Jump to content

User talk:Acather96/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Welcome!

Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative.

Welcome to Wikipedia, Acather96! I am Fetchcomms and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time. I just wanted to say "Hi!" and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some important pages that you might find helpful:

But don't forget to:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh, and when you post on talk pages you should always sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post (AKA your signature). If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, visit the help chat, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  fetchcomms☛ 17:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


Thank you!, and Yes Please!

Yes I would like to have my Page Semi Protected, sorry for taking 2 days to get back to you but I hav'nt been able to get internet access. Also at the same time can I request that my username be changed?, if that's not a problem for you.


Thank you very much.

jack4740 17:53, 01 May 2010 (UTC)

Facebook

It's very much discouraged, so it should be removed. See WP:EL.  fetchcomms☛ 18:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Just What Do Think You're Doing?

I have been adding reliable information about the Game Changer's criticism, despite probably making a few typos, and it is ok to add that information. It doesn't violate the NPOV policy at all. Keep your political views to yourself and be neutral. If you continue to erase my very neutral edits, I will report you for obstructing the good faith policy. By the way, this IP address is from a public computer.

  • For my part, I've just looked over that edit myself. Looking at the article history, this IP address didn't delete any information, as your warning template alleged; you did when you reverted his heavily sourced edit without an explanatory edit summary. May I ask what information you believe he deleted?  RGTraynor  19:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, firstly, I must apologise I understand now that you did not delete content. I hope you will understand my reason for doing so. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and as you can see from my contributions, revert allot of vandalism using twinkle. However, recently my computer has sucummbed to a virus and I am therefore contributing using an iPod Touch. When viewing Twinkle, it did appear that you had deleted content (due to the screen not display the full content of the page). I only realised this very recently and am genuinly sorry if I have annoyed you. I hate vandals and do not wish to appear to be one! I will remove (if you have not done so already) the template off your userpage and will explain my error in the edit summary. Thanks for your understanding. Acather96 (talk) 21:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Sutta

Can you please tell me what is wrong with edits? Becouse I really don't know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.200.65.73 (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. The only reason I reverted your edit was because it wasn't really written from a neutral point of view (as if it was an advert). Please feel free to re-enter the information but consider changing the opening sentence, and adding a source to verify your information or quote. I have removed the template as the edit was in good faith, and if you have questions aboout any of the above please contact me on my talk page. Oh, and remeber to sign your talk posts by typing four tidles. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! Acather96 (talk) 21:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hello Acather96, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, then don't use rollback and instead, use a manual edit summary. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 18:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I love Rollback as it enables me to use Huggle, wish allows me to fight vandalism VERY effectively. Thanks again Acather96 (talk) 19:09, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

User: 190fordhouse

Even though, I've been here since late 2006, I've never reported anyone before and sometimes Wikipedia can get complicated in such procedures. Thank you.Carmaker1 (talk) 03:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

For reverting vandalism to my user page :) Mushroom (Talk) 20:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Ditto for reverting vandalism on my talk page! Dougweller (talk) 21:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting vandalism on Omirocksthisworld(talk). I am not associated with the MFI or Omi... however, I'm being associated with the two quite a lot, and I'd like it if I weren't. I am just trying to help out with Omi and the article Messiah Foundation International and this bloke from Pakistan (where everytime you connect to the internet, you're given a new IP address) writes abusive comments and passes abusive information regarding me to other Wikipedia users. I'd recommend this user being banned, somehow, as it's really not fair and puts me off Wikipedia.--Nasiryounus (talk) 00:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the user has been banned for edit warring. Another victory for Wikipedians!Acather96 (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your revert on my talk page, this sort of thing has been happening since I started reverting vandalism...I suspect its a normal thing people have to deal with when they revert other people's edits. Anyway, thanks again, its courteous people such as yourself who make Wikipedia a pleasant place to be.(Omirocksthisworld (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

Many, many kind thanks for your help in stopping the vandalism on Max Havoc: Curse of the Dragon page & Albert Pyun page

Thank you so very, very much for your work here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitaleye42 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Sinhalese people reversion

Hey Acather96, You reverted my edits because I removed a section of information here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sinhalese_people&diff=340363102&oldid=340362728

But I removed it because the information was accidently duplicated while I was moving things around. As can be clearly seen (A copy of the section is still present in the article, after I deleted it). Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in the edit summary. I put "Removed copy of genetic studies section". Anyway, no real damage done. It just meant I had to re-do all my edits. Thanks for keeping vigilant. Kind regards, Wikinpg (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thats fine, I'll remove the warning and ask editors to disregard it. Keep contributing Acather96 (talk) 17:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. I noticed that on some articles, you were one step ahead of me and the vandalism was already reverted. I would like to say keep up the good job!

Hello Acather96, Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Your revert at WP:AIV

Next time please go back in the page history and restore to a good revision instead of manually removing the vandalism. This edit broke the helperbots for the past hour or so. If simple rollback does not work, WP:POPUPS or WP:TW may be useful. Tim Song (talk) 18:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry,as you can see from the comments above I revert/warn allott of vandalism and file allot of reports WP:AIV and appreciate the help the bots give there. I am sorry but do not understand why my edit 'broke' the helperbots. If you could explain I would be very grateful. Thanks Acather96 (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

That edit broke the configuration data for the bot. Note the following line in the original:
<!-- v2.0.15 RemoveBlocked=On MergeDuplicates=On AutoMark=On FixInstructions=On AutoBacklog=On AddLimit=5 RemoveLimit=3 -->
Your edit removed the final bracket, which caused the bot to fail to parse the instructions on that page. Tim Song (talk) 19:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! Acather96 (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage, much appreciated! GedUK  20:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I Belive My Most On Telepathy Was Very Constructive:0 I Wonder Why You Do Not Think So. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.173.124 (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

It appeared that you were adding promotional content to Wikipedia, and the information wasn't really in the right section. Acather96 (talk) 06:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Islamic architecture

Can you explain this edit.It seems like you have restored a test edit. NotedGrant Talk 12:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, thats a very good question. Obviously, it was a mistake.Please accept my apologies, I can only assume that I reverted the wrong edit through Huggle (instead of reverting the vandals). Although use of an automated tool is not an excuse, I really am sorry and this is the only explanation I can give! Thanks for understanding! Acather96 (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I'm now very confused. I looked through your talk pages history and found no warning, which Huggle should have given. I was going to remove the warning, but it looks like its already gone or was never there? Acather96 (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem,I did not receive any warning for those edits.Well just leave it NotedGrant Talk 17:46, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

THanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 14:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Reply to your message on my talk page

Hi, that IP is just some aggrieved kid, he/she has no admin powers. I lost rollback powers for 3RRing vandalism last week. I haven't done any 3RR since then. All I have done is undoing of vandalism. This flags business is nonsense. I suggest you pay no attention as I've been harassed by many IPs this month. Thank you. Paralympiakos (talk) 14:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Good, at least thats sorted out. He seemed really annoyed about what was really such a tiny, insignificant thing. Thanks for updating me on the situation! Acather96 (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. It's just getting on my nerves now because if an admin looks at my talk page history and sees "Serious warning for .." then that's a little disconcerting. You may also like to look at my talk page where I have documented that user's harassment, sockpuppetry and threats. I'm looking to report this user, but the sockpuppet wiki page appears to be locked due to backlog.

Any discussion you wish to further take place in (on my talk page) would be greatly appreciated because I can't shake this kid from Helsinki, he's working off lots of IPs to try and get me into trouble. Cheers. Paralympiakos (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

RE:Thanks

Thank you so much for the Cheeseburger :-) MaenK.A.Talk 12:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Om nom nom

Pixel the cat thanks you for the cheeseburger!

XXX antiuser eh? 18:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)













Barnstars 'R' U

The Hidden Page Barnstar
I award you one for finding Trekphiler's page for people who always think that "new message" bar is real. Aren't you glad you answered the phone? TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
FYI, I prefer to "send" them. Not that I object to your "borrowing" one, mind you. ;D If you'll delete this mistaken double award (which is to say, the above one)? TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:42 & 20:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

For this--Mbz1 (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

...for reverting multiple instances of vandalism on my user page! It is much appreciated. —KuyaBriBriTalk 21:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Protection

Hey, with the amount of vandalism your user page gets, maybe you should request protection for it. Cheers, XXX antiuser eh? 20:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, and I have considered it before. However, I am happy for vandals to vandalise my userpage as it's earns them an extra warning, and one step closer to being blocked. Furthermore, I think it's better that a userpage be attacked than an encycolpedic entry. Thanks, though!Acather96 (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: twinkle edits

I normally warn registered users or IPs who vandalize extensively. At least then there is a chance of them being blocked. Lots of active vandals at the moment, good to see other people patrolling.-Regancy42 (talk) 11:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, in fact if you are intrested in the area of vandal fighting and speedy deletion, you may wish to apply to become a rollbacker. This allows use of a tool called Huggle, which makes tagging CSD's and reverting/warning vandals allot easier. If you need any help with this or how to, apply just ask!Acather96 (talk) 11:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is Twinkle really slow? Takes roughly 15-20 seconds to load, and it doesn't always work. Isn't rollback the same thing? -Regancy42 (talk) 11:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

No, not at all. In fact, when you come across vandalism, you just hit Q on the keyboard. That reverts and warns, and if nesscersary reports.Acather96 (talk) 11:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm maybe I'll try that. Must be my internet connection, its really hard to fight vandalism with a crap internet service. -Regancy42 (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Cookie!

Regancy42 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

-Regancy42 (talk) 12:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I figured that it is just as important to recognize positive contributions as it is to fight against vandals. Give a cookie to another constructive editor!Regancy42 (talk) 12:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Agreeded. Though I usually give cheeseburgers or lollipops.Acather96 (talk) 12:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry!...

... and thanks for reverting the vandalism done from our office IP, the miscreant will be publicly humiliated as a Fearne Cotton fan for the remaining two weeks of his employment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.16.210 (talk) 17:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Your reversion at Blood alcohol content

I was taking a look at Blood alcohol content earlier today, and I can't help but feel that you could have assumed a little more good faith in this reversion. I think, judging from this IP's subsequent comments on the talk page, that the edit was made in good faith. I don't think the IP's edit changed any of the facts of the article; in my opinion it made that section more readable. Before reverting your change, however, I wanted to ask if there was any particular reason you thought it was an unconstructive edit. Thanks! Wrelwser43 (talk) 03:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for remaining so very civil, unlike some other editors who seem to just want a fight! I must apologise for two things:

1) I apologize for taking so long to reply to this message. My computer is currently in repair, I only get a couple of vandal fighting sessions at school, I am replying to your message on my iPod Touch.

2) Your perfectly right, I am in the wrong. As you can see through my contribs, I revet allot of vandalism and unfortunately it looks like I mistook a helpful contribution for vandalism. If you have not done so already, please feel free to revert my edit and I will remove the warning with an explanatory edit summary. Hope this resolves your issue, thanks for keeping vigilant and continue the good work!  :) Acather96 (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject iPhone OS

Promote the project
  • Join this project! Add yourself to the list, and add the userbox to your page, to advertise the project to people who happen to pass by.
  • Invite people to the project – drop a note on the user talk page of editors working on iPhone OS topics who aren't project members.
  • Consider promoting the project via the Wikipedia Signpost WikiProject desk.
Improve the project
  • Update the project pages, archive clutter, and make use of the latest automation available
  • Consult the WikiProject Guide for ideas
  • Come up with new ones
Use the project

This was a one-time notice from WikiProject iPhone OS · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Report Proccessed

Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 142.227.187.2. We wanted to let you know that the case for the report you filed for 142.227.187.2 has been closed. Thank you again for filing and alerting us of this IP's abusive behavior. Rockyman512 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism to Your talk page

I just reverted some vandalism to your talk page after you warned him (He redirected it to Adolf Hitler) Regards Floul1 | My Talkpage | Vandalise Here

Thanks, as always. Enjoy the cheeseburger :)Acather96 (talk) 06:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, can you help out?

Could you help clean up my user page? Lol. It'd be nice to see it clean. Getting really dirty. If you had the time and could be bothered, please do have a chat ;) Thanks --  Nasir | ناصر یونس  chat?  01:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Why thank you! Very kind of you x.
I'd just like it to be organised and well-set up. Clean to view etc. --  Nasir | ناصر یونس  chat?  21:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Feature Portal Review of Portal:iPhone OS

IPhone OS has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. This was a courtesy notice from WikiProject iPhone OS · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Alec Stone Sweet

Please actually take the time to clean up the article after accepting it (I had to fix all the formatting myself), and I'm not sure that the sources for this BLP are very good, either... Perhaps you could help by adding some in? • ɔ ʃ → 17:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

You're right, I apologise. You're right the sources aren't brilliant (I will find some more), but I was planning to give the article a little clean. As embarassing and as stupid as this sounds, I was called by my mum for tea!Acather96 (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh, alright. • ɔ ʃ → 18:00, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Added one other source, would it be appropriate to add a link to the actual books on Google Books? Acather96 (talk) 18:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes; if possible. Anything to help verify the material in the source, so a link is good. • ɔ ʃ → 22:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

CCI clerkship

There is no current place to request clerkship. I guess my talk page will do. Once you get some months at the various copyvio boards -- SCV, CCI, PU[IF], IFD, possibly some image tagging -- then let me know. I will circulate your "application" around the copyright specialist admins and see what they have to say. MER-C 12:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will, try my best. Acather96 (talk) 16:57, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI, you probably don't need to mark the deleted articles at SCV as done, since they're pretty obviously redlinks (although it doesn't hurt anything). Also, I've already looked through all of 5/2 and everything's already done or at least tagged for speedy deletion. I kind of live at SCV except for weekends. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I didn't know about that. Also, why even if the article has been deleted does the template still say 'Copyright infrigiment remains?' Acather96 (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

As to that, I'm guessing it's for the case where a speedy delete tag has been applied but the article hasn't been deleted yet, but I think I only used that option of the template for the first time today, so I haven't bothered asking. Also, I just realized that I may have sounded territorial above, so if you wanted to take a stab at SCV just let me know and I have no problem moving on to other areas. There are always more complicated and messy situations to deal with elsewhere. I'm watching your talk page now, so no need for tb's if you reply here. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:47, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No, it's OK. I don't want to force you to abandon SCV as you are obviously doing a very good job, but I would like to help as much as I can. Acather96 (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, as MER-C mentioned above there's more than one area. Image copyright issues don't seem to be terribly popular around here, so WP:PUF doesn't see much input. WP:CCI has a heck of a backlog, but it's kindof intimidating. If you're any good at rewriting all of the articles that are blanked at WP:CP (which includes WP:SCV) can always use more people. If the articles don't get rewritten or have verified permission within a week of tagging they're often deleted simply because there's not enough manpower. Wikipedia:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup has some other links for places you can help out. I've only been working in the copyright area since mid-March, so there's probably some things I'm forgetting right now, but more help is always welcome. Any questions feel free to askVernoWhitney (talk) 18:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi! And welcome aboard. :) Always nice to have somebody new working copyright issues.

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Rcpaterson is a very special CCI in that the contributor took material from only a few specific works: all of which he had written himself. The only problem here is that he did not have permission from his publisher to do so. There's a list at the top of the page of the books he wrote and links that let us search those.

In this particular case, I'm afraid, what you've found is almost certainly a Wikipedia:Mirror. Those are one of the challenges of copyright work when they copy content from Wikipedia without giving credit. There are a couple of things that suggest that's what this is: first, at the bottom of the page, it says, "The content of this website is a collection of materials gathered from a variety of sources, some of it unedited. The webmaster does not intend to claim authorship, but gives credit to the originators for their work." (The last bit, if he's copied from Wikipedia, is obviously untrue.) Second, though not definitive, I do not find an archive for his page in wayback. Third, and more tellingly, this article has been changed since it was created. Only in subtle ways, but those changes are reflected in the external source. This suggests that they were made before it was copied. Compare the July 2006 version to the September 2009 version (when the website says the page was last updated). The article used to say, "the opportunity was too good to pass", but it was changed to read "the opportunity was too good to pass up." The external site uses the later language. Several typographical errors have also been corrected, and these are correct in the external site.

Paterson may have copied from his own books, but probably didn't copy from this website. That said, there's no harm with the changes you've made, and I appreciate your looking into it. :)

Once thing you would need to be careful about, though, is creating a "close paraphrase". When we rewrite content, we have to rewrite it from scratch, which is a total pain, but it's the only way to avoid creating a derivative work. Let's compare a passage from the original with the rewrite:

Douglas was an important prisoner, and King Edward himself wrote to Dacre instructing that he and William Barde, another captive, should be kept safely ironed and in prison. Douglas was to remain in captivity for two years. Andrew Wyntoun, a Scottish chronicler, later recorded his feelings about the 'Battle of Dornock'...

To help clarify concerns, I'm bolding the content that is taken word for word from the original, even if it's not in the same order.

As Douglas was an important prisoner, King Edward wrote to Darce, telling him that he and another captive, William Barde, should be kept safely in prison Douglas remained in custody for two years. A Schottish chronicler called Andrew Wyntoun later wrote his feelings about the Battle of Dornock...

You've eliminated some content and rearranged some, but as you can see most of the language is exactly the same as the original, and it is largely in the same structure. While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation - including both structure and language - are. When we rewrite, we have to be careful to rework both, and this can be kind of a pain in the neck. Unless the facts chosen and their order of arrangement is completely non-creative, we can wind up infringing on the original otherwise. (There's a little bit more about this at my userpage.)

The essay Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism". Both of them talk about how to completely rewrite something so that it isn't a derivative work. There's a good guide about it for college students over here.

This can be a really difficult skill to master, I'm afraid, but with some practice is certainly doable. The best tip I can give you: don't write "on top" of what's already there. Pull it all out and start over. When I do it, I go all the way back to the start and use brand new sources that I find on my own. It can take a while, but that way we know what we wind up with is completely clean of copyright problems. :)

I hope you won't be discouraged by this first encounter. We can certainly use your help! We're working on a "guide" for doing copyright cleanup at User:MLauba/Cv101. There is already one written for administrators at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins that has some tips that might help you recognize backwards infringement and other issues that we run into in evaluating.

And if you need more time to grasp rewriting, please don't feel that this will prevent your pitching in. You are more than welcome simply to tag the issues you find.

If you have questions about any of this, please let me know. I'll be watching your talk page for a time. And you are welcome to stop by mine at any time that I may be able to help, particularly with a copyright concern. This is where I put most of my time. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:06, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


Thank you very much for all your information and I will definitely carry on contributing in the copyright 'realm'. I will try to rewrite Battle of Dornock at some stage. Sorry for my breif reply, but thank you again for your invaluable help. Acather96 (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

With regards to the false positive of Pimentel (surname), you're correct that it's not a copyvio, but per WP:CWW we still need to ensure attribution to the original contributors of the content before the split. If it's made clear in an edit summary that's sufficient, but it can also be added via {{copied}} on the talk page(s). I felt this was somewhat ambiguous, so I tagged the talk page. Keep up the good work! VernoWhitney (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, and thanks for the thanks :) Acather96 (talk) 05:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Another note: If you blank a page, you can just note it on the SCV page like you did, no need to list it on the main CP page too, since SCV is transcluded into the page already (it wasn't today because someone apparently vandalised it). And I must say that it is quite nice to wake up in the morning and not see a huge backlog of unchecked pages from overnight waiting for me. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, will do. The only reason I did is because I followed the instructions in the template, I didn't no that SCV was already included in CP. Thanks again Acather96 (talk) 14:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the ribbon! I do appreciate extra shiny things :). I hope you don't mind if I rework it to fit in with my other ones. Oh, and if you ever feel like I'm pestering you too much with unasked-for advice or the like, just let me know. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

No, really its the complete opposite, you're advice is extremley helpful. And of course I dont mind the image re formatting. Two more thing s though: 1} Is there anywhere to request IP block exempt rights? Because my school is blocked, and I can't edit with my account there. They were {and rightly so} blocked for two years, I tried to figure this out but am a bit stuck, to be honest. Or do you just request a softblock? 2) Congrats on becoming a CCI clerk!Acather96 (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Glad I'm being helpful then. If I understand Wikipedia:IP block exemption, you should make an unblock request on your talk page, which I guess looks something like {{unblock|1=Insert your reason to be unblocked here}}. I suppose you could also request a soft block, but I imagine they have a reason for making it a hard block. Thanks for the congrats. Now I just need to finish a CCI so I can close it out and make use of my newfound powers. Mwa-ha-ha. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

OK

I'm sorryEliasTheHorse (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Scrumpy & Western EP

Sorry, my mistake for copying The Wurzels article, I was in the process of changing it, but you were too quick off the mark for me! Have now corrected it, although I might have a few more tweaks to do over the coming days. Cogoal (talk) 12:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Acather96 (talk) 14:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

iTunes overlinking

I think you probably have a point, but can you explain it in a little more detail on the iTunes talk page? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Done, and I've seen your additions. Sorry for the generic template, I was planning to look at it later, but thought I'd tag it incase other users (like yourself) wanted to help :) Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

AR Case

Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 205.170.127.101. We wanted to let you know that the case for the report you filed for 205.170.127.101 has been closed. Thank you again for filing and alerting us of this IP's abusive behavior. --Fumitol (talk) 16:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Acather96. You have new messages at Fetchcomms's talk page
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template.
(This notice was added 20:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC) by —fetch·comms)


Orphan tag

I removed the orphan tag from Gothic! Ten Original Dark Tales because I added a link to three articles. Joe Chill (talk) 11:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Good to know :) Acather96 (talk) 12:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Bernd Teo Matthias

The following is the information I have cited:

Bernd Teo Matthias(June8, 1918 - 1980) was a physicist, professor and researcher in superconductivity. He was born in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, on June 8, 1918. He completed his Ph.D. in physics in 1943 at the Eidgenďssische Technische Hochschule Zĕrich and continued his research there for four more years. He immigrated to the United States in 1947. Matthias was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1965 and is most noted for his discovery of nearly 1,000 superconducting materials.

I just think that the information is just a basic introduction and description for the scientist. I am afraid that in my opinion it is so concise that I could not find another way to describe him more properly. Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 12:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll try and re-write it, I've contested the speedy deletion of your page :) Acather96 (talk) 12:51, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Audio Secrecy

(talk page stalker) I've moved it to Wikipedia:Afc namespace and tagged the talk for deletion. It should be (relatively) fixed now :) Cheers, {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 10:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Sonia has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Thank you! :) {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 10:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Judith Reisman

Hi

Just out of interest, if someone is saying that a page is defaming them, is there anywhere in particular that we can report this to? I did have a look at the page as soon as defamation was mentioned but I couldn't see how the page was defaming the person that's why I just kept reverting. Might just be me being thick though! --5 albert square (talk) 10:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I've just e-mailed the Wikimedia Foundation. This could potentially be quite a big issue we've trodden into to. I've asked the user to give examples about what 'defamation' occured. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 10:43, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll keep an eye on the page meantime make sure the blanking doesn't continue :) --5 albert square (talk) 10:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


FROM JUDITH REISMAN TO WIKIPEDIA

Gentlemen: I am in another country right now and was informed that Wikipedia was again using people who are long time pornography and pedophile lobbyists to defame me. Jimmy Wales had to correct all this a few years ago and now its back. This site ridicules my scholarship and undermines my professional reputation (legally this is interference with advantageous relations). For example, the representative from the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco who you pose as a credible source to assault my pristine child sexual abuse research, has sold its own home made child pornography to Hustler magazine while Wardell Pomeroy, their former "dean" is on record as soliciting funds from the Adult Video Association to film child pornography at the IASHS. Their BOOK, Meditations on the Gift of Sexuality is a picture book of students, faculty, staff and friends engaged in illegal sexual orgies (circa 1977) including what is clearly understood today as child pornography, and my research has exposed their "institute" as a bogus "scientific" establishment in great detail. The same facts apply to your other critic. I could go through your entire entry for the slanted coverage, libelous and trivialization of my findings but I simply demand that you remove my entry from your site. It is wholly untrustworthy. Thank you for your immediate attention to this issue, Judith A Reisman, PhD —Preceding unsigned comment added by Judithreisman (talk • contribs) 15:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Just for future reference to whom it may concern, I flagged this up for attention at ANI , and they gave the user the email adderess to contact. Acather96 (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Shawn Tempesta

Seeking further clarification on Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Shawn_Tempesta rejection based on BLP. All links go to either Shawn's personal page, which is allowed, or Shawn's employer's sites, which are allowed, and further links. Just seeking info on HOW to make this better, as Wikipedia seems to be an impenetrable force. 98.216.130.184 (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC) Geoff, 5/16/10

The article was on hold, and there were no edits for 2 days. Policy says that we should usually decline any submissons that are older than 24hrs. Feel free to re-submit by following the instructions on the submission page. Thanks for helping Wikipedia, Acather96 (talk) 06:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

There were no edits within 2 days because the page was fully up-to-date and everything posted had direct links to his former co-workers, magazine articles, and his own website. I don't understand how the links provided were not suitable. I wrote about him and others before, and my writing has gotten better as time has gone on, but I'm missing something. Help me! 98.216.130.184 (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC) Geoff, 5/28/10

Re: Tocsearch

I have permission of author of that text about site and database tocsearch. Author will put that page with cc license. --Djordjes (talk) 17:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, that's fine. I've removed both tags, do you have any idea when the author could cc it? Acather96 (talk) 17:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. They did it few minutes before. --Djordjes (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I hate to be a buzzkill, but it needs to be more detailed than "This is page is under creative commons licence", as there are creative commons licenses which are incompatible with Wikipedia policies (such as non-commercial requirements, some other specific examples are listed in table format at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright). Something more specific, such as "Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License", which is used by Wikipedia itself, would be acceptable. Once the text is appropriately licensed we also need to add explicit attribution to the source, but I can take care of that tag once the license is clarified. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. I inform them about it, and they add details about cc licence. Is it ok now? --Djordjes (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
That'll work. The page is unblanked and attribution is added. There are no more copyright concerns. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Seeking further clarification on Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Shawn_Tempesta rejection based on BLP. All links go to either Shawn's personal page, which is allowed, or Shawn's employer's sites, which are allowed, and further links. Just seeking info on HOW to make this better, as Wikipedia seems to be an impenetrable force.

Audio Secrecy

Hi. Richard.darren (talk · contribs) has asked why I deleted this article. What I actually deleted was the redirect left behind when you moved the article back into Articles for Creation with an edit summary saying that it should still be on hold. I'm not sure what its status is now - it doesn't appear on the AfC lists, probably because it's at WP:Articles for creation/Audio Secrecy whereas other articles in AfC seem to be at [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/...]]. I guess the reason for hold is doubt whether, being about an unreleased album, it meets WP:NALBUMS; but could you tell Richard.darren what's going on? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

OK will do. My apologies on the late reply :o Acather96 (talk) 15:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

5 albert square has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!


Thanks! --5 albert square (talk) 20:53, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Max and Nadia Shepard Recital Hall

I made an error earlier by uploading a photo that was part of my university's website, it got flagged immediately and I went and personally took new photo's and uploaded them and revised the cite. Please review the information before deleting I also added a hang on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tzim78 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

OK Acather96 (talk) 09:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Edit Summary

Thanks for your message and the reminder. Clari 2010 (talk) 10:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

International Forum on Urbanism

Regarding this article, it was prodded and the creator removed the prod tag, indicating that they contested the deletion. While this is not acceptable for speedy deletion tags (where the avenue is {{hangon}}) or AfD notices, or copyvio blanking or plenty of other things, this is perfectly acceptable behavior for a prod. See WP:CONTESTED. I have accordingly re-removed the prod, but you are of course free to nominate it for AfD if you agree with Chzz that it should be deleted (I haven't really looked at it so I have no opinion as of yet). Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh right, thanks. I was not aware of this policy. Is it still appropriate to warn users who remove Coren SearchBot tags in bad faith without explanation for 'removal of maintenance templates'. I do this at the moment. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 19:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
And I am not 'over templating' SCV, am I? Acather96 (talk) 19:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) First, no need for talkbacks with me - I've watchlisted your page, and will continue stalking you so long as you and I are both active with copyright cleanup . Second, glad I could help. Prod really is the black sheep of the deletion policy family. Third, frankly I don't know the answer to your question. I don't bother warning them for that as we're still going to go through SCV and deal with them appropriately whether the tag is there or not and I feel that it's a little bitey. Of course, I tend to not use those warnings anyways unless they repeatedly remove templates, so maybe it's just me. In answer to your new question, I don't think so: personally I don't say anything about the ones tagged for speedy deletion, but I always watchlist the articles when I do that (in case something changes) and I'm still used to working it mostly alone, so I think the way you're working SCV works just fine. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
One follow-up comment that I noticed again just now, it doesn't really matter at SCV whether something is prodded or blp-prodded or sent to AfD or whatnot, so make sure to leave a note regarding the status of the copyright situation too (such as for How Weed Won The West on today's list). VernoWhitney (talk) 19:41, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your support at my RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 99 supports, 9 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Your support was much appreciated.

Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:11, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of FIR-TEX

The product FIR-TEX has been sited now by numerous independant sources, and, to my opinion, fullfills all the requirements made by Wiki. Please let me know why it should not be included in wikipedia? The article you removed was and is my own. Kind regards, Dick Fir-Tex 15:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dicky747 (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) In this case the article probably should not have been deleted as a copyright infringement as http://wikibin.org/ only mirrors content which was deleted from Wikipedia, and so unless the deleted copy was a copyright violation in the first place the content itself was fine (although the history would have needed to be restored by an admin to retain attribution and avoid GFDL licensing issues). However, looking into the situation further, I see that the original article was located at Fir-Tex and was deleted per the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fir-Tex. This means that even though it was (just now) deleted for the wrong reason, it still likely should have been deleted under WP:CSD#G4 as a substantial duplicate of the old page. If you feel it was sufficiently improved to overcome the original reasons for deletion, you should talk to an admin (say Cirt (talk · contribs) who deleted the old one or Vianello (talk · contribs) who deleted the new one) since they can compare the versions and, if it has changed sufficiently, they can restore the deleted version for you. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
If you have a new, improved version of the article, you might want to submit it here. This would allow other editors to review your submission, and make constructive comments instead of just deleting constantly. I am quite active at Afc so can help with submitting if you want :) Acather96 (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, i would be greatfull if you could help me with that. I am quite new and inexperienced at this. The main reason for the deletion some month ago was very vague (apart that in my and some others opinion some people just did not want to see the article on WIKI for a reason only known to them...) and based on assumptions of others and remarks that they did not find it as a product recognised by the bigger public. Yes very cryptic... However now this product is available to everybody and used and recognised by big instances such as RED BULL Racing, the Netherlands Olympic Committee, Dutch and many foreign Handball teams as well as other numerous organisations. Of course some very powerfull medical instances rather not see any information about this fabric as it might mean less business for them... Anyway i think it is important to create an unbiased article showing this new innovative and revolutionary fabric as it should be presented. i am not looking for a promotional article, just the plain truth. So if you could help me with that i would be very happy. Kind regards, H.P. Fir-Tex 17:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dicky747 (talk • contribs)
Okay, this is what I have done. I have created a page in my area, here, for you to work on the article. The reason I have decided not to go through Afc is because oter editors may (and understandbly) deny it quickly for being an advert. You can write whatever you want in this page, and it won't be deleted. Once it is finished I will move it to article space. Also, when you finish writing a reply to someone, don't include the word 'FIR-TEX' as this may become a conflict of interest. Instead, just type four tidles or click the signature button. But as long as the new page isn't biased in any way then this shouldn't be a problem. Thanks, and if you have any questions, you know who to ask :) Acather96 (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
P.S. conflicts of interest are something that could be a problem regardless of what they write in a reply. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Noted, if any of his edits cause a possible policy violation then I will template and bring it to the COI noticeboard. For the mean time I do not wish to deter this editor from contributing, and am cofident of good faith. That's my opinion anyway :) Acather96 (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
I have placed the page and are waiting for your comments and changes. Again thanks for your kind help. Flying Dutchman 08:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Bernd Teo Matthias

I saw that this page was blanked instead of speedily deleted as you said you were going to rewrite it. If you're still intending to do this, I thought I should remind you that this article has now been sitting there for long enough that it can be deleted at any time as a continuing copyright violation. There's obviously a bit of backlog at WP:CP since MRG's gone and not many admins have been stopping by, so I don't actually expect it to be deleted soon, but it could be. VernoWhitney (talk) 02:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

 Question: Just had a look for some more sources, couldn't find many but did find this. Is this material PD? Would it be okay to copy, with fresh sources and wikifyed? Acather96 (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Nope, not PD so not okay to copy. Near the bottom of the page it gives citation information, including copyright. Sorry. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah...err... sorry for being thick. Accept my apologies for being stupid, and will be re-written shortly. FYI, Battle of Dornock is now, finally, nearly a B-Class article! Acather96 (talk) 18:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
No worries, we all do things like that. Good job on Battle of Dornock! The sheer scale of those Rcpaterson articles overwhelms me. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Professor McEldowney

I declined speedy deletion of this article because it had been changed somewhat and no longer appeared to be a copyright violation of its original source. The article has also been moved to the proper title John McEldowney. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the info Acather96 (talk) 05:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
FYI, as the majority was still a close paraphrase, I blanked it for rewrite/review. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Acather96/Archive_1&oldid=1092092461"