipedia. Specifically, Wikipedia keeps a banners and buttons archive which has banners that you post on your own website! The only articles these banners and buttons are included in IF they are included is on USER PAGES! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Banners_and_buttons The image is free-- I made it. The image is trademarked only in so far as it was WIKIPEDIA IMAGE. THis is something that is true of all or half of the banners and buttions. Correct the code in the GNOME BOT to respect banners and buttons. REstore the deleted images created by your beta test. Mrdthree 15:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually the image that it did remove was an orphaned fair use iamge. Fair use images are considered orphans if there are no instances of it in mainspace (Article space). There is no bug with the code in this instance. Regards —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 15:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

That rule would delete all banners and buttons. Mrdthree 15:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• No, only remove fair use images from banners and buttons. The policy on this is clear; no fair use allowed outside of the main article namespace. This doesn't prevent buttons/banners. It only prevents the use of fair use images on them. --Durin 16:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont think that is the intent of hte banners and buttons page. It is in the text of thte banners and buttons page that you may use these fair-use images on your own websites, and certainly I have seen them on a number of blogs and websites. Mrdthree 16:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess the administrator User:Misza13 restored the image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Misza13#Undelete_image. Perhaps I can tone down the title and offer some apologies for getting upset (I didnt save the image file). Mrdthree 16:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

gnome bot removal of Image:Cs utility.jpg

The image Image:Cs utility.jpg is a screenshot of a software tool provided by Apple as part of OS X. The screenshot was being used as a demonstration on a talk page of how users might go about performing a color conversion. I think this is a perfectly reasonable example of a fair use usage, even if it isn't on the main article namespace (and improves wikipedia, by helping editors to make accurate color conversions). The Gnome bot replaced the image with a "removed non-free image" image on the talk page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Color), and tagged the image itself as orphaned. I'm wondering if there's any more comprehensive policy, and if you could clarify these actions by the bot. I don't think the current use is improper, but IANAL. Feel free to contact me at my talk page. --jacobolus (t) 10:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Generally if possible it would be nice if you can re-upload and relicense the image under a free license. As current policy stands we do not allow any usage of fair use outside of mainspace. If you will notice on my talk page I've also mistakenly violated these rules, and I will have to relicense my own image. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

It's tagged as a screenshot, which template is a "fair use" template by default. It's not like it's possible to "relicense" the image; it's obviously self-made by whoever uploaded it, but still is a screenshot either way. Perhaps Apple could be asked for permission to use a screenshot, but that seems a little silly; I can't imagine the usage on the talk page not falling under fair use, legally. --jacobolus (t) 18:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

• Our policies are that fair use images (including most screenshots) are not to be used outside of the main article namespace. See Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9. Even if it's legal, we do not permit it. If we did permit it, then we'd have a highly complex environment of fair use management. Having a simple, clear rule makes management of this considerably easier. --Durin 18:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Abomination.jpg

Your bot has removed this book cover and several others that I uploaded. This is an incorrect action as the image is/are fair use of a book cover(s). Please correct your bot or explain your actions. thanks Tony 11:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Tony

Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria#9. "Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages." ShadowHalo 06:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Bot tagged: Buj-logo.jpg

Hello! The Gnome Bot tagged an image in one of the userboxes on my personal page (Image:Buj-logo.jpg) as being removed as a fair use violation. However, the image is still in the template. I reworked the fair use criteria for the image and provided a source; will this be satisfactory? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm in ur sandbox, killing ur pix

Hello, Bishonen. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Aquitaniaposter.PNG) was found at the following location: User:Bishonen/Emigration. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

It was in my fucking sandbox. Where I was writing a big-ass article. With images. So I can't try out any fair-use images until the sandbox is mainspaced, is that it? Would you rather I didn't write any big articles? Any articles at all? At least not any illustrated articles? Bishonen | talk 15:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

• Ok, that was out of line. Using profanity at Eagle_101 is inappropriate. What his bot is doing is appropriate. Working in a sandbox is fine. But, what should be done is that the images you want to be used should be linked, rather than actually displayed. If you need an image for sizing purposes, then use Image:Example.jpg and leave a note to yourself in the code of the sandbox pointing to the actual image, when you are ready to go live to mainspace.

• Lots and lots of people use sandboxes. The problem is two fold. First, our policies prohibit the use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace, and there's no exception for sandboxes. Second, lots of people's sandboxes become old. Where do we place the cutoff on allowable fair use? 10 days? 30? 60 since last edit? The Foundation has made it policy that the cutoff is not to allow them at all. --Durin 18:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Bot Removal

Your bot removed two images from my user profile. I didn't place either and I am happy to remove them, but one apparently has permission to be on wikipedia, so your bot may need tuning.

Happy Hunting Liastnir 23:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Images that have "Permission for use on Wikipedia only" are not allowed, sorry. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome (Bot) edit sumaries

Just wanted to let you know that "notifiing" is not a word :D. I presume this will be easy to fix, only sorry I didn't notice it earlier. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Blah, fixed for the next time the program reloads :) ... I wanted to invent a new word there :p —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 01:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Readd isn't a word either mate, sorry for mentioning it...but my ADD is driving me to tell you. rgoodermote (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I should learn not to compromise when I don't have to

No good deed goes unpunished I guess. :-) See comment on Wikipedia_talk:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler_warning --Kim Bruning 02:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have replied again :) Its on the main page, where this sort of discussion ought to happen. I did note someone (I could not tell who) reverted my edit, so I went ahead and put it back, as there was no response on the talk page) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 02:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler_warning. If you revert me again before we finish discussing, then I shall have to assume you wish to close the discussion as inappropriate. This is not because I want to be mean, but because policy does not afford me much more leeway. :-/ --Kim Bruning 02:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, as I did not have more leeway to ignore the rules, I have closed the discussion, as per policy.

To prevent this kind of situation in future, please try to be less hasty, wait a minute for someone to finish all their edits at times, and do not revert while the other party is typing replies.

--Kim Bruning 02:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I can't. 3RR is very strict, and I don't feel up to doing an IAR defense versus 3RR at this early hour in the morning (it's the trickiest one to do). I've already provided enough leeway as is. It was your choice not to make use of that, so now I'm happy to let policy run its course. --Kim Bruning 03:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Blah, glad we sorted this out on the talk page of the MFD :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

:-) --Kim Bruning 04:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Stealing one from kim, ^^;; :P —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 05:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome Bot

I see that you deleted the image (Image:Clarisemailerscreen.png) that was found at the following location: User:Ww2censor/Uploaded images. Does this mean that I cannot keep track of a fair use (computer application screen-shot) image I uploaded for use on an appropriate page on a user page? Seems a bit crazy to me when the main use is allowable. Your advice would be appreciated. Here is your bot's original posting on my talk page. Cheers ww2censor 04:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, first off, sure you can track your image, all you need to do is put [[:Image:foo.jpg]] instead of the normal [[Image:foo.jpg]]. In any case fair use images are not allowed in any other space other then mainspace, we, (wikipedia, and you) don't own the rights to those images. If you have a look at point number nine of our nonfree policy, it specifically states that userspace is not a permitted location for any fair use image. That aside, the image itself won't get deleted, don't worry. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome Bot

Hello, I´m thw1309. Your Gnome Bot wrote a message on my User talk: The image (Image:Cvlogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Thw1309. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. Gernerally, your bot is right, but in this case the non-free content policy does not apply. This is the coat of arms of the CV an umbrella of German fraternities. I am member of one of these fraternities. Therefore I am autholrized to use this logo to idientify myself as a member of a CV fraternity. This is explained of the context, because on my User page I used the image in a box, stating: This user is a member of a CV fraternity. So , in this case your bot failed. Please could you prevent him from removing the image from my userpage. Thw1309 06:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, per our policy, Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. I'm afraid no exemption can be made in this case, because it would violate the copyright law, with your membership beside the point. Миша13 08:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

you are deleting my user page!

Your 'Gnome' bot or whatever the hell it's called is deleting all of the images on my user page. I would like to point out that all those images came from the articles associated with those albums, and all those images have been there for several YEARS. how come your stupid pet doesn't remove them? this is the second time that this Gnome thing has attacked my talk page. Please stop doing it. These images are fair use, and have been for years. --Paaerduag 08:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The solution is to not display the images on your userpage. On Wikipedia, we have a policy on how we deal with fair use images; on the policy, it states that fair use images cannot be displayed on userpages. Point 9 of this policy says: Restrictions on location. Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails, add to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of discussion.). I have bolded the area where you should read. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to request that you be more civil towards fellow editors. Your misunderstanding of our policy is not Eagle's fault in the least. Миша13 08:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome (Bot) is an idiot

Your bot removed my TV screenshot as non-free :-DD. No offence, self-maded screenshoot can't be non-free. User:Q Original (talk • contribs) 11:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC).

Unfortunately they are, because the TV show/computer program/whatever they represent is copyrighted. Please have a look Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images for an overview. Миша13 11:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Proof that bots aren't always the best for this type of work

Your bot removed Image:DreamHost Icon.png from my userbox template User:Scjessey/Userboxes/DreamHost because it is incapable of reading the fair rationale given in the summary text and figuring out that permission to use the image has been sought and received. I have reverted your bot's action. -- Scjessey 12:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The image is still tagged as fair use, so we cannot use it on your userpage and in the userbox. If they want to release the image to be used on userboxes, it will have to be under either the Creative Commons or GFDL. Until they do that, the image cannot go in the userbox. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The image now has a {{withpermission}} tag to reflect the specific permissions given by the copyright holder. -- Scjessey 15:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• This is insufficient. The image must be released under a free license to be used outside of the main article namespace. --Durin 15:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• I would suggest that you read our policy on non-free content. Cheers! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 15:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Dispute Removal

Greetings.

GnomeBot removed an image from my userpage that was already in use on the PartiallyClips page. The image is from that webcomic and references Wikipedia.

If the image can be used on the article, I'm at a loss to understand why it can't be on my userpage; they're both part of Wikipedia. Furthermore, I made a point to give credit for the image and source.

How to I reinsert it without the dire consequences threatened by your bot?

Thanks,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 16:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC) (watching your page, so I'll see your response here)

Never mind. #9. Too bad, because I really liked that image.

Excuse me while I go remove the image your bot applied.

*sigh*

Unwatch

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 16:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• Image:King And Jester webcomic.png is marked as a fair use, copyrighted image. As such, it may not be displayed on your userpage. Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria item #9, which prohibits such use. You may link to the image, ala [[:Image:King And Jester webcomic.png]] (note the ":" between [[ and Image), but you may not display it. --Durin 16:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

This is about a small group of "nannies" who are determined to impose their view of how readers "should be" using wikipedia, and removing spoiler tags, which are harmless. Calling it "vandalism" is, I agree, a little strong. But only a little. And I only did it the one time. Wahkeenah 17:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well...

Well... I have already read the messages you give me. Don't put the messages again any more. User:Emiliano s

• If you're referring to the messages left by the bot, they are automatic. --Durin 19:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
• Yeah, I'm sorry, but if you remove all fair use images from your userspace, you won't get any more messages. Cheers. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 20:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Exemption request

Re: Image:Martí - Artesa.jpg, I'm "using" the image in my userspace in that I keep a gallery of photographs that I've taken. I'm raising the issue of an exemption through the appropriate channels. Please instruct the bot not to remove the image from my page until this is resolved. Thanks. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

WMF Policy Says ... "no." Which is harsh, but has good reason. You probably want a private web host, Flickr, Photobucket or similar - David Gerard 23:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Please read our image policy, especially point number 9. The bot will not exempt you. Sorry. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 23:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Really? I'm just trying to keep an easy-to-manage-and-access list of the photographs that I've uploaded to the Wikipedia. This is problematic??? Furthermore, I'm not asking the BOT to exempt me, so much as I'm raising the issue on the exemption page. I'm just asking that the bot not run roughshod over my userspace until the matter is resolved. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you aware that you can create casual links to images without actually including them? [[:Image:Example.png]] produces Image:Example.png - this approach will create an "easy-to-manage-and-access list" without violating our policy. Миша13 23:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I suppose that's what I'll have to do with the Martí image, but it's much easier to scan thumbnails and parse the content of the file rather than read text. My point is MAINLY that it's not hurting anyone for me to maintain my gallery page, so why not simply let me do it. There are workarounds, to be sure... but there doesn't seem to be a compelling argument that my use is problematic aside from it violating this arbitrary policy. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The policy is certainly not arbitrary. We need a compelling reason to be using copyrighted images on a free encyclopedia. "I don't want to have to use a regular link" is far from compelling. I feel the need to add that reverting an edit to a version that goes against policy and then protecting that version seems out of line to me. ShadowHalo 06:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The edit was from a bot, I protected the page to prevent the bot (which is automated and cannot be "reasoned" with) from altering it again, not to prevent it from being changed by an actual editor. I do not consider this to be "irregular" other than that the situation itself is far from normal. The policy is certainly arbitrary in some regards. The categorical refusal to allow fair-use images in User space is an arbitrary one. The compelling reason is that it helps me and hurts nothing. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 06:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Come again?

Hello, Gnome. A human process has found that your brain is scrambled, or most charitably that although your mentalese is straight its expression is seriously garbled.

An automated process has found and will [will what?] an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. [Ah, by "used under fair use", do you perhaps mean "used fairly"? And if it's used fairly, where's the problem?] The image (Image:Utterlyfairandimpartial.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Eagle 101/Archive07. This image or media will be removed per [sic] criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. [If that's so, then "necessarily" above is superfluous; if "necessarily" isn't superfluous, there's a contradiction.] All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected [Period. "All ... will not ..." isn't idiomatic in my idiolect. "No ... will ...", perhaps?] Please find a free image or media [What's a free media?] to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. [Say what? I thought that you had already removed it, Mister Gnome. You're now implying that you haven't removed it. Make your mind up.]

In short, before you go mass-splattering boilerplate on people's pages, you'd be wise to read the boilerplate, reread it, print it out, show it to your mum and ask her to go through it with a red pen, read it upside down, read it inside out, show it to your English teacher, etc.

Have a day! -- Hoary 23:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree that the template message should be rewritten, but in answer to the "used fairly" question: Images used under a claim of fair use(under copyright law) are not allowed outside of the mainspace. Prodego ^talk 23:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone wants to help me re-write it feel free to offer suggestions, the future tense is there because the bot actually edits the talk page *before* editing to remove the image. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 23:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

And before it's rewritten, while it's still scrambled, you're just going to keep using your bot to splatter it around? Maybe the latest: Hello, Joltman. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. Sprinkle with "[sic]" as appropriate. ¶ I first guessed that English was your second language, but your user page suggests it's your first. I'll "assume good faith", which of course rules out any inference of arrogance. Can I infer laziness, or is that out too? Whichever, it looks like: "Working out what I mean is your problem, chum. Meanwhile, I'm zapping the image." -- Hoary 00:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Eagle probably didn't notice that mistake even now. Why don't you just stop the bot? Prodego ^talk 00:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes I have noticed and I have halted the bot. Now what exactly needs fixed, if you would like, write up an example message saying what you think it should say... and I'll go from there. This message has been changed several times over the course of the bot's operations >.>. So any advice is helpful :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 00:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like for you to read what fairuse is about, it is not "fairly" :S. Plain and simple our policy states that nonfree images are not to be used in userspace.

Try this number: An automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Utterlyfairandimpartial.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Eagle 101/Archive07. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

An automated process has found and will [will what?] an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. [Ah, by "used under fair use", do you perhaps mean "used fairly"? And if it's used fairly, where's the problem?] The image (Image:Utterlyfairandimpartial.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Eagle 101/Archive07. This image or media will be removed per [sic] criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. [If that's so, then "necessarily" above is superfluous; if "necessarily" isn't superfluous, there's a contradiction.] All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected [Period. "All ... will not ..." isn't idiomatic in my idiolect. "No ... will ...", perhaps?] Please find a free image or media [What's a free media?] to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. [Say what? I thought that you had already removed it, Mister Gnome. You're now implying that you haven't removed it. Make your mind up.]

In short, before you go mass-splattering boilerplate on people's pages, you'd be wise to read the boilerplate, reread it, print it out, show it to your mum and ask her to go through it with a red pen, read it upside down, read it inside out, show it to your English teacher, etc.

Have a day! -- Hoary 23:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree that the template message should be rewritten, but in answer to the "used fairly" question: Images used under a claim of fair use(under copyright law) are not allowed outside of the mainspace. Prodego ^talk 23:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone wants to help me re-write it feel free to offer suggestions, the future tense is there because the bot actually edits the talk page *before* editing to remove the image. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 23:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

OK then. Here is a first draft:

An automated process has found and is about to delete a link in your [[PROVIDE EXPLANATORY LINK|userspace]] that displays an image hosted at Wikipedia but tagged as [[PROVIDE EXPLANATORY LINK|nonfree]]. The file (Image:FILENAME) was found within PAGE. This image will be removed according to [[PROVIDE EXPLANATORY LINK|criterion number 9 of Wikipedia's non-free content policy]]. The image will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so the formatting of your userpage should not be damaged.

The image is not now being deleted or proposed for deletion from Wikipedia; it is not now being removed from any article and no proposal is now being made to remove it from any article.

These edits have been made by Gnome, a "[[PROVIDE EXPLANATORY LINK|bot]]" that is run by and is the responsibility of User:Eagle 101. Please post any question about the removal of the image from your page or about this explanation to [[User_talk:Eagle_101|Eagle 101's talk page]]. ~~~~~

You'll notice that there's nothing about "media". If you also want to go around zapping OGG files or whatever, fine; write a different template for that. (If you must use the term "media", note that "a media" is not standard English, except perhaps among teenagers.)

The message (which is only a first draft and should be checked very carefully indeed before mass use) attempts to explain, or to link to explanations of, what might be called technical terms. I'm not going to spend my time looking for these explanatory links: this bot is your baby; you can do it as easily as me. Anyway, I have to leave my computer in order to attend to my paying job.

And of course the message gives a link to your (this) talk page, rather than luring people to a talk page that tells them messages posted there won't be read. -- Hoary 01:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that looks good, better then what I had, and at one point the bot was doing things with media files but it is no longer doing so... thats a relic. :S. Thanks for pointing that out. The bot is currently back up and going, but operating using the message given by Zscout above. I'll probably end up changing it to your message, as it is a bit clearer. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 01:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome at TFA/R

You seem to be removing fair use images wherever they occur outside the article space. That makes sense to me in general, but are you absolutely certain that removing fair use images from the proposed main page content at WP:TFA/R is the way to go? I'm not saying you're wrong; I just want to know that you've thought it through. Hesperian 00:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

There was a discussion about this a little less than two months ago:

• Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content_criteria_exemptions#Removing_exception_in_policy_for_.22Main_Page.22

It was closed with consensus that "it is the stated policy of the English Wikipedia that nonfree, unlicensed content will not be used on the Main Page." --Tony Sidaway 02:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Tony. Hesperian 02:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Images

• Hi, I'd just like to know that (after an image I had was removed because of some sort of "non-free content") it suggested that I replace the picture with a "free image or media". How am I supposed to know what is "free", and what isn't? I thought this was a free encyclopedia? Wolfdog 01:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
  • What the bot is trying to get at is try to use a picture that has been released under the GFDL, Creative Commons or public domain license. While it is true that Wikipedia is free encyclopedia; one of the ways to make it free is by using images under one of the previous licenses I made it. Fair use images add restrictions where other users will have a hard time using the images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PalestineRemembered/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 05:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

oMg LyKe Ur BoT kIlLd A bAbEe!!!!!1111!!!!

Thought I'd mix up the heading for you.  ;-) There's some discussion of the bot at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#short-sighted use of a bot to remove fair-use from user pages, if you weren't aware. What I actually wanted to suggest is a change in the bot's functionality. From what I can tell, the bot currently removes the image with no trace of the original. This can be problematic, for example, when someone is referring to an image on a talk page. The image should be removed, don't get me wrong; however, completely removing the image makes it difficult to tell what the person was discussing without going through the page history. Would it be a good idea (and possible to implement) for the bot to remove the image but then add <!--commented out text--> containing the filename so that the image isn't displayed, but it's still there for reference purposes? Oh, and by the way...

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thanks for the bot. It's doing something that's been long needed, and as much some of the comments here may disagree, I'm glad that you've taken the initiative to do this. Keep up the good work. ShadowHalo 06:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

As suggested the bot now lists the image in comments, let me know if there are ideas as to perhaps put a message or something in the comment. diff —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 06:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

See my comment regarding the Gallery tag, where the HTML comments seem to not work. --duncan 17:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

~Damn, I should have known you already got a barnstar for this. Well deserved. Garion96 (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

C00l

For outstanding coolness and endurance under fire (after running an idiot-bot), I hereby award Nixeagle/Talk/Archive with the “Cool Award.” Миша13 07:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnome bot

Hi! Your bot sent me a message saying that an image, in this case Peñarol Atletic Club, is to be removed for not having the correct license. Well, I didn't actually understand why he asks me to not include that image again, when that picture in the userbox is not mine, I mean, it wasn't uploaded by me but by another user. Perhaps you can tell me then why I received such a warning. Thanks in advance for your attention. --Gustave - May I help you? 11:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Because the image was used on a userbox that you are currently using. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 14:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I can see that point. --Gustave - May I help you? 17:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that happened to me too, with J-pop and J-rock userboxes. I don't object to this in any way, as I know these are fair-use images and didn't create the userboxes, but I don't think that adding warnings to everyone with the userboxes that the image has been "removed" when it really hasn't will do much, as it is on another page... :) Do you think there'd be any way to fix that? --Cartoonmaster 00:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess I could figure out a way to check that. :) The bot is down right now because of some problem with the servers or something not picking up its pass. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 00:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, good luck ^_^ --Cartoonmaster 01:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

CHECK YOUR BOT

Your bot is driving the a good deal of wikipedians mad!!! It is reverting our hard-work and reaking havoc on images that it has no buisness attacking, since thaey fall under the correct guidlines for being used. I'm not only suggesting fixing it but removing the bot comepletely. While you've been on a wiki break your "minion" has been shredding good aritcles and reputable users. PLEASE STOP THE BOT!!!!!!

Please tone down. The bot is doing a fine job eliminating copyright violations. Only people who are getting mad are those who do not understand (and/or do not wish to understand) our policy on non-free content. Миша13 13:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Egypt and Race Mediation

I'm on my way out the wikipedia door right now but I wanted to thank you for taking the Egypt mediation. It's a mess but I have some hope that a productive atmosphere can be restored. Good luck. NeoFreak 16:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the unblock, and apologies to have increased the backlog at CAT:RFU -- I didn't know what was happening and hence added the unblock template to my talk page. -- Paddu 22:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Any help?

I noticed you took the mediation between Urthogie and Taharqa. Now, I was not around when this dispute started, and have tried to keep myself out of it, however for the life of me, I cannot endure Taharqa's constant accusations of ignorance/bad-faith/numerous-other vices much longer. If at all possible, during this mediation, could you get her to stop? Thanatosimii 04:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The Mediation Committee assists in the resolution of content issues, working towards a comprimise that all parties are satisfied with. Although, naturally, we appreciate that all users involved behave according to Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and general standards, the Mediation Committee has no juristiction whatsoever on 'making' someone act in a particular way, and generally avoid commenting on user behaviour as it generally only further intensifies the situation, and mediators are expected to be totally neutral and avoid behavioural comment.

So, in answer to your question: no, sorry, I can not and will not make any comment, nor any action, regarding the actions of any party during the mediation case. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 07:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

help request

Dear Eagle101,

I can not log into VandalProof. I was authorized to use it three months ago. I get a message "corrupt user list. Contact a moderator". What am I doing wrong? Thank you so much for your time! LaSaltarella 05:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Requested moves

You ran a successful test with Gnome here that added the new date at WP:RM, but it hasn't repeated the action in the few days since then. Can you automate that edit, which would allow us to further shorten the instructions for the page? Dekimasuよ! 09:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Suppose that's a no? Dekimasuよ! 06:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops, it should be working, sorry I missed this comment in the rest of the flood. The bot is reporting to me that its editing >.> I'll go look up why. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 06:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Nothing today, either. Thanks for looking into it! Dekimasuよ! 00:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Your bot has a bug!

Hi Eagle 101, Your gnome (bot) (see User talk:Gnome (Bot)#Image:The end video by birdhouse.jpg) has a bug when replacing text. It may be something you want to investigate and rectify. The replacement picture was not shown after you bot had gone through to do its business. I am refering to the edit it made on 08:58, 18 May 2007 on User:Ric man/Images gallery. HTH,
--ric_man 10:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I know, its been fixed, thanks for the report. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 23:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Alles klar?

Lol: [5] AmiDaniel (talk) 02:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed... I was testing twinkle >.> There was a bug in it. Funny :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Failed replacement by GnomeBot

It seems tbe bot fails to replace non-free images in some cases. Anyway... an image used by a userbox defined as a subpage of a userpage and shown on the userpage results in a message on the talk page, but no replacement of the image. Needs to be fixed.Eric Bronder 13:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Gnomebot removal of Image:Conniedobbs.JPG

.. from User:IMBJR

I am the author of the image, but have gifted the copyright to the Church of the SubGenius. How do I mark the image such that GnomeBot will not remove it again? --IMBJR 15:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately you may not display the image, unless its under a free a free license. If you are the copyright owner, you can release it under a free license, otherwise you are going to have to ask the organization to release it under a free license. Sorry.

IAR dispute protection

Could you please unprotect? The page is in the middle of being edited. I'm not going to revert FeloniousMonk again, but if you check out Talk you'll see that a lot of other editors are in the middle of tweaking the other version for look and feel. Protecting the page will quell that progress. Please consider my request carefully. Thanks in advance. --MalcolmGin Talk / Conts 01:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

What does it really cost you to unprotect? I've provided you justification and rationale for my opinion, which apparently you disagree with. Please unprotect the page. I don't think we are edit warring. If we were, I would have reverted twice. As you can see, I reverted only once. Please unprotect the page and allow us to continue with the compromise/consensus-building momentum we've built. --MalcolmGin Talk / Conts 01:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

You know what? I was wrong. Please go ahead and protect the page. I don't care what version it's in when you protect it. We deserve a protection spanking. Clearly we can't talk anything out. --MalcolmGin Talk / Conts 02:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

You read my mind. Thank you. --MalcolmGin Talk / Conts 02:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

TOR proxies

I see no evidence we are "losing good contributors because of this", and I see a clear benefit; vandals and other ne'er-do-wells can no longer hide behind proxies. And I'm not "changing a policy", I'm enforcing it. Policy is that open proxies are not allowed to edit. Period. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I never changed policy, which is quite clear: Users are prohibited from editing Wikimedia projects through open or anonymous proxies. Prohibited. Got that? It's echoed in Wikipedia: Wikipedia:No open proxies. No open proxies. That's policy. I've merely removed material from essays which encouraged people to violate policy. Jayjg ^(talk) 08:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and please name the editor being affected by this. Thanks. Jayjg ^(talk) 08:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Alternatively, he could stop running a TOR exit node, and then the problem would go away. Jayjg ^(talk) 08:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No, that's not my viewpoint. Wikipedia has a very clear policy about open proxies; you're not allowed to edit Wikipedia from them. Armedblowfish can make up his/her own mind whether editing Wikipedia or maintaining a TOR exit node is more important to him/her. Jayjg ^(talk) 08:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

What new software feature? Jayjg ^(talk) 08:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

About the edit in my user page

Received the message and changed the image, thanks.

—Nethac DIU, would never stop to talk here—
10:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Opt out

Your bot appears to be running inefficinetly: rather than remove all non-free images from my userspace and note all of em in one single comment (which would be ideal), I'm getting many incremental ones, to the point where it resembles spam. I have been in the project for years, long before FU and other non-free image policies. Please do not have your bot leave any further comments on my talk page, just have it remove the images silently. But I do, again, encourage you to code it so that it does everything at once. I'm seeing some user talk pages and it is riddled with comments from your bot, each one taking a full section and paragraph-sized template, whereas that paragraph can feature a list of all the respective images in one section, at one given instance. And then it's over. Many thanks in advance. El_C 16:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Multiple messages

Hi. I seems that the issue of multiple notices being put on users' talkpages has been raised several times already (both here and on the bot's talk). A solution I thought of would be to approach the problem from a different side. First, gather all information (I assume you go image by image checking file links). Then group it per user and only then proceed to action. This way, when approaching a user, you'll have a full list of images that violate the policy in his userspace, so you can list them all at once in the message and then remove. What do you think? Should be fairly easy to accomplish, no? Миша13 22:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. It's dissapointing to see that you have chosen not to respond to either of us. I do maintain that you have the responsibility to offer some sort of an explanation. I see some edits by your bot, such as these, and I wonder whether its approval was premature. Thx again. El_C 16:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm sorry. First off, the bot is not currently running, nor do I plan to run to run it utill this problem is fixed. I'm not sure exactly how I'm going to go about it, but I know there are some improvements that can be done before I run it again. I will likely try doing Misza's idea, though I had an idea of my own, before Misza came along. Again sorry. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 22:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I just saw you online for two days without a response. Thank you for working to address our concerns. Regards, El_C 13:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

weigh in at WT:IAR

As the protecting editor, could you weigh in on the current discussion? We did manage to achieve consensus (from all four people who showed up once you took their toys away), and so I requested editprotection, and not only got slammed, but attacked and insulted, which is starting a fire of a different kind on the talk page. As you were the protector of ignorance and disobedience, it would be helpful if you could clarify what you're looking for in terms of consensus, etc. Thanks, Miss Mondegreen talk  11:04, May 21 2007

Re: Bot account

I'm only making a few edits per minute (I think the average is 4/min or something). In reality, I probably will create a bot account once I come up with a good name. Cheers. --MZMcBride 04:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Cheers. --MZMcBride 04:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I only intended to finish out that particular task, so I felt a bot account was too much of a hassle. I don't use AWB very often because it requires me booting Windows. But, if I decide to do any other big projects, I definitely will get an account approved. Cheers. --MZMcBride 23:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The change seemed pretty non-contentious to me. There are now a standardized set of protection templates, all of which start with pp-. Older templates (like Template:sprotect) are now redirects. I wasn't as concerned about those because those are used as a temporary measure. However, articles that use Template:sprotected2 are supposed to have long-term semi-protection. If there is a new (or updated) system, I don't see any problem with updating the old format using AWB. It allows more people to become aware of the new system and it deprecates the old system. If Template:Sprotected2 is turned into a redirect to Template:pp-semi-protected, it can still be used, only it would require the small parameter to have the same effect, which is pretty standard throughout Wikipedia. Additionally, as far as I know, the AWB guidelines only suggest a bot account in cases where there is a high rate of edits per minute. My speed was low. I hope that clarifies the issue. Cheers. --MZMcBride 02:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

hello

can i know why my article on Abdul Qadir Junejo was deleted, plz, iam waiting for your response

Regards,

Qadeer Mangrio^Talk same as Mehran Mangrio

It appears that it was blatant advertising, used only to promote someone or something. You can see the deletion log here. I think you might also find Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted? useful. Cheers. JoeSmack ^Talk 18:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Close[d] mediation

I noticed that you forgot the "d" in "Closed" when closing this mediation case. The template wouldn't display "close" so I added the "d" and it now says "Closed". I don't know if there are other things to do to that closed case to ensure it is added to the closed case category or whatever else needs to be done to it. I also don't know if there is a particular template that needs to be added to the article's talk page or if the "open mediation case" template can simply be removed. --ElKevbo 20:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

hello

Thank you for your neutrality on "Eternal Divinity" entry. As I am new here, please forgive any errors on my part in attempt to communicate with you. As always, I am honored to participate in discussion. Good Day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfd101 (talk • contribs)

Your nomination

Thank you for your confidence in me. I have accepted the nomination and answered the questions. Vassyana 05:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Real Sound Lab

What are a bit more extensive explanation of deletion of this page? It was more about the technology, not the company - besides, informative, not promoting. This is what I said also on the Talk page. There was also a reply on my explanation that the page seemed ok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umbitis (talk • contribs)

Please read our guidelines and policies on what is considered promotional material. In addition we have a requirement of multiple independent sources that show that something really is notable and important enough to have in an encyclopedia. Cheers! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 05:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The reason why there is no references to other outside source is that this is very brand new technology and there are no way the world can know about it. We have been at the Audio Engineering Society (AES) Pro Audio Expo & Convention and there were several industry leaders who expressed that this is a breakthrough technology. Mostly, due to this reason I made a decision for an entry in Wikipedia. My other suggsestion, I can leave out the company and make an article about CONEQ technology itself.Umbitis 07:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Its not wikipedia's job to let the world know about new technology. When and if it ever becomes relevant it can have an article. Many software projects flop. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 07:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. Then I leave this job until the technology appears on all the loudspeakers out there. See ya.Umbitis 08:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Did you intentionally remove me from the VP userlist, or was that an error? Just want to know. --Whsitchy 20:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC) resolved over IRC --Whsitchy 20:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

User talk:87.101.244.6

I see you blocked this as an open proxy.

I've been going through the French list of open proxies and I noticed that open proxy notices had been deleted after a few months as part of "old IP warning cleanup" by bots. Those are probably not notices anyone should delete but I'm not sure bots are very judicious.

I suggest also leaving the notice on the user page; otherwise, there's no record of any open proxy and it wastes time when people are going through lists (such as this one) looking for open proxies. --A. B. ^(talk) 13:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Online "Status button"

That cool light you have at the corner of your pages- how did you get it? Is it possible for me to make this? How does it work? Thanks! SeanMD80^{talk | contribs} 17:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

See User:GeorgeMoneyBot-status :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 03:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

DB-Repost

Hi - just a quick one about this tag - I noticed you sent Pony Island to AFD with the rationale The given reason was: db-repost. This is not a valid speedy reason as there does not seem to be an AFD or other discussion on this... However if you read the repost tag it states "Previously PROD-deleted articles are not eligible under this criterion, and Speedily deleted articles are not automatically eligible for this criterion. Check the deletion log for prior deletion rationales." hich indicates that the tag IS a valid speedy reason if the content is the same as a previous speedy - I say indicates as the tag is a bit vague. However it IS clear that no AFD is required in many cases.

Either that or the criteria has been changed and nobody has updated the tag? I don't know. --Fredrick day 10:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

heck if I know, perhaps the AFD will clear things up. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 10:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

speedy deletes

Since they were created before he was banned, they do not qualify for g5. Thanks for the suggestion, though. shoeofdeath 17:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

User talk

Re this, not that I really care, and this is mostly out of curiosity, but I'm a bit confused. For one, I don't think "talk page of a deleted page" can really apply to a user talk page. I believe the consensus is that one can remove comments from their talk page because there's still a page history that people can look at, but.. what gives for this situation? -- Ned Scott 21:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Bah no speedy tags, They showed up in CAT:CSD, so I guess I meant to delete as G7, I've restored the history in case the user wants or needs it. If he wants it deleted, he can re-tag it. Cheers. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 00:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Libra

Eagle, please slow down. I am trying to rewrite the blasted article. look at my contribution record. I have no COI and i don't tolerate spam any more than you do. Ocatecir recreated it in my name space for the purpose. Please undelete it for the record (though I could do it myself)--but with 3 admins working on the same article at the same time it can get confusing. DGG 04:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

replied on user talk. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Help with a DRV closure

Hey Eagle, I just closed the above mentioned DRV and it has something around 1400 subpages all of which have to be deleted. Can you please help me with some kind of script to nuke them all? Thanks --Srikeit 04:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Working on it, using a script of georgemoney's. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Great, merci beaucoup :D --Srikeit 04:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

There's a whole truckload of templates involved with this whole mess as well. They all start with either "List of people" or "Lopbn". Also, the Wikipedia-space pages Wikipedia:List of people by name, Wikipedia:LoPbN Meta-structure, and Wikipedia:LoPbN index-template generation but I don't know if they should be handled separately or not. WarpstarRider 11:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Could I ask for a list of all the pages that were deleted to be deposited on a subpage of the MfD? And then a link to the subpage placed on the MfD, with a link to the DRV discussion as well? I am assuming of course that you kept a list of all the pages that were deleted... Thanks! Carcharoth 15:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

PS. There is discussion on ANI as well. Can I ask if a similar script could be used to (a) undelete and blank to page history; (b) (preferable) just generate a copy of all the content of the pages listed at the main template page. I was preparing to make a copy myself, but somehow missed the DRV and had been putting it off for a few weeks once the MfD had closed as no consensus. :-( Carcharoth 15:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The template I am talking about is Template:List of people by name compact page-index. Could I ask you to hold off on deleting that, as it is this template that holds the key to the pages I wanted to make copies of. It is only these pages I am asking to be undeleted/whatever, so I can get hold of a copy to carry out step one of my proposal. Carcharoth 15:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to refer you to the actual closer, I was merely assisting Srikeit in the closing as 1,400 pages or so is quite a bit to ask any one admin to do. In fact it took two of us, User:ABCD and I! —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 16:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

A little something for all your work...

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For the amazing script work and the ton of deletions made in the entire LoPbN matter. Thanks Srikeit 17:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The script was written by User:Georgemoney. Please give him the barnstar ;) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 11:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Gracenotes RFA

I saw your comment on his RFA. Was your intent to support? Frise 02:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

You read it as you like, I don't care to vote in those things. I just gave my view point. :) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 11:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Kingcricket342

The latest User:JB196 sock, can you block him, and rollback his edits (see the discussions on ANI about his disruption) SirFozzie 17:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

May want to hit these too. –– Lid^(Talk) 17:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Also 15 minutes? That seems light for someone who has employed 20+ socks in the last 24 hours and is indef blocked on sight. –– Lid^(Talk) 17:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

He just moved on to Jake Rocker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) anyway. SirFozzie 18:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

sorry... I hit the wrong button >.> indef'd —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've blocked http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Jakesteen << those, Shadow has the current socks. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Finished Page 1 of your Stub removal

I've finished Page 1, just so you know. — Taggard (Complain) 18:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)