MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 6 thread(s) (older than 10d) to User talk:J Greb/Archive Apr 2009. |
→You are a coward.: new section |
||
Line 245: | Line 245: | ||
Really srry to bother you, but since you're, like the only Administrator I really know of and you taught me how to fix mistakes on Wikipedia on Talk page. Can you just tell me how I could improve my edits...See here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics] in the Dr. Strange section. I know I have made loads of mistakes, but I really wasn't trying to damage the articles or vandalize...I go back to 2006 at Wiki. I just want to help. But the users really have a big deal about me and my edits, and, hell, I just want to help, not ruin the articles. I know the might seem real childish, but, even though you're likely to side against me, too, could you just tell me if I've done any good at all in the past few months on Wikipedia. I mean, the users there talk about addressing me directly, but for months since I began to edit Marvel, they refrained, and instead complained about me there without telling me my many problems. Some users are considering banning me, some say my articles should be burned, some revert my edits with a mere explanation of how bad edits are self-explanatory. I really know this sounds pretty pathetic, but you'd be pissed off too if so many users are against you for taking months to add edits adn you didnt know about it till today...sorry for telling you this, but I am pretty new and I've never faced so many united complaints, almost sounding lacking of good faith in nature...I know you might think I'm really wrong and just another sad user, and I understand that, too...just tell me, how should I improve my edits, adn I promise i bother u again; I've stopped marking the Minor Edit box and all...just thought, as an Administrator, u should be the one to handle problems about articles involving so many users... [[User:Aidoflight|Aidoflight]] ([[User talk:Aidoflight|talk]]) 02:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
Really srry to bother you, but since you're, like the only Administrator I really know of and you taught me how to fix mistakes on Wikipedia on Talk page. Can you just tell me how I could improve my edits...See here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics] in the Dr. Strange section. I know I have made loads of mistakes, but I really wasn't trying to damage the articles or vandalize...I go back to 2006 at Wiki. I just want to help. But the users really have a big deal about me and my edits, and, hell, I just want to help, not ruin the articles. I know the might seem real childish, but, even though you're likely to side against me, too, could you just tell me if I've done any good at all in the past few months on Wikipedia. I mean, the users there talk about addressing me directly, but for months since I began to edit Marvel, they refrained, and instead complained about me there without telling me my many problems. Some users are considering banning me, some say my articles should be burned, some revert my edits with a mere explanation of how bad edits are self-explanatory. I really know this sounds pretty pathetic, but you'd be pissed off too if so many users are against you for taking months to add edits adn you didnt know about it till today...sorry for telling you this, but I am pretty new and I've never faced so many united complaints, almost sounding lacking of good faith in nature...I know you might think I'm really wrong and just another sad user, and I understand that, too...just tell me, how should I improve my edits, adn I promise i bother u again; I've stopped marking the Minor Edit box and all...just thought, as an Administrator, u should be the one to handle problems about articles involving so many users... [[User:Aidoflight|Aidoflight]] ([[User talk:Aidoflight|talk]]) 02:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
== You are a coward. == |
|||
Stop BSing me and talk. ([[User:JoeLoeb|JoeLoeb]] ([[User talk:JoeLoeb|talk]]) 01:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)) |
Revision as of 01:47, 24 April 2009
- User talk:J Greb/Archive 2007
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Winter 2008
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Spring 2008
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Summer 2008
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Fall 2008
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Dec 2008
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Jan 2009
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Feb 2009
- User talk:J Greb/Archive Mar 2009
SIA threshold
I don't think there is one beyond someone being bothered to do it. There are two different types though:
- Within company, like Ant-Man, Spider-Woman, Quasar (comics), Captain Marvel (Marvel Comics), Marvel Boy, etc. - I'd recommend we should aim to make all of these articles. Examples of this would be Black Widow (comics) and Marvel Girl. There is also some discussion on what to do with Ms. Marvel (see the talk page).
- Across companies, like Thor (comics). There aren't many of these and I'm not really too sure how helpful it is in general (as that article for example doesn't really allow quick navigation onwards and usually with a mixed bag article you just want to have something that allows people to disambiguate between characters and move along - in the inter company type you are usually dealing with an alias passed between characters or reused which might require further information), although it works here as there are other Thors in comics that don't seem to have articles here (the non-English language ones). So perhaps that is the threshold - if something needs coverage that can't be given elsewhere (which includes on lists of minor characters by company that we'll have some day soon - although it is likely to mainly cover the big US firms). I'd suggest discussing this first on the talk page as it is rare and there might be better ways of doing this.
Also looking at the SIA examples I wonder if it is worth having a category like "Marvel Comics set index" to shuffle some of them off into, as they are a different beast to the more basic lists.
That is just my thinking on it but looking over the examples it seems to make sense. (Emperor (talk) 14:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC))
- Oh right. Sorry I was talking general but you mean on the articles talk page header.
- It is a tricky one as "dab" and "list" don't allow for quality assessments (ditto "future" I suppose). It is there for disambiguation purposes but it also adds more background. As there isn't a way to fine tune the header I'd suggest when the set index expands into an article from a list it makes sense that it needs an assessment like other articles. (Emperor (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC))
- What do you think about the other idea, having company specific categories for the articles. There are plenty for Marvel and for DC there are (off the top of my head) Robin (comics), Nightwing, Speedy (comics) and Batgirl - the infobox should be able to generate the category automagically and it can go under the set index article and the company character cats. There are also some big names that might require one as Superman, Spider-Man, etc. have had other characters use the alias, the most obvious one is Batman (as he is now dead and people are fighting for it). The big question is the location - we are using "(set index)" at the moment but consistency would suggest we should use things like Batman (comics) (which currently just redirect to the main article but a set index article wouldn't slow people down as the main link would be at the top of the article). Thoughts? (Emperor (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC))
- hrm... we've got Category:Set indices on comics (all of the article with the SIA template) and Category:Set index pop (the articles using the set index infoboxes).
- If we are going to sort out the sets that are mono-company-centric, like Kid Flash or Captain America (set index), I'd rather do it through the SIA template, or a comics specific variation.
- As for dabbing... I stand by my preference as stated with the Green Goblin and Captain America issue:
- (comics) would be preferred unless it is more natural for that to be used for a specific character or as a redirect to a specific character. The latter is the case with things like Batman (comics) or Spider-Man (comics).
- (disambiguation) should be used if:
- The page is not a subset a another dab, and
- The page is just a list, not moving to become an article itself.
- (set index)
- This assumes that the index would not be the base page.
- Examples that I can thing of...
- Nightwing - none of the character article use "Nightwing" as a title and there is nothing outside of comics currently using it.
- Flash (comics) - Two of the characters which use "Flash" in their name are of equal weight and there are uses of the term outside of comics.
- America's Best Comics (disambiguation) - The only case I've seen where the dab is a simple list, it's limited to comics, and one of the elements is the more reasonable use of the straight title.
- Captain America (set index) - Where the list is anything but simple and both the base term and (comics) are better suited elsewhere.
- On a side note... Mentor (Marvel Comics) and Midnight (Marvel Comics) may need to be revisited.
- - J Greb (talk) 00:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- On your points:
- Yes I was thinking it might be best to make this happen automatically through the infobox as it makes life much easier (as this is largely an issue with companies who have a long and massive continuity it will largely just be Marvel/DC anyway), if you can easily separate out the alternate versions articles where the infobox is also used. We can then dig out those few that aren't yet articles (the only one I can think of at the moment is Marvel Girl but there might be a couple of others).
- Looking at Special:WhatLinksHere/Batman_(comics), there are very few incoming links and those should really be updated, slotting another page in wouldn't overly complicate matters as its first link would probably be to Batman and it also means we can catch people who might use Batman (comics) when they are actually looking for Batman (comic book) (this is a problem that does happen, see e.g. [1] and Vin Sullivan, and is difficult to pick up otherwise, with the SIA at "(comics)" you can hatnote the title). I have to say I am not bothered either way (although Lord Sesshomaru is in favour of using "(comics)") but I can see how it would work OK that way.
- Yes Mentor is a pain as the original Mentor goes by A'lars (although I suspect it should really be "Mentor (A'lars)" but this keeps it simple) and I am unsure what the other Mentor would be disambiguated as because they don't have an actual name (unlike for example Gladiator (Kallark)) but "Mentor (Imperial Guard)" might work. What do you suggest doing with Midnight? Expanding it like I suggest with Marvel Girl? Also worth looking at Whizzer (comics) again - I suggested splitting off the Squadron Supreme member which got no objections [2] and it would allow us to fix the page up as a set index article which would help clarify matters and keep it clean and simple. Thoughts on that too?
- I'll have a dig around and see if I cna find more examples of lists that could be articles and if there is anything like Whizzer that might benefit from clarification. (Emperor (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC))
- The SIA template can be edited to act as an automatic switch. And I'd prefer doing that since, ideally, the set index cats should be among the last listed, just like stubs. (Side note on that... I'm wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea for all footer templates to come after the manually added categories in the markup.) Also, it avoids issues with pages like Marvel Girl where the infobox will be the bulk of the page.
- I would be careful about re-purposing redirects. Yes, the links to Batman (comics) should really be converted to point directly to Batman. But even if the redirect is effectively orphaned, it still serves at least 2 functions:
- It's a search topic. A user can type it in and be directed to the most likely target.
- It's a valid alt for linking as articles are written or edited. If an editor is unsure, they can use it and still have their text wind up at the right place.
- As for Mentor, Whizzer, and Midnight... in all honesty, my thoughts would be very, very unpopular.
- With Mentor either:
- Collapse the two character articles back to the SI and convert it into a full article. Yes, the two share only their name and that they are Marvel Characters, but that really isn't important. OR
- Strip the SI down to bare bones. Either like Marvel Girl or limit the section text to slightly shortened copy of the character article leads. The later may be preferable.
- With Whizzer, something similar, though it may be more of a case of moving the Stewart FCB to a "Squadron Supreme characters" article. That one actually has some real world context touching all of the characters that should be in one place, so the Marvel Girl format really would not work.
- With Midnight, just upmerge it back into Midnight (comics). It seems very silly to have split it off for just 2 items.
- With Mentor either:
- - J Greb (talk) 22:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Again on the points:
- I'd definitely prefer that as it makes life simpler. Is there not a manual of style for position of footers? Usually they come before the categories but I don't know if that is written in stone. I don't really have a preference either way as long as someone doesn't sweep through and change them all back when we are done ;)
- Fine. I'll look into Superman, Batman and Spider-Man set indexes but will put them at "(set index)" - if anyone objects then they can start a discussion at WT:CMC and we can arrive at a consensus.
- Looking over the Mentor articles they are both currently active characters and their articles need expanding and updating so I'd rather avoid collapsing them into one article if we didn't have to. What needs clarifying on A'lars is his publication history (which needs out-of-universe explanation - I'm currently expanding and rewriting Eternals articles and this a prime candidate) and that text is currently in the set index and needs moving over. This would effectively empty the article and, as this isn't an alias shared by the two characters (as it is in most cases) I don't feel there needs to be any information so I'd go with the first option, strip it right down to a list and ditch the infobox. We also need to address where it goes - I'd suggest move Mentor (comics) and put the list there - what to call that article is tricky but "Mentor (Imperial Guard)" isn't a bad option. If that seems OK I'll sort that out at some point.
- There doesn't seem much point in splitting the Stewart information off to a characters article - if you don't think it is enough for a full article then I'd be prepared to wait until we start the "minor Marvel Comics characters" article and then move the information over.
- Looking at the history the Midnight article wasn't really split - I established as a redirect and someone came up with another Marvel Midnight and added it in there, when the logical thing would have been to change the redirect to Marvel (comics) and add the information there. I'll sort that out now.
- OK that all seems to fix things - I'll fix Midnight in a few minutes and work on the Mentor articles. I'll sketch out the Superman, Batman and Spider-Man set indexes and see how they look and drop you a link when/if I make them live. Whizzer can probably wait until we have the structure in place to stick the information into. (Emperor (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC))
- Again on the points:
- On your points:
- I think the thing with the footer templates wasn't an issue until some wise-acher got it into his head to plunk templates that autocat into the "center" of the article. Ibelieve that the idea was to have the "maintenance" cats sit in front of the "real" cats. So the "clean up" templates (headers) would throw their warning, then the stub IDs (sitting before/above the other cats), then the editor added ones. The infoboxes interrupt that (as well as forcing a non-alphabetic hierarchy) so it went from:
- "Fix it!"
- "Improve + class it."
- Define it"
- to
- "Fix it!"
- Define some of it"
- "Improve + class it."
- Define the rest"
- I'd rather see, where it occurs, the improve/class autocatting be the tail end.
- I agree with your take with the Mentor articles, at least if the three are going to be kept. And "Mentor (faux Braniac 5)" really wouldn't fly...
- IIRC with Stewart, there was, and still is a very big problem with the original Squadron Supreme characters. Almost all of them appeared together during the bulk of the teams appearances. That bread a very similar FCB for them, the same text and the same cites. I think we knocked it down as much as possible within the Whizzer article, but it is not portable.
- - J Greb (talk) 22:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- No "Mentor (Fakiac)" won't work - I am just wondering if it could have been any more blatant!! Still I'd like a source for the similarities (him and the Imperial Guard) - if I can't easily find one I might punt it across to the Comic Book Legends folk, I have been keeping an eye out for things they might be able help with and this (and the who, what when where of the retconing of the Eternals into Marvel continuity (it is done in bits in things like the Avengers but I'd like to know if there was a plan).
- Also it looks like it might be best to leave Whizzer alone and then take a look at all of the Squadron Supreme when we have the structure to cope with such characters (thinking about it you are right - the bulk of their story is already told on the team article). (Emperor (talk) 04:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC))
- I think the thing with the footer templates wasn't an issue until some wise-acher got it into his head to plunk templates that autocat into the "center" of the article. Ibelieve that the idea was to have the "maintenance" cats sit in front of the "real" cats. So the "clean up" templates (headers) would throw their warning, then the stub IDs (sitting before/above the other cats), then the editor added ones. The infoboxes interrupt that (as well as forcing a non-alphabetic hierarchy) so it went from:
User subpage and mainspace categories
Greetings, J Greb. Your subpage User talk:J Greb/Sidebar is appearing in several mainspace categories; is there any chance you could remove it from them? Skomorokh 19:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
- Shold be out of them now - J Greb (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks for the swift response! Regards, Skomorokh 23:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Minor edits
I am sorry if my erroers have been so big a deal for Wikipedia...I am trying to improve the articles...in all logic, and with all due respect, how could a misuse possibly damage the article structure as a whole, for the reader? I will not do so in the future. Aidoflight (talk) 21:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your message. I am clear now as to what is a minor edit. I will not make such mistakes in the future. Aidoflight (talk) 21:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
William Stryker & David North
You and I had a discussion about Agent Zero / Maverick & William Stryker, 2 Marvel characters. I want to continue it. (JoeLoeb (talk) 22:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC))
Would this qualify for the theme field in a metaseries infobox? (Emperor (talk) 23:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC))
- Looks good, and points up a minor issue I need to address with the template (it should allow "X-Men" titles to over ride "Marvel Comics titles").
- I did move the first issue cover into the template though.
- - J Greb (talk) 22:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- Ah yes good catch on the cover - it also helps keep the image use under control in the article (unlike the lists!!).
- Anyway I rolled on and did X-Statix as it was easy enough to copy and paste the infobox across. (Emperor (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC))
- And now Knights of Pendragon. I think we are nearly ready for the big Justice League push!! (Emperor (talk) 18:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC))
- Just double-checking before I go ahead - a team/title would work for X-Factor (comics) (and we could get rid of the two that are currently there)? (Emperor (talk) 02:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC))
- And Omega Men. Is it possible to pick up where limited and ongoing are both checked so it'd say "ongoing series and limited series"? (Emperor (talk) 14:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC))
- X-Factor - Yeah, converting it would be a good idea. And it is a case where there are 2 clear "teams" - the original X-Men and the later US sanctioned group. I'd set it up so both 1st appearances are present.
- Omega Men - Actually, the "format" field can, and should be used as an override, see Batgirl and Secret Six (comics) for examples. Yes, the template could hard code it, but the thought was to allow specific identification of which volumes are which.
- And just a side-ish thing... the X-Factor roster should point to the appropriate section of List of X-Men members... but when I went to look at it... OMFG, I gotta wonder whose brilliant idea it was to add the years to the headers. - J Greb (talk) 15:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- Right:
- I'll get on that later
- Good point. I've sorted that out.
- God knows. On X-Force I was thinking of removing the list of characters from the article as they are on the X-Men members list but was a little overwhelmed by it and, checking now, I see they have clearly been updated recently as the original link went to a section labeled "X-Force (original)" which made sense (changes started here). I have run across a number of cases of section headers including the story arc name and the issue and numbers it was in (check out some of the list of storyline articles for examples). I think this is A Bad Idea and I am not sure if it is part of the comics manual of style but there is an overarching principle of brevity and these seem to make that overly complicated when, looking down that list, it is clear that it is unnecessary in most cases and when some distinction is needed then it could be descriptive. There are possibly a number of fixes, the simplest for now is to create redirects from things like List of X-Force members and leave a note in comments to say if the name changes then change the redirect, that should mean the links keep working. Ultimately I wonder if it might just be better to split them off to separate articles - the page is 115kb and so weighty it is getting problematic and probably decreasingly useful to people as it stands. (Emperor (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC))
- Right:
- And Omega Men. Is it possible to pick up where limited and ongoing are both checked so it'd say "ongoing series and limited series"? (Emperor (talk) 14:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC))
- Just double-checking before I go ahead - a team/title would work for X-Factor (comics) (and we could get rid of the two that are currently there)? (Emperor (talk) 02:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC))
- And now Knights of Pendragon. I think we are nearly ready for the big Justice League push!! (Emperor (talk) 18:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC))
- (sigh) This is one reason I stopped actively trying to work on the team roster lists. Honestly. that list, and the Avengers list should be blown apart into separate list articles for the separate teams. It's just a nightmare dealing with the Marvel Zombies on the Avengers ("But the in-universe charter says... so we can assume...") and the rabid X-Fanatics (the X-Men navbox is another one). And to be fair, Lestfer and BBIA aren't any better with the JLA list.
- The lists should be flat ass simple. List the real-world context that is:
- Character name(s) - limited to the names s/he/it was a member under.
- Alter ego - debatable, but a good way to denote between characters that use the same codename.
- When the character first appeared as a member of the team - not the flashback showing them getting membership, not a "guess" about when the "had to have joined", the first time by publication date.
- Notes limited to:
- Retcons - Black Canary is a good example of this.
- Role - Founder. Leader, with issue spans.
- Status - Dead? Retired? Left the team? Debatable items, but if they are there, definitely with an issue cite.
- Other teams - Also debatable, especially since it invites "Previously...", "Subsequently...", and "Concurrently..." notations.
- The mini-bios, power lists, "not really a real member because..." fan-site driven stuff drives me nuckin' futs.
- - J Greb (talk) 17:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sounds like something worth getting a consensus on and then clamping down on.
- X-Factor (comics) has been updated. Worth checking it over as I may have moved something to the wrong place while compressing the two into one. (Emperor (talk) 03:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC))
- And Skrull Kill Krew - also any thoughts on images? The main image was deleted and (if memory serves) was of the Secret Invasion line-up but it seems the upcoming mini-series is going to bring back the original team making it tricky. Perhaps: first issue image for the smaller issue image, the old image of the Secret Invasion team inserted into the section which discusses them and perhaps then have the main infobox image as a picture of team (possibly as originally done e.g. or grab something when the new interpretation comes out, we could even add back the old image as the infobox one and then move it down when the old team comes back, although).
- Also can you look at The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume II? The LoEG and WotW fields may be clashing or there is something I've missed. (Emperor (talk) 17:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC))
(de-dent)
My preference would be either add the original 1st issue at "cvr_image" and leave the balloon up for the time being.
It may well be that the original line up is the more notable, but I'd rather editors closer to the topic hash that out. I don't see a Nightwing situation though.
As for LoEG 2... that's a small train wreck I've got to look into. There are a couple of issues I need to tweak there. One is getting on 1 steampunk, another is killing the alt-history. It's an "on the list" thing...
- 23:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow admin!
Just wanted to say Hi, after having passed my recent Request for adminship. How's everything going?
I don't know how much you've looked into the comics project's GA drive; so far, we have been successful in the last few months with Spider-Man, Spider-Man: One More Day, Silver Age of Comic Books, Alex Raymond, Winnie Winkle, LGBT themes in comics, Hergé, and Pride & Joy (comics). Hope to see you around, and happy editing! :) BOZ (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- 1st off... congratz
- I've seen the GA drive running, but I've been plodding along with a couple of other lower scale cleanups:
- Infoboxes - Placing, converting, and documentation.
- Images - Sizing, appropriatness, sorting, and tagging.
- Project header(s) - Making sure the headers are atleast there with a base class/importance rating.
- I think I intersected on atleast two of the GAs... OMD and Pride & Joy, but I'vee been trying to limit myself to get the sweep through based on the 'boxes done ;)
- - J Greb (talk) 16:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hey man, no problem - hopefully we'll keep this train running for a long time, so you can "jump on" whenever you're ready. :)
- Hey, here's something I've been thinking of regarding images. A whole lot of infobox images have been deleted due to lacking FURs. Do you think, now that I have the tools, it would make sense for me to get in there and try bringing them back? BOZ (talk) 17:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- I've been thinking the same thing. However, I have yet to run across a test case in my cycling.
- I would think it would be OK, if the restored file has a place to start looking for the source information. Without that, it's better to skim a site you know should have a variation of the image. Grand Comics Database, Comic Book DB, and Comics Vine come to mind as good places to look. Though CV is a bit hard to list the original publication info for most of the images.
- And remember to re-delete if you can't salvage the file. The file shouldn't have to wait a week it the original deletion should stand.
- - J Greb (talk) 17:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CmdrClow
Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CmdrClow. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Snork.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Snork.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Prager.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Prager.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Mr Bones.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Mr Bones.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:CadetNimrod.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:CadetNimrod.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Tweak.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Tweak.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Grunwalder.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Grunwalder.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Murd.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Murd.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:CaptainSkank.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:CaptainSkank.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Whitey.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Whitey.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
My edits
Really srry to bother you, but since you're, like the only Administrator I really know of and you taught me how to fix mistakes on Wikipedia on Talk page. Can you just tell me how I could improve my edits...See here: [3] in the Dr. Strange section. I know I have made loads of mistakes, but I really wasn't trying to damage the articles or vandalize...I go back to 2006 at Wiki. I just want to help. But the users really have a big deal about me and my edits, and, hell, I just want to help, not ruin the articles. I know the might seem real childish, but, even though you're likely to side against me, too, could you just tell me if I've done any good at all in the past few months on Wikipedia. I mean, the users there talk about addressing me directly, but for months since I began to edit Marvel, they refrained, and instead complained about me there without telling me my many problems. Some users are considering banning me, some say my articles should be burned, some revert my edits with a mere explanation of how bad edits are self-explanatory. I really know this sounds pretty pathetic, but you'd be pissed off too if so many users are against you for taking months to add edits adn you didnt know about it till today...sorry for telling you this, but I am pretty new and I've never faced so many united complaints, almost sounding lacking of good faith in nature...I know you might think I'm really wrong and just another sad user, and I understand that, too...just tell me, how should I improve my edits, adn I promise i bother u again; I've stopped marking the Minor Edit box and all...just thought, as an Administrator, u should be the one to handle problems about articles involving so many users... Aidoflight (talk) 02:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
You are a coward.
Stop BSing me and talk. (JoeLoeb (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC))