→Brazil4Linux sockcheck?: respond |
Aaron Brenneman (talk | contribs) →Brian Peppers deleted again: if you restore something I have deleted I would appreciate it if you would at the let me know |
||
Line 176: | Line 176: | ||
What part of "What part of "Based on some new information, I am reasonably satisfied that the takedown request is genuine at this time" do you not understand? The Uninvited Co. has made his case pretty clear, and I'm inclined to say that if you disagree, you should take this to the mailing list, the ArbCom or the board. This is not a matter for a vote. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 19:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
What part of "What part of "Based on some new information, I am reasonably satisfied that the takedown request is genuine at this time" do you not understand? The Uninvited Co. has made his case pretty clear, and I'm inclined to say that if you disagree, you should take this to the mailing list, the ArbCom or the board. This is not a matter for a vote. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 19:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
== Brian Peppers deleted again == |
=== Brian Peppers deleted again === |
||
[[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] has seen fit to delete the [[Brian Peppers]] article again. Any way you could restore it until the new AfD discussion is concluded, please? It's very difficult to hold a discussion on an article when it disappears randomly. Thank you! :) --[[User:Ashenai|Ashenai]] 20:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
[[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] has seen fit to delete the [[Brian Peppers]] article again. Any way you could restore it until the new AfD discussion is concluded, please? It's very difficult to hold a discussion on an article when it disappears randomly. Thank you! :) --[[User:Ashenai|Ashenai]] 20:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
*The article content is available on the Talk page of the AfD. There is no consensus to restore and certainly no consensus anywhere to *again* start a new AfD. I have simply restored the status quo ante. The Uninvited Co. has restated that, based on new information, he believes the takedown request to be valid and legitimate. I suggest that if you want to pursue this matter, you go to the ArbCom, the mailing list or the board. This is not something for a "vote" anymore. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 20:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
*The article content is available on the Talk page of the AfD. There is no consensus to restore and certainly no consensus anywhere to *again* start a new AfD. I have simply restored the status quo ante. The Uninvited Co. has restated that, based on new information, he believes the takedown request to be valid and legitimate. I suggest that if you want to pursue this matter, you go to the ArbCom, the mailing list or the board. This is not something for a "vote" anymore. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 20:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
Line 184: | Line 184: | ||
:::::I shall add the references to the version on the Talk page. My point is, none of the references except Snopes are to any coverage of the subject - because there have been absolutely none outside the Internet, except for one blurb on a Toledo TV news station. Hence, the fact that they're not on the Talk page doesn't change anything. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
:::::I shall add the references to the version on the Talk page. My point is, none of the references except Snopes are to any coverage of the subject - because there have been absolutely none outside the Internet, except for one blurb on a Toledo TV news station. Hence, the fact that they're not on the Talk page doesn't change anything. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
::::::Thank you! I still disagree with your deletion of the article with the discussion underway, but this is much more acceptable now. --[[User:Ashenai|Ashenai]] 20:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
::::::Thank you! I still disagree with your deletion of the article with the discussion underway, but this is much more acceptable now. --[[User:Ashenai|Ashenai]] 20:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
Alkivar - <br/> |
|||
This was a poorly considered action. It would have been wiser to not twist a quick pseudo-vote into "consensus" in light of the facts that: |
|||
*This had been deleted by three other admins and only restored by one in the recent time-frame, |
|||
*There were ongoing discussions on both ANI and on the article's talk page, and |
|||
*The only admin who criticised the re-deletion and close of the AfD was the one who restored it. |
|||
I'd note that you commented on the matter at ANI on 20:37, 14 February, so at the very least you were aware that your actions would be controversial. Did it occur to you to say "I'm going to restore this" and test responses? Once you had restored the article you: |
|||
*Failed to put a note on WP:ANI saying that you had done so, and |
|||
*Failed to put a note on the deleteing admin's talk page saying you had done so. |
|||
I'm leaving a note on ANI, I'd encourage you to expand on your reasoning there. In the future, if you restore something I have deleted I would appreciate it if you would notify me. <br/> |
|||
[[User:Aaron Brenneman|<font color="#000000">brenneman</font>]][[User Talk:Aaron Brenneman|<font color="#000000"><sup>{T}</sup></font>]]<span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman<font color="000000" title="Admin actions"><sup>'''{L}''' </sup></font>]</span> 23:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Brazil4Linux sockcheck? == |
== Brazil4Linux sockcheck? == |
Revision as of 23:39, 15 February 2006
Food for thought: | |
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism by Larry Sanger. | |
"...We make the internet not suck." — Jimbo "POV Pusher" Wales | |
To do: | |
|
|
This user is a part of the Military history WikiProject, which aims to expand Wikipedia's coverage of military history. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
WikiProject on Beer | This user is member of WikiProject Beer, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to beers and breweries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
I'd be willing to scan just about all of the NASA stuff if it's really only 500 pages or so. Do you want me to send it back when I am done? I was thinking some of the documents might be better OCR'd and converted to wikitext articles, if they are predominantly textual. My scanner can scan up to legal size. For anything larger, I have a hand scanner that scans a path 4 inches wide, can stitch those scans together for larger images. please delete my email address when you are done with it. Pedant 17:54, 2004 Oct 16 (UTC)
- pages are in the mail you should recieve them soon. Alkivar 04:18, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The package of NASA material has arrived. It appears to have survived the trip well. I haven't opened it yet, will try to start tonight.Pedant 22:34, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)
I'm stuck for a bit on scanning, the computer the scanner is connected to has had the RAM removed, I'm waiting to get it back from Kingston. They received it on the 22nd of November, so I expect it back in a matter of days. Pedant 07:23, 2004 Nov 29 (UTC)
OK, I have the scanner running, trying to figure out the OCR thing. I uploaded this one file for test purposes. I'd like to convert this kind of thing to wikitext rather than keep them as jpgs, cause they get pretty big. If you know of any resources to help me figure out optical character recognition, I'd be grateful. Pedant 22:12, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)
- all right, I have worked a bit at it,and looks like I'm started. The front page for the archive, at present is at this page on wikisource Pedant 06:55, 2004 Dec 30 (UTC)
- EXCELLENT! Alkivar 01:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You been doing any more with those NASA Facts papers? Sorta curious as I havent heard anything in a while. ALKIVAR™ 01:02, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- yes, I have taken a break on that, I'm working on getting a faster scanner, but I will definitely follow through on the whole pile. I'm really busy these days so faster is really gooder... gotta run, let me know when you get back from your break. Pedant 02:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
A quick note to say thanks
I just wanted to drop you a quick note to thank you for your support in my request for adminship. It was certainly a wild ride, and I really appreciate you taking some time out to contribute. ClockworkSoul 16:26, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your work on the Jew template
I know it's a bit frustrating now, but in the end I think it's going to be vastly improved, and most of the credit goes to you. Jayjg | (Talk) 02:54, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nice work, and thanks
I just wanted to thank you for coming up with the idea for the The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar, which evolved into the finest (and in my opinion highest) award that we have here at the 'pedia.
Oh, and by the way (for what it's worth) I like your orange sig and the associate image. It adds a bit of flavor to sometimes bland pages. – ClockworkSoul 14:07, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Defender of the Wiki Barnstar citation
Kudos on inventing the Defender of the Wiki Barnstar. Since I think defense of Wikipedia is extremely important, I've edited the DOTWB page to include their citations and supporting evidence. In fact, the only award I can't find supporting evidence for is... um... yours. Could you link it in when you get the chance? Thanks! Alba 00:45, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I dont have one... I never self award. :) ALKIVAR™ 01:07, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Steve Dalkowski
Thank you for your FAC support and for updating the table, looks good! Is it Hardcore dance music you're into or that horrible Hardcore Rap stuff they play on MTV? There's very, VERY few of us hardcore dance music fans in the US :) Zerbey 18:39, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Colditz Castle
Impressive work on the Colditz Castle. I enjoyed reading the article. StRay 20:39, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Signature
Thanks for voting in my RfA - but please don't use images in signatures! They are unnecessary server load. See [[WP:~~~~]]. r3m0t talk June 30, 2005 20:28 (UTC) (reply here)
- What are the size restrictions for signatures, anyhow? I've been considering using one myself. —RaD Man (talk) 1 July 2005 01:20 (UTC)
- For the record i've had this conversation with the dev's ... the image is on commons, not on the en server. The server load is therefore negligible. Or at least thats the conclusion we came to. As for the other reasons listed, it neither interferes with line height nor blinks... I think you worry too much :) ALKIVAR™ 1 July 2005 06:45 (UTC)
User page improvements
LOL! Thank you for "improving" [1] my user page. — brighterorange (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Van Impe
Your addition of audio to the Jack Van Impe article rocks my world. - Jersyko talk 03:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
You have been nominated
You have made a positive impact on Wikipedia, and I firmly believe sysop privileges would only enhance your contribution abilities. If you do not mind, I have taken it upon myself to nominate you for adminship on this hallowed occassion. Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/nominate#What_to_do_if_you_are_nominated: should you wish to accept, as there have been some changes to the RFA process as of late. Best regards, Hall Monitor 22:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Nice work!
Hey, dude. Just wanted to say that I really enjoyed reading Don't Copy That Floppy. Nice job, and keep up the good work!--Sean|Black 04:46, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Blocked!
You have been blocked for being a sockpuppet of Boothy443.
Just kidding. Thanks for supplying the only oppose vote on my RfA in the absense of Boothy. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I mess up in the use of my new powers. --GraemeL (talk) 16:00, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
- It would be far, far more unsettling if you were accusing him of being a sockpuppet of this Boothby... --Nlu 17:09, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Wikimania 2006
Firstly, enjoy your Wikibreak; come back clear-headed and ready to edit! Second, I noticed you live in New England, and are a DJ (awesome!), and wondered if you've heard of Wikimania 2006, which is happening right here in our fair city of Boston. I know it's a few hours' drive from where you are, but if you could participate in IRC chats, or volunteer to help with Wikimania, we'd really appreciate it. I enjoy working with you, and look forward to seeing you in the future. Happy wikibreak, Mysekurity 02:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- P.S. I love the userpage! 02:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
St. John's College High School
Fantastic work on the St. John's College High School article, it looks wonderful! Bahn Mi 21:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Images
Thank you for the additions of pictures of the Bendix and Thompson tropies! KillerChihuahua?!? 13:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- I dispute your unsourced assertion that you ever sit on your "lazy ass"! If you expect such controversial claims to remain unchallenged, you should not use such a recognizable sig! No one even has to check your contribs to see that is a deliberately false and misleading statement. I am deeply disappointed in you for attempting to push this unsupported minority POV. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:17, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for fixing my ugly user page! I really appreciate it. I had tried to make it look nice, but I just couldn't figure it out! Thanks!Reggaedelgado 19:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
ALF, now with added ALF
Here's a barnstar for converting me to ascii and HTML they are fantastic, thanks. I spent three hours this week trying to find just an ascii version, so I am delighted to have these in user space. Big smile on my face now, thanks. --Alf melmac 11:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Funny shit, I wish I still had one of the posters (the one with a swashbuckling floppy) that they sent out to universities during that campaign so I could up it to commons. Also, excellent work on the many aspects of warez (it's refreshing to see well written articles by people who have a clue). Nice userpage, too, 'cept the whole spiel about being conservative ;-P (at least you aren't a GWB fanboy). --Dragon695 18:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Question about block of Ec5618
I dont see where Ec5618 violated 3RR, am I missing something or did you miscount? KillerChihuahua?!? 14:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Image:Alkivar-003-TWEAKED.jpg
I have a question about the above mentioned picture. You state it was taken by Utopium Photography, yet you claim to be the copyright holder. If this picture was not taken by you, but you are the subject the photographer has to release the copyright to you. Just like wedding photos, the married couple do not hold any copyrights, or infact any rights to the photos. Mike (T C) 23:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Dude... you have absolutely no idea what the hell your talking about. In the US, works for hire cannot be registered for copyright by the creator. See this pdf:
- Under the 1976 Copyright Act as amended (title 17 of the United States Code), a work is protected by copyright from the time it is created in a fixed form. In other words, when a work is written down or otherwise set into tangible form, the copyright immediately becomes the property of the author who created it. Only the author or those deriving their rights from the author can rightfully claim copyright.
- Although the general rule is that the person who creates a work is the author of that work, there is an exception to that principle: the copyright law defines a category of works called “works made for hire.” If a work is “made for hire,” the employer, and not the employee, is considered the author. The employer may be a firm, an organization, or an individual.
Afd vote
Hi Alkivar. Can you please reconsider your vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V. Kalyanasundaram in light of recently available references establishing notability? -- Sundar \talk \contribs 04:14, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please look at what I originally voted on. The article as it stood when the AFD closed I would have voted keep for. ALKIVAR™ 19:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Alkivar, read the template carefully. Under what circumstance would you place this on a User page? The template is meant to notify of a semi-protected page preventing a blocked user from editing it. The only page a blocked user can still edit is his User_talk page, not his User page. The wording you left there makes no sense at all; please change it back. Thank you. Owen× ☎ 03:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Its original goal... was to be a template to mark that a user page or user talk page had been semi-protected. It was NOT intended to be JUST for blocked users... but for vandalism protection warning as well. This was ENTIRELY to be done to remove user/user talk pages from being categorized along with all the rest of the semi-protected page. Splash and I repurposed this template back in January. ALKIVAR™ 03:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please don't tell me what the original goal of this template was; I know exactly what I created this template for back in December. Thank you for "repurposing" it, and turning it into a useless template. Owen× ☎ 04:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah i'm sure its useless... ask User:Bishonen, User:B.Wind, User:StuffOfInterest and User:ScienceApologist who've had their pages repeatedly vandalized who dont want it fully protected... or the ArbCom how useless it is when placed on a blocked users' page see User:IAAL, User:Irismeister (they dont always want pages fully protected you know). Sorry buddy but your claim its useless is baseless and absolutely untrue. ALKIVAR™ 04:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please don't tell me what the original goal of this template was; I know exactly what I created this template for back in December. Thank you for "repurposing" it, and turning it into a useless template. Owen× ☎ 04:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Brian Peppers
What part of "What part of "Based on some new information, I am reasonably satisfied that the takedown request is genuine at this time" do you not understand? The Uninvited Co. has made his case pretty clear, and I'm inclined to say that if you disagree, you should take this to the mailing list, the ArbCom or the board. This is not a matter for a vote. FCYTravis 19:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Brian Peppers deleted again
FCYTravis has seen fit to delete the Brian Peppers article again. Any way you could restore it until the new AfD discussion is concluded, please? It's very difficult to hold a discussion on an article when it disappears randomly. Thank you! :) --Ashenai 20:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- The article content is available on the Talk page of the AfD. There is no consensus to restore and certainly no consensus anywhere to *again* start a new AfD. I have simply restored the status quo ante. The Uninvited Co. has restated that, based on new information, he believes the takedown request to be valid and legitimate. I suggest that if you want to pursue this matter, you go to the ArbCom, the mailing list or the board. This is not something for a "vote" anymore. FCYTravis 20:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- The references aren't available on the Talk page, which seems to be relevant, since you were the one who repeatedly lambasted the article for being properly referenced. --Ashenai 20:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- I have repeatedly lambasted the article for being about a subject which lacks notability, based on its lack of any coverage outside the Internet save one now-deleted local TV station news story. Those references are conspicuous only in their complete absence. FCYTravis 20:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Er... I have no idea what you're getting at. The article had references. The "content available on the Talk page of the AfD" doesn't include those references. The references may or may not be relevant; I don't really want to discuss this on poor Alkivar's talk page, especially since I can't see those references anymore, and neither can the others discussing the article. --Ashenai 20:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- I shall add the references to the version on the Talk page. My point is, none of the references except Snopes are to any coverage of the subject - because there have been absolutely none outside the Internet, except for one blurb on a Toledo TV news station. Hence, the fact that they're not on the Talk page doesn't change anything. FCYTravis 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you! I still disagree with your deletion of the article with the discussion underway, but this is much more acceptable now. --Ashenai 20:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- I shall add the references to the version on the Talk page. My point is, none of the references except Snopes are to any coverage of the subject - because there have been absolutely none outside the Internet, except for one blurb on a Toledo TV news station. Hence, the fact that they're not on the Talk page doesn't change anything. FCYTravis 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Er... I have no idea what you're getting at. The article had references. The "content available on the Talk page of the AfD" doesn't include those references. The references may or may not be relevant; I don't really want to discuss this on poor Alkivar's talk page, especially since I can't see those references anymore, and neither can the others discussing the article. --Ashenai 20:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- I have repeatedly lambasted the article for being about a subject which lacks notability, based on its lack of any coverage outside the Internet save one now-deleted local TV station news story. Those references are conspicuous only in their complete absence. FCYTravis 20:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- The references aren't available on the Talk page, which seems to be relevant, since you were the one who repeatedly lambasted the article for being properly referenced. --Ashenai 20:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Alkivar -
This was a poorly considered action. It would have been wiser to not twist a quick pseudo-vote into "consensus" in light of the facts that:
- This had been deleted by three other admins and only restored by one in the recent time-frame,
- There were ongoing discussions on both ANI and on the article's talk page, and
- The only admin who criticised the re-deletion and close of the AfD was the one who restored it.
I'd note that you commented on the matter at ANI on 20:37, 14 February, so at the very least you were aware that your actions would be controversial. Did it occur to you to say "I'm going to restore this" and test responses? Once you had restored the article you:
- Failed to put a note on WP:ANI saying that you had done so, and
- Failed to put a note on the deleteing admin's talk page saying you had done so.
I'm leaving a note on ANI, I'd encourage you to expand on your reasoning there. In the future, if you restore something I have deleted I would appreciate it if you would notify me.
brenneman{T}{L} 23:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Brazil4Linux sockcheck?
Hiyas. I noticed that you have an indef block on Brazil4Linux from early jan pending sock check. What was the outcome of that? I'm asking because some redshirt just added the POV wikinews item back to Xbox, and that automatically makes me think of Brazil4Linux. However, I figured it was better to talk first than go in with blocks ablazin'. :) --Syrthiss 22:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- As far as I know no sockcheck was ever officially performed, the other facts were just too blatant. If this edit was made by an anon acct would you give me the IP, and i'll see if it matches anything i have logged for B4L. ALKIVAR™ 23:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- Jumpout (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- 201.58.143.145 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
- 201.58.131.164 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
- I just included Jumpout because they were the redshirt that first reintroduced the link...and I agree, B4L has a distinctive editing style, which makes me think this is him again. --Syrthiss 23:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)