User talk:EdBever/Archives

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

Hello Ysignal! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Dylan Lake 08:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

Nice article!

London Underground accidents looks like a very valuable contribution! --Czj 07:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:LUL

You seem to show an interest in the London Underground. Just thought you might want to check out this WikiProject. Simply south 14:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Already done and added some info here and there and started some new subjects. Will continue to do so in the future. Ysignal 10:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Smit logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Smit logo.jpg. 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 page 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.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


Removed widespread linkspam to fansite

Dear Sir, you recently removed the external link to our Prince Valiant website (www.princevaliant.net). I 'have really no idea why you did that. It's the best possible source of information for Prince Valiant there is, everybody agrees to that. The site has no commercial interest of what so ever, it's only hobby and costing me mony, nothing and nobody else. I wonder if you've ever taken a look at the site itself?

In 2007 I also made changes to the article, only to improve it, because the current article is very very limited.That is also deleted. I really lost the purpose of Wikipedia here.

I am not sure if you've deleted other sites of me as well, if so please give me the reason for it! This is very strange

greetings, Marco Bijl webmaster —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijl0130 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Marco, Placing links all over wikipedia is considered spamming regardless of the commercial nature of a site. Wikipedia is not a collection of links. People seem to be using wikipedia as way of attracting attention to their site and that is not what wikipedia is for. See also Wikipedia:External links. EdBever (talk) 15:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Ed, I understand now, I never properly read the background of Wiki, and honestly thought that I was simply adding extra information. Again, the pages I've added are only for information nothing else. And I still think, reading the External link chapter of Wiki, that my pages are indeed falling into real additional, useful, background information pages. But from now on I will use the talk pages first. Nevertheless I was reading in the Wiki documents that you should have give me a warning first, that had give me time to remove the links again and place them in the talk pages. The Prince Valiant external link was placed on the PV page for several years (not sure about how long). Again, I had no intention to become blacklisted...if I had know I hadn't placed the links like this. I only though to add more info to Wiki. Can you please reconsider your advises somehow and place at least the Prince Valiant link back to where it belongs? I would really appreciate it. Bijl0130 (talk) 08:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Marco, I don't doubt your good intentions, external links can be helpfull but wikipedia really gets swamped by the links. I suggest you use the talkpage on Prince Valiant to see if the community really wants your link. Your site contains a lot of info but it's not an official site and there probably are more fansites like yours. EdBever (talk) 12:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

"Spamming" Wikipedia

Your message to me is a bit off-base. 

You said:

5 Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services, (...)

My response is that my site offers thousands of pages of free information.

You: 6 Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content, (...) If i look for Brenda Russell i see some -copyrighted- pictures of disccovers and i can purchase information about that artist and others. This is not in line with Wikipedia policy. If i see the amount of links you have placed in about 4 hours time, this is spamming. EdBever (talk)

Me: (1)Yes, you can buy artist information--for the moment. I am redesigning that part of the site and the artist reports are very likely to go away. Heads up: when I finish the redesign, I will be back to correct the URLs at Wikipedia. (2) I have written permission from Universal Music Group to use photos of its products. Wikipedia has many copyrighted photos on the site. Do you have permission for all of them? (3) Wikipedia has a long history of its users copying information from my site and posting it on Wiki--without my knowledge and permission and despite copyright notices on my site. Because of my agreement with my book publisher, I cannot license my information to you. The only relief I can get from this problem is to post links to my site on Wikipedia. I trust you will agree that links are a much more reasonable solution than having you locate every violator , remove copyrighted content or sending you cease and desist letters. (4) My site covers 2,400 artists and you are upset because I posted less than 100 links. You should count the IMDB ones--a genuinely commercial site and probably not one that Wiki users think of as a reference for music but IMDB is well represented on music pages.

I would really appreciate finding a working solution with Wikipedia. I do not see a day when Wikipedia will overcome the faulty notion many people have that because things are posted on the internet they are free and copyrights do not apply.

If you have some suggestions that would help me, I'd appreciate them.

MasterRecs (talk) 20:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Dear MasterRecs, I know people copy material from other sites to wikipedia-articles. I agree it's very hard to prevent or stop this. Images on wikipedia are very harshly patrolled for copyright-violations. You probably have read Wikipedia's copyrights policies. Imdb is indeed sometimes questionable in reliability but it's also another source of information (as is wikipedia). The wiki-society agreed that linking to Imdb is allowed since the consensus is that it adds information to an article or is useable as secondary source or reference. Placing 75 links in articles without community consent is not-done here in wikipedia. Only if the community agrees that addition of a link to your site in relevant articles is allowed then placing such a number of links is acceptable. I would suggest that you ask approval of the community. If you do keep placing links without discussing it first you run the risk of being blacklisted. I don't think this helps a lot, but then again, talk is free here. EdBever (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Demand for explanations (elimination of a link)

Ciao EdBever, The link of the site of the italian fans of Michel Vaillant it has been eliminated from the italian, french and english pages dedicated to this comic strip and its authors on Wikipedia. The rules of Wikipedia allow the links to the sites of the fans if these are important in order to deepen the dealt arguments. I think that the site of the italian fans, a site nonprofit authorized from Jean and Philippe Graton (the authors of the comic strip), with hundreds of pages of informations, is important in order to deepen the acquaintance of the comic strip and its authors. why, for analogy, it has not been eliminated the link of the site-web of the french fans ? The link it has been removed also from the section " References" of the page dedicated to Michel Vaillant in English (in that section, the link it had been inserted directly from the english creator of the page, which had cited the site of italian fans together to the others sources from where he had taken the informations) .....why ??? Without controversies I will accept every your decision, but I would appreciate to understand the true motivation of the elimination. Sorry for my, very bad, english. Sincerely yours. Gianfranco Castellana (webmaster of www.michel-vaillant-fan.it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.158.175 (talk) 20:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Gianfranco, The reason I found the links to your site was because our spam-searching bot found it: m:User:COIBot/XWiki/michel-vaillant-fan.it. The link has been placed on several wikipedia-projects (languages). You are correct that some fansites are -sometimes- allowed as external links in wikipedia. See the external link policy, item 11. Personally I feel the only relevant link is www.michelvaillant.com.
Your site is written in Italian. If you place a single-language link in another language the usefullness is very limited.
The reference you mention was no real reference, except that it showed there is at least one fansite. As a reader I don't really need that kind of reference, with a subject like Michel Vaillant there are surely many fansites. I suggest you ask the wikipedians in the various projects if they want this link. Furthermore I suggest you place as much information from the site on wikipedia. I hope I have answered your questions. EdBever (talk) 22:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi EdBever, thanks for the answer, but, between the reasonings, I continue not to understand because, like the Italian site, you have not eliminated also the link to the french fanclub and to a french forum that they are still in the french page. But, as I have said, I accept the decision even if I am sure that who will modernize the pages of Michel Vaillant will continue to take news also from www.michel-vaillant-fan.it (even using the automatic translators...), considered that I constantly receive news of the comic strip directly from Philippe Graton and Christian Papazoglakis (of which I am fortunately friend…). Personally I guarantee that I will not insert more the link (even if I hope that you see again your position). Ciao,Gianfranco. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.158.175 (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, At first I blacklisted your site, but seeing your explanation I have removed it from the blacklist. Since you receive info from Philippe Graton your site could be considered the official fansite. I still think you should discuss inserting the link with the other users (via Talk:Michel Vaillant on the various languages). May I suggest that you place an English-language page on your website? EdBever (talk) 10:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi EdBever, Thanks. Actually, the official fan sites (those which have contacts and are recognized from Graton) are the french and the italian fansites. There is also a german fansite (but I do not know if he has contacts with Graton). There are not other Michel Vaillant fansites in the world (at least up to now). Even if I do not know very well Wikipedia (and I write very badly in English…) I will try to follow your suggestions. Ciao. Gianfranco —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.165.221 (talk) 17:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your recent revert of vandalism on my userpage, much appreciated, by the way: just couldn't reisist this edit summary: 1 in response to this one SpitfireTally-ho! 21:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome. I am not a biologist, but according to that guy we're of the same species I guess... EdBever (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I copied the userbox, it's nice to know how well-loved we are. EdBever (talk) 21:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Cyber Hymnal

We got a spam notice (presumably from an automated bot) which said we hade made an "inappropriate" link to our bio page on Francis Scott Key (http://www.hymntime.com/tch/bio/k/e/key_fs.htm). We followed the explanatory link it gave, but are baffled why it considered our link inappropriate. Our link was to a biographical/works page that contains material not found elsewhere on the Web, so we thought it was entirely appropriate. Are we missing something?

As to link order, is there a written policy on this subject? We assumed that the links go sources with the most data would go first.  ??

FYI, the Cyber Hymnal is not a commercial site, & does not even carry ads (though the group that hijacked our old domain name (cyberhymnal.org) does.

But you *do* use black hat SEO techniques - the 100 or so invisible linked images on hymntime.com give you away. MER-C 09:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

POV edit

O really? You found it unconstructive? Then tell me how you call "I love them" and "I am a fan of them" messages in music bands' talk pages as 'constructive'? Ahhh.. also, who gave you the right to 'revert' my messages in the talk pages?--hnnvansier (talk) 12:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh please, this diff is an attack at most wikipedians! Please do not call people losers but try to enter in constructive discussion. EdBever (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

George Halse

Hi Ed,

I am trying to create my first article on George Halse who was a 19th century British sculptor. I have a number of citations and one of these seems to be causing a problem. I entered it at the beginning as per instructions but then got an error message and I don't know how to deal with it. As a result the main text of the article with citations properly entered will not save. Can you help? The error message relates to Farningham, Elizabeth, George Halse Sculptor 1826-1895, Doncaster, 2002 ISBN 0954237919. and then altered so that it was consistent with MLA.

Can you help? Gunx Girl

I see someone else already helped out. I think the article looks good now, but if you need help you can ask me here (I was away from the computer just after my revert on your page so I wasn't able to help out). EdBever (talk) 15:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you EdBever, much appreciated. Yes, it's amazing how quickly people are there to help! Gunx girl.

Many thanks

Thank you very much for your revert on Angelokastro (Corfu) here. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 20:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC))

And for Panagiotis Kanellopoulos. I had missed these. Take care. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 20:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC))

You're welcome, this guy tagged 2 articles per minute... EdBever (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up the mess that IP 128.243.253.112 made! (I guess that means I'm doing my job. A welcome relief from the real world.) JeanColumbia (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! I usually reside on nl: wikipedia but the folks here are definitely more outspoken both on the good side (your message) and the bad side (that IP's message) ;). EdBever (talk) 10:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Your welcome - and thanks for reverting the mess on my page! QueenCake (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Audre Lorde vandal

User:67.84.87.196 vandalized the Audre Lorde page after your final warning. Dkreisst (talk) 22:11, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems they stopped now, the next time you can report this to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. I am not an admin so I can not block anybody. EdBever (talk) 22:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
(Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism...) LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the correction! EdBever (talk) 06:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Shoot! Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. Dkreisst (talk) 22:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Your userpage

I have semi-protected it for 6 hours. You can request it lifted if you want, but I was hoping to get some ip's frustrated by their inability to practice their spelling on it... LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:11, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! EdBever (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't bother warning him any further.

I've already reported the name as offensive. He's already blocked; it just hasn't happened yet. HalfShadow 19:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

OK. EdBever (talk) 19:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Forsyth Missouri

Hey, please just block this IP. You've gotten at least 30 vandalism-related edits, you should probably just go ahead and block it so we don't have any more garbage coming from this IP. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.199.194.83 (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reporting the user to AIV for me. --Odie5533 (talk) 21:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

School Page

According to the rules, aren't those comments on that school's talk page violation of the talk page guidelines? just wondering, thank you. -- 62.209.19.224 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.209.19.224 (talk) 10:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, I nominated it for speedy deletion. EdBever (talk) 11:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
It's cool :) Thank you! --62.209.19.224 (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC) (talk)

AfD nomination of Rohingya Jihad

An article that you have been involved in editing, Rohingya Jihad, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohingya Jihad. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting!

Thanks for catching the vandalism to my userpage! —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 01:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

My edits in the I've Got No Strings article

I'm sorry, but I was only helping directly pointing some of the wikilinks. I can promise you that I mean no harm to articles. --99.158.136.26 (talk) 04:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

CSD tag

Heh, guess Huggle got a little confused there for you for a second. Until It Sleeps 12:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I've never seen this sort of mixup on huggle.... EdBever (talk) 14:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

GTA vandalism

Just so that you know, your reverts of the edits by the 78.x.x.x IP user were correct. He/she is a serial vandal who mainly alters dates. He/she is always on a Turkish IP address and attacks articles connected with GTA as well as Nokia Mobile phones, Peugeot cars and Turkish entertainers/singers. - X201 (talk) 12:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up! I had to do some research before I found out it was actually vandalism. EdBever (talk) 14:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

I hope you don't mind my asking, but how long and how often do you sit there and watch the recent changes? I'm interested to know what it takes. 207.67.17.45 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey, bro, come on...that's not cool. 207.67.17.45 (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
This morning 10 minutes, right now an hour. Why do you ask? EdBever (talk) 15:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I am interested in participating in a similar fashion, but the task seems to be daunting. I am glad to hear that something substantive can be done in as little as 10 minutes. Can you provide any insights on the comparison between WP:TW and WP:HG? 207.67.17.45 (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
First of, you can start with special:recentchanges to see new edits and see if you can pick out the vandalism. You'll learn to spot vandalism very quickly. If you are looking to automate the patrolling I'd start with Twinkle, since that is a bit more convenient for starters. It does not actually have to be "live" RC-patrolling, you can patrol edits that have been made in the past. Huggle is "Live" the moment you start huggle and the connection has been established you start seeing the new edits. I'd suggest you register first, when you have a username people will trust you sooner. If you have any questions I'd be happy to help, so stop by here. EdBever (talk) 16:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Rockall

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.12.186 (talk) 12:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC) Removed fake warning by vandal

You are vandalising wikipedia and accusing me of reverting too often.... Just stop deleting content and I won't revert you. EdBever (talk) 12:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Ed - my compliments on your patience and steadfastness - applause - ClemMcGann (talk) 14:20, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! EdBever (talk) 14:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Yep mate, I think he's just getting fun out of adding nonsense[1] and deliberately creating edit wars. Let's hope an admin acts upon his report at the vandalism noticeboard soon. —StaticVision (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Blanked pages

Hello EdBever, please remember to check that when a page is blanked it is not the page creator blanking it, if it is then the page can be tagged with {{db-blanked}}. The case to which I refer is Don Krug. I understand that this is a problem when using huggle, as I use huggle myself, but this is becoming a big problem, users getting warnings when all they were trying to do was make a good faith request for deletion. Cheers SpitfireTally-ho! 17:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for removing the warning from the users talk page, much appreciated. All the best and keep up the great work, SpitfireTally-ho! 17:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I noticed the username and the pagename were similar, and you beat me to tagging it as CSD-7. Huggle does sometimes ask to tag it for CSD, but not if there are other users who have edited. But thanks for the heads-up! EdBever (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou

...for removing vandalism from my talkpage--Tangent747 (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! EdBever (talk) 19:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hey, just testing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint-billy (talk • contribs) 14:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

EdBever...I need your help with a Wiki matter..please email me Ruthie818@neo.rr.com username on here OhioRuthie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OhioRuthie (talk • contribs) 20:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Please state your problems here so everybody can have a look at it if they want to. As far as I can see you keep deleting the same section of an article without discussing it. The section seems relevant. EdBever (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit warring on Family Court With Judge Penny. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Tiptoety talk 21:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Please note I have also blocked your IP. Do not continue to edit war or evade this block by using multiple accounts as it will result in longer blocks. Tiptoety talk 21:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

That is not my IP, please request a checkuser if you doubt this. EdBever (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Considering the IP was warring, I'd say the IP block is still justified. — neuro(talk)(review) 21:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's not your IP (at least, assuming that you are in the Netherlands), since that IP in Georgia, USA. — neuro(talk)(review) 22:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Look at the contribs of that IP versus my contribs, I was logged in and active during the anon contribs. EdBever (talk) 22:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

EdBever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am patrolling recent changes, I have made more than 4,000 edits without one single block or any other punitiveor preventive action against me, though some vandals have complained on my talkpage (of course). I have reverted one user's edits more than 3 times. I should not have reverted more than 3 times since that edit might probably not constitute obvious vandalism. This user kept removing relevant material to which user:Proofreader77 added better references, he/she reverted Proofreader77 15 minutes later again without discussing. I have no personal involvement in any part of that article except the edits of this evening. I was and am still acting in good faith.

Decline reason:

In that situation, you should have requested protection. There are other, and better, tools than rollback. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

EdBever (talk) 22:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Per our discussion off-wiki, your account is now unblocked. Happy editing. Tiptoety talk 21:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Per your above stated block, I have revoked your rollback privileges as you violated WP:ROLL by using a anti-vandalism tool in a content dispute. You may re-request the tool on my talk page, or using the usual means at WP:PERM. Tiptoety talk 21:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I would re-request had I not been blocked... As stated above this is the first time in over 4,000 edits. Besides, and I know it's a weak defense, that user was warring for some time before I got involved. EdBever (talk) 22:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Right, of course. I was meaning re-request it once your block expires. Tiptoety talk 22:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry too much

Hey Ed, just saying how very much appreciated your work in the recent changes is, I shouldn't worry to much about one block, it can happen to the very best of us. Hope that you stay and continue your great work here, cheers SpitfireTally-ho! 05:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks mate, this situation sucks... It even cost me some sleep, and even my work doesn't cause that... EdBever (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't allow it to cost you sleep mate, seriously. Nja247 15:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EdBever/Archives&oldid=1145079332"