——————————————— Archive, July 2007 ———————————————
|
This file may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading following images. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description pages and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
- Image:Superpower2 cover.jpg
- Image:Stratagem (ENT episode).jpg
- Image:Storm Front (Part II).jpg
- These Are the Voyages... (ENT episode).jpg
--BetacommandBot 04:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you going to start a request for checkuser case or should I? If it can be proved that those IP addresses were me, then surly it also could prove or disprove if I am a sockpuppet of Diyako or Xebat. --D.Kurdistani 00:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind discussing why you moved that? Shakespeare's play is "A Midsummer Night's Dream" not "Midsummer Night's Dream". There is a disambiguation link on top of the page. -- Cat chi? 15:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Are you serious? Read the Talk page -- the vast majority of users who came to that page did so by mistake. Do you really expect that everyone who is searching for the Shakespeare play is required to know that it starts with the word "A" and include that in their search? --Russ (talk) 15:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I am always serious when I post such a thing.
- The talk page conversation is most uncivil and even one of the posters was a vandal (which you have reverted). I do not see an adequate discussion to move the page.
- Consider a search for "Midsummer Night's Dream", as you can see the first hit is "A Midsummer Night's Dream" and second one is "Midsummer Night's Dream". If people typo and forget to put an 'A' in front of the title the first line they read will show them their mistake to them.
- And yes I generally expect people to either use the "search" function or know the exact title in what they are looking for.
- -- Cat chi? 16:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your comment about search results is applicable only if a user chooses the "search" button instead of the "go" button. Be that as it may, I think the issue should be posted at WP:RM to allow a broader discussion, rather than have you and I go back and forth about what makes more sense. --Russ (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As you wish. Though I,d like to add that the "go" button is reserved almost completely for "exact" titles. -- Cat chi? 17:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and just to be clear -- when I said "Are you serious?" I didn't mean were you serious about wanting the page at a particular title, but were you serious about not understanding my reason for moving it. --Russ (talk) 21:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Heh, its fine :) -- Cat chi? 21:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the barnstar. It's always nice to see that one's work is appreciated. :) --Hemlock Martinis 04:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent bot approvals request has been speedily approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. --ST47Talk 12:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has been reanimated, as befitting for the undead. >Radiant< 14:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What type of animation? :D -- Cat chi? 14:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- You know, the classic type. Heavy slabs, electrodes in the neck, lightning bolt to the chest, that routine. >Radiant< 14:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No ice cream? (btw what is this about? :)) -- Cat chi? 14:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- the White Zombie band cat. >Radiant< 14:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- OH! How could I miss that! :D -- Cat chi? 14:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Btw, I see you are more active with cfds. I'd like to use my bot to assist you with decategorization and recategorization. :) Is there a central list for this? I would like to work on a particular nom right after you close it making a backlog non-existant. -- Cat chi? 15:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
sono chikara mo watashi ga torikonde kuru... 阿修羅96 21:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, how can I help you? -- Cat chi? 13:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I am curious, what makes a historic site "Kurdish"? Can you reference sources for these? -- Cat chi? 11:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Thank you for your question. Every site built by Kurds is Kurdish, and every site built by Turks is Turkish. Brusk u Trishka 11:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not believe it is that simple. We generally sort historic sites by country not ethnicity. What if a site is partially built by Kurdish and Turkish peoples?
- Consider Ephesus, it has Ancient Greek and Roman origin. It isn't categorized as a "Greek city" though.
- -- Cat chi? 13:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Well. if you look at it again, you will see that it is categorized as a Greek city twice in the article. Brusk u Trishka 13:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ancient Greek refers to an era, Greek (ethnicity) does not. -- Cat chi? 13:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Template:Infobox Military Conflict (4 sided), which you created, is currently unused and seems to have fulfilled the purpose it was created for. If there is no particular reason to retain it, would you mind tagging it for deletion with {{db-author}}? Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 16:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I can but why? :) It may be used later on. Does it cause a problem? -- Cat chi? 17:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Why? Just routine maintenance, I suppose. I encountered the page while randomly browsing through templates and suggested deleting it because it is unused and has been for a while. I also can think of no conflict where there have been four distinct (i.e., not allied) fighting sides. If you think it merits retention, would you please replace the "temporary template" message with some basic documentation (nothing too detailed, but so that someone can know how to use it if the need ever arises). Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 18:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I have done as you asked. I really think the template may be used for a 4-way conflict. There are plenty of those - mostly allied two sides which can be presented individually with this. -- Cat chi? 21:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. And never mind about the documentation ... I just realised that it's probably almost identical to that for Template:Infobox Military Conflict. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 21:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(unindent) Can I see an example of this particular infobox anywhere?--Timeshifter 03:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why was it deleted? Who requested the merge? Whats going on? :D -- Cat chi? 22:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Very sorry about that, Cat. Template histories are merged now. Sr13 03:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem at all. :) -- Cat chi? 08:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
There are currently 3 Different lists of Iraq Operations; Iraqi coalition counter-insurgency operations(which is also somewhat POV), a chonological list and an alphabetical list. I have added a lot of operations to the alphabetical listing and have been updating it faithfully but I haven't updated the counter insurgency or the Chonological listing much. Before I do I recommend that we consider other methods. I figured out how to add a column sort function and added it to the Alphabetical listing. I recommend the other 2 articles be merged into the alphabetical listing and then we can rename the alphabetical listing to something more appropriate like Iraq Military Operations since 2003 perhaps. I added a blurb on the discussion page and recommended the merge for the chronological list and the counter insurgency operations page. You seem to do a lot with the Iraq war articles what do you think? --Kumioko 15:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I merely fixed an ugly looking template. I do not know much about the Iraq war itself aside from the fact that we have a lot of articles on it. We can merge multiple templates yes. Which templates did you have in mind? I would prefer a chronological listing over an alphabetical one. -- Cat chi? 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Why should I take the deletion of something in my userspace to the MfD? User:Cool Cat underwent an mfd (closure was reverted 4 times by Ned Scott) and later drv (by Ned Scott). My userspace and how I organize it is completely my thing. I can alter it as I please. I do not even have to maintain archives.
Whats wrong with me reorganizing pages in my userspace? Ned Scott has been repetitively attempting to dictate how I am do organize my userspace.
-- Cat chi? 12:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- What's wrong is that you are causing a large amount of drama (as evidenced by the many ANI threads) over something trivial. You said you want the talk page archives to point to your proper talk page. Fixing these broken redirects is the easiest way of resolving that. You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that the literal wording of the rules must be applied at all times. >Radiant< 13:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The "drama" is a product of Ned Scott's reverts of my edits. I am not the cause of the drama, Ned Scott is. I am explictly allowed to request the speedy deletion of anything on my userspace. Please do not recreate them again. -- Cat chi? 13:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- False, because Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. You are mistaking the letter of the rule with the spirit of the rule. Speedy deletion is for deletions that are not controversial; these pages have proven controversial, and hence should not be speedily deleted. >Radiant< 13:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing controversial about me reorganizing my userspace, the suggestion is rather strange. Please take it to WP:DR or directly to WP:ARBCOM or else, leave it alone. Thanks. -- Cat chi? 13:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- False. As the ANI threads prove, your means of reorganizing things does cause controversy. I'd suggest you quit playing ostrich. >Radiant< 13:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Take it to arbcom or whatever process you feel like. I have no intention of allowing Ned Scott or someone else dictate how I am to organize my userspace. I have no intention of stopping editing my userspace. If my edits to my own userspace is leading to drama, so be it. -- Cat chi? 14:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Please do not make excessive reversions, like you did on User talk:Cool Cat/Archive 2005/08, as that is considered edit warring, and is a bad idea. For relevant policy, see the three revert rule. --ST47Talk·Desk 13:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- While 3rr does not cover my userspace, I will do as you ask. -- Cat chi? 13:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I think the root problem here is that, although I asked you to stop editing your signature, you found a way to continue (changing the links instead of the usernames). Could you please stop doing this? Things will probably get back to normal if you stop editing your signature in archive pages. That's what seems to be annoying so many otherwise fair-minded Wikipedians. It may seem like a small thing, and you may wonder what it has to do with them, but evidently your edits do cause a lot of drama and the drama rebounds on you and not on them. So in your own interests, although it may seem unfair, it is better to stop. --Tony Sidaway 18:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I am hereby employing m:Right to vanish. I request all content in my userspace, usertalk space on all 3 of my usernames to be deleted. I am done here. -- Cat chi? 18:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see a good reason to delete anything. You can vanish any time you want- just log out and stop editing. Friday (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not care what you think. See: m:Right to vanish -- Cat chi? 18:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I will ask Jimbo Wales if this request isn't met within 24 hours. -- Cat chi? 18:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)-- Cat chi? 18:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Since there is nothing in the user name change policy that mandates users to redirect their user pages, I do not understand why changing links causes such drama. It is possible that people Cool Cat has prevously alienated are over-reacting? As long as he does not make misleading changes to archive content, is there any real reason to object? Thatcher131 18:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't. But I have been putting up with this nonsense for quite some time now. After getting rid of Davenbelle and his socks I was able to edit comfortably for a few months. Those were the happiest times of mine. Now other people such as User:Ned Scott is filling in for the role of Davenbelle. I will not bother waisting a full 2 years with this one either. Who know... he probably is a sockpuppet or maybe he isn't - not that it matters. -- Cat chi? 19:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Oh come off it, Cat, I barely interact with you, revert a hand full of edits, and you freak out. It's your own fault, and it has nothing to do with harassment or stalking. -- Ned Scott 05:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It is my fault that you reverted my edits? Why did you revert my edits? -- Cat chi? 06:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- Now I'm confused. Do you or do you not want all your userspace pages deleted? I'm in the process of tagging (see below), and currently I'm still in the Cool Cat sub-pages, which are all or mostly redirects. If I continue I'll be tagging every single page, including your userpage, for deletion.
- {{db|[[User:White Cat]], formerly [[User:CoolCat]] and [[User:Cool Cat]], has asked on [[User talk:White Cat]] for all of his user pages to be deleted under [[m:Right to vanish]].}}
- --Tony Sidaway 19:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please delete User talk:White Cat/Archive and all number links. -- Cat chi? 19:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'll have them deleted as long as they don't contain any substantive edits (if they're just copies of what's in your talk page history that will probably be okay). --Tony Sidaway 19:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Right. I have ceased monitoring any page on the project so I recommend posting things on my talk page. -- Cat chi? 19:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Am I to understand that you don't want User:White Cat itself deleted? If so, in order to comply with your wishes in a clean way I'll probably edit it so as to "subst" any transcluded userspace pages and then delete everything else in your userspace. --Tony Sidaway 19:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- My userpage is a work of art. It shall be my "head-stone" on this project; just get archives deleted and I'll be fine with it. Me tagging them myself is considered controversial and disruptive so I ask you to preform this task. -- Cat chi? 19:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Okay I've tagged all of your talk page archives with the following notice, and most of them have already been deleted:
- {{db-userreq|rationale=[[User:White Cat]], formerly [[User:CoolCat]] and [[User:Cool Cat]], has asked on [[User talk:White Cat]] for all of his talk archive pages to be deleted under [[m:Right to vanish]]. The history of [[User talk:White Cat]] already contains every single edit ever made on his user talk page since he started editing in February 2005.}}
- --Tony Sidaway 20:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, I noticed several of the userboxes were deleted, could they be undeleted? The ribbon pages too. -- Cat chi? 06:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed that Picaroon is taking care of migration. I'll ask him to see about the rest. --Tony Sidaway 08:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh I want nothing to be migrated. Anything that is in use can stay here. I just wanted pages like my archives and history pages deleted. -- Cat chi? 09:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- My sig links can/should stay too :/ -- Cat chi? 12:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I would like you to view my comments here. Your thoughts on this matter is needed here. --Siva1979Talk to me 10:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Articles you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Admiral (Star Trek) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Admiral (Star Trek) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Admiral (Star Trek) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --EEMeltonIV 21:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So what avenue would you recommend for this?
Add "#REDIRECT [[User:White Cat]]" to User:Cool Cat. Presto, done. --Calton | Talk 13:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "Either obey or obey" is not a part of WP:DR. That would not fix my archive redirects. -- Cat chi? 13:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Also inter namespace redirects aren't allowed I believe. -- Cat chi? 14:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
"Either obey or obey" is not a part of WP:DR - Nor are they dessert toppings or floor waxes -- which is just as much a non sequitor, perhaps even less so, than that bit of handwaving. Hint: objections should be made about things that are actually said instead of making up incoherent nonsense to rail at.
Also inter namespace redirects aren't allowed I believe - "User:OLDNAME to User:NEWNAME" is an inter-namespace redirect? Are you sure you know what "inter" means? --Calton | Talk 14:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- You altered your comment... In any case as per past experience I do not desire to continue this. -- Cat chi? 15:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- You altered your comment - No, I corrected my comment, and my meaning and intent should have been and should be clear to anyone with the slightest bit of logical and reading comprehension skills.
- I do not desire to continue this - Of course, given your unwillingness -- and probable inability -- to answer direct questions honestly, favoring instead misdirections, irrelevancies, and stuff made up out of whole cloth.
- So, to repeat: add "#REDIRECT [[User:White Cat]]" to User:Cool Cat. Presto, done. And yet, you not only don't, you've taken active steps to prevent it and spout nonsense when asked why. More than a little suspicious, if you ask me. --Calton | Talk 00:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Then take it to ArbCom. -- Cat chi? 06:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kirk.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kirk.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ejfetters 12:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I find this entire interaction to be distasteful. It would have been much much easier if you simply stated that there was a better replacement image rather than wasting my time with fair-use rationales and etc. In the future please just simply tell me what it is that you are doing without involving redundant policies. Thanks. -- Cat chi? 13:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry for upsetting you, it was not my intention. I stated on the images for deletion page it should be replaced with a screencap and waited a bit, but I figured I would try to be of help instead of saying what to do, and just upload it for you. I will try not to upset you in the future, sorry. Ejfetters 23:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping out. I look forward in working with you again since I now realize you were trying to help while going by the book. :) -- Cat chi? 15:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Oh the image is deleted yet it is on commons. Fun. Admiral Alan G. Kirk. Not James T. Kirk :) -- Cat chi? 16:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
|
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
