User talk:Android79/TalkArchive014

HIStory

Hi

As you monitor the Michael Jackson page, could I refer you to the HIStory article. An editor called User:Appropiate, who has also been editing anonymously as User:81.106.165.39 and User:81.106.166.184 is constantly violating WP:NPOV in regard to this article, despite numerous warnings. I have reverted twice and informed him of WP:3RR, and also WP:NPA as he did in his edit summary. As an admin, could you watch this for a few days as I don't want to voilate WP:3RR myself. Cheers Funky Monkey 19:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please also read the comments he has made to me on the Talk:HIStory page and perhaps comment on them also. Thanks Funky Monkey 19:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully the message I left on the HIStory talk page straightened him out. (BTW, what's a "gorm"?) android 79 20:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ThanksFunky Monkey 20:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's at it again as an anonymous editor now. I can't be bothered any more, I'm getting seriously fed up with POV pushers and vandals, I'm taking a breakFunky Monkey 00:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Android79, I apologise about the past few days, I have explained on HIStory's, talk page - though I have changed my mind, I staying. About your change to my extension to HIStory's "Criticism & Controversy" - I understand WP:V (I shall verify it with sources) and WP:NOR (I shall provide reliable links to prove it's not just my conception), but WP:NPOV I do not understand. I know what the latter regulation is all about, but I don't know what violates this in the writing, I carefully tried to keep it neutral - perhaps you could tell me what parts concern you on HIStory's talk page. Thanks, and sorry again. By the way I'm not sure what a gorm is - someone called me it once and I liked the word, but I shouldn't have said it to Funky Monkey, and I have since apologized and familiarized with wikipedia rules fr.Appropiate. Appropiate 16:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have something to say?

WP:NPA? StrangerInParadise 23:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Page Needs Clean-up

Hi. Please take action as an admin and go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02_Persian_people. I`d appreciate it if you can look into this.Zmmz 20:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a cabal mediator; please ask one of them to handle this. android 79 21:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was I wrong?

If this was wrong, just let me know. I respect your opinion and peolpe were jsut fueling a fire there for no good reason.Gator (talk) 22:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. I was thinking about doing the same thing. android 79 22:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian peoples

Iranian peoples. So please you add the dipute tag to that article, I can't. Thanks.D iyako Talk + 02:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't you, and why should I? If you're revert warring over tags, please use WP:DR. android 79 02:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your attention, I am just trying to stop attacks against Iranian articles by two or three contributers here, these are follow ups to these incidents mentioned here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02 Persian people Looks like we have to start one for Iranian people soon.. it is very sad that we dont have an admin willing to take an action against these attacks, unless you are willing to do so, thank you --Kash 02:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admins aren't content police. If he's not violating any policies that I can block him for, you need to just work out a compromise or use WP:DR. android 79 02:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see my friend, at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02 Persian people, majority of users are against him, yet he is still going around, editing things, adding disputes, reporting me for vandalism for removing his actions!, etc etc! I am not sure what it takes to get someone blocked from Wikipedia my friend, but if you are not willing to help then, it is a real shame. Sadly I am not an expert on Wikipedia, yet, but as you are, I'd like to invite you to have a look and help out, Thank you. --Kash 03:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see User:Diyako mentioned anywhere on the mediation page. android 79 03:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry someone probably deleted the top 10 of everything, I remember checking a few weeks back and it was there since december. Crowbaaa 12:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

REcool MaN: Hey it does exist, what the heck dude.

See Hoy Kim

Thanks for saying you'd take a look at the problem. The images in question are: Image:Frozengodzilla.jpg, Image:Xillians.jpg, Image:Stallone.jpg, Image:Barthez.jpg, Image:PrestonLG.jpg, Image:Christian bale.jpg, Image:KimDaejung.jpg, Image:Godzilla running.jpg, Image:Mothravsgigan.jpg, and Image:Hford33.jpg AriGold 16:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User 151.213.167.25

Just thought you should know that User:151.213.167.25 has broken the 3RR on the Jackson article. So far there is a consensus to keep 'Wacko Jacko' but that doesn't seem to stop User:151.213.167.25 from removing it--Count Chocula 00:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List it at WP:AN/3RR; I can't block him because I'm involved in the dispute. android 79 00:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marcyu

Marcyu blanked the warnings and your block notice from their discussion page. Crumbsucker 01:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If s/he continues to edit, we'll worry about it at that point. android 79 02:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an anti-stalking rule? Crumbsucker apparently has taken it upon himself to undo almost every edit I do on this site - no matter the subject. Marcyu 16:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States presidential elections, 2012+

Thank you for acting so promptly on my request on the village pump. I was shocked at the speed of various people's responses there.

— DLJessup (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Blocks

Hehe, what a mess ;) — FireFox • T • 19:33, 4 March 2006

Glenn Reynolds political orientation

Hi Android79. I notice that you removed my attempt to specify a political orientation for Glenn Reynolds's blog. This morning I modified a bunch of blogger articles and one was Reynolds. I inferred that he is a conservative commentator. You disagree with my "pigeonholing", a term that implies that I am trying to diminish Reynold's blog via framing. His blog is distinctly non-liberal and he very frequently takes conservative stances (although these are not always Republican stances) since this is an encyclopedia it is appropriate to attempt to describe things and thus I am allowed to add adjectives to his blog to inform readings of the subject. If you wanted to correct it to libertarian that would be okay -- conservatism and libertarianism are very similar. When did conservative become pejorative? Why are you police-ing this article? --Ben Houston 17:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW one major problem I had with your response is that you cite Glenn Reynolds as the authority of his political orientation. That is not a NPOV source. Most intelligent political commentators are very good at rhetorical techniques and framing, thus it is important that Wikipedia doesn't become a slave to their "sensitivities". --Ben Houston 17:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who said "conservative" was pejorative? I only removed it because it was inaccurate – you stated that you "inferred" he is a conservative, from what I don't know. Reynolds is pro-choice and supports gay rights, and has frequently described himself as having libertarian beliefs. I disagree that Reynolds is a POV source when it comes to his own political orientation, as long as it is stated in the right way. "Reynolds describes himself as a libertarian" would be an accurate, NPOV way of presenting that. Inserting the adjective "conservative" is not only inaccurate, it is original research, since you "inferred" that he is a conservative and that he runs a "distinctly non-liberal" blog. The reason I simply removed "conservative" rather than replacing it with "libertarian" is that I wanted to find a post on his blog in which he self-describes as a libertarian before making that assertion, so we would have verifiable information in the article.

I am not "policing" this article; I have it on my watchlist, saw some inaccurate information being added, and removed it. I resent your accusatory tone. android 79 18:04, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an analysis of Glenn Reynold's political orientation and decides that he does fit under the "conservative" big tent: [1]. Here is an article Glenn wrote for Salon in which he is introduced as a "prominent conservative blogger": [2]. He is also one of the stars featured on www.thoseshirts.com, where "conservative humor, superior quality, and professional artistry come together." Anyways, I'll leave the article as is. I stand behind my original addition, I was not adding "inaccurate information", although I will accept that it wasn't properly referenced. --Ben Houston 21:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kirby Puckett

If you are able to update the Kirby Puckett article, please please include a picture of the catch and Jack Buck's soundbite of the home run. If I can be any help please don't be afraid to ask. I grew up watching him, and I balled like a baby last night when I found out. I felt like a fool, because I'm 26. But hey, guys like that are rare. --Leopold Samsonite

I'm the same age, and I did the same thing. android 79 13:28, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kirby Puckett 2

Yes I know wikipedia is not a eulogy, I wasn't thinking at the time. I grew up in North Dakota, and now live in West Virginia. I never got to see him play in person, but I loved watching him on tv and listen to the games on the radio. --Leopold Samsonite

Kirby Puckett Image, and Baseball Wikicity

Android, it was good to hear from you over at my Baseball Wiki talk page. It's good to see you there, and I hope you have fun. Unfortunatly I don't have a Kirby Puckett image for you. Take care, Googie man 19:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated...

Been nominated to be a Admin. Any advice ? Martial Law 00:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Had a keypad error. Martial Law 00:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :([reply]

Well, based on the current tally, you should take what others are saying and use it as a learning experience. And, one non-RfA-related thing: if you make a typo, there's no need to announce it. Just fix it and let it be. I don't need or want to know about "keypad errors". android 79 03:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you place the WP:V on my listings, if it is not already there ? More and more magazines and the like are now going online, a good example is the magazine Popular Mechanics magazine. How does WP:V deal with a issue like that ? Martial Law 23:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Got six more days to go on this. Imagine me as a Admin. Martial Law 23:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Deletion of Successfactors page

Android79,

As someone new to Wikipedia, I find it quite surprising that you deleted the page we put up for my company, SuccessFactors. I would like to understand a little bit more about why you felt it appropriate to delete our work and what we can do to make it more palatable to you and others. The one note I did see included a reference to us as a Non-notable company (something I'm sure our 400 customers and 1.4 million users would be willing to argue with you about).

Please let me know how I can help provide more information about us to the ever growing community of people who are interested in knowing more.

Thanks, Max —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.237.186 (talk • contribs) .

I deleted the article in accordance with the proposed deletion process. Someone nominated it for deletion because the article didn't meet our generally-accepted inclusion guidelines for articles on companies. Also, you should be aware that Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about yourself or your own endeavors. If you still feel that the deletion was in error, please bring it up at deletion review. android 79 00:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Lissack pic

Hi there - I got the pic on the Google Image Search. The original location is at http://zeppelin.blogdrive.com/images/Russell%20Lissack.jpg.

Tom Smith pic

Hi there - I only selected the 'wikipedia screenshot' option because there was nothing else that came remotely as near as that to what I meant.

My RfA

Hi Android. I wanted to thank you for taking the time to consider my RfA, which passed this morning, and for your kind words. If there's ever anything I can help you with, just ask; you know where to find me. ×Meegs 05:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Madea's Family Reunion

The persistant editor at this page seems to be using multiple IPs to avoid the 3RR. Crumbsucker 01:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm the one that blocks or protects or whatever, I'm sure this person will cry foul. Report at WP:AN, or, once the 3RR is actually broken, WP:AN/3RR. I'll continue to monitor the situation. android 79 02:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because other people revert to my edition, I'm automatically accused of using multiple IPs? Do you seriously think I'm looking at this page 24/7? Policeman of the Control Freak Wikipedia Editors 08:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, since the IPs all come from the same ISP in the same city. android 79 17:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So much for my comprimise, looks like it was finally protected.Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 18:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or, just perhaps, this was pointed out to a friend who felt as strongly about this article? Because that's exactly what happened in this case. Cox Communications is the largest broadband provider on the east coast, and the entire thing runs through Atlanta, their headquarters. I believe the IP address to which you're referring as a 3RR violation actually originates from South Carolina and the other is from Florida. Please be sure of your facts before accusations of wrongdoing.

Recruiting your friends to aid you in circumventing the 3RR is just as bad as violating it yourself. android 79 05:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't solicit their help in doing a revert. I just pointed the article out to that person. If that is considered a 3RR violation, then User:Mhking, User:Crumbsucker, and User:R._Koot (an administrator) are all also guilty of the 3RR infraction, as they even admit, in writing, collaborating against me in their talk pages (User_talk:Crumbsucker, and User_talk:R._Koot).

"Collaborating against me" -- shouldn't that be "us", then? android 79 05:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Semantics - they specifically targeted me, but no one else, in their Talk pages, thinking I was able to conjure IP addresses. But you avoided the question - why weren't those 3 users also punished under the 3RR rule? The inconsistencies, double standards, and outright hypocrisy is evident. The problem here is there is no one to look after the administrators, who have almost complete editorial control without any oversight. There's a reason why the editors of USA Today are above drinking age - it has to do with patience, experience, and the ability to lead people. The only administrators I see who have that aren't even very active here. My retired uncle, a former editor at the New York Post, is pretty shocked at the lack of objectivity on these pages. I don't blame him.

You say semantics, I say a revealing slip of language.

The difference between what you did and what Crumbsucker et al. did is this: they are established Wikipedia editors who, as far as I can tell, hadn't really interacted with one another before. There was no recruiting going on, and the reason they were "collaborating against" you because you refused to discuss the dispute any further on the talk page, instead relying on friends or extra IPs to get your preferred version in. They were a group of editors interested in maintaining Wikipedia's standards of neutrality and verifiability. You were a group of editors looking to force your point-of-view on a single article, objections be damned.

You talk about maturity, leadership, etc., as though these are qualities you have in abundance, and that your perceived opponents lack. I don't see it that way. Making petty personal attacks [3], using a ridiculous signature declaring yourself the Wikipedia "policeman", and refusing to follow basic standards of community etiquette are not marks of maturity.

There are plenty of venues to which you can bring your grievances. The administrator's noticeboard is one; requests for comment is another. There is oversight of mine and others' actions, and I welcome it. android 79 14:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would use the administrator's noticeboard if it actually worked. What's really ridiculous is your claim that the administrators are impartial. They deleted my complaint of my page being vandalized. Your "established" editors are doing nothing but reverts - I, along with people not reverting, are the only contributors adding useful information. I've had to go back and re-insert data your established editors deleted without even looking at (wiki links, updated box office numbers, actor/actress names, etc). If this what your so-called "Wikipedia standards" entails, it's no wonder I'm not following them.

Shaun Powell

LEAVE SHAUN POWELL PAGE ALONE >_> I whould happen to be him and whould appreciate it if I could write my freaking biography in the way I like. —This unsigned comment is by Untide (talk • contribs) .

User:161.74.11.24

I see you referted one of his edits removing a reference request. User is also doing this to Records and achievements by Michael Jackson. He is also continually removing warnings on his talk page despite being REPEATEDLY warned about this. Could you help? Funky Monkey 15:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a shared IP, so the person removing the warnings may not be "him", but we can assume it is one person continually reverting Records and achievements by Michael Jackson. Just continue reverting; it's certainly a valid request. android 79 15:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jew (disambiguation)

It looks like Cecropia speedily deleted it. I reverted it because both an incomplete AFD and a PROD were placed there by an anonymous IP, which is pretty unusual. I may have been too quick with the rollback button on that one, but I generally distrust anything from an anonymous IP when it comes to deletion proposals. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 17:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I generally distrust anything from an anonymous IP when it comes to deletion proposals. Yeah, I totally understand that. Looks like the situation resolved itself. Thanks! android 79 17:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Thank you for teaching me about the 3RR. I did not know that one. I have not violated it and will try not to. I am, of course, reverting the blanking done by one user who is blanking without discussion. I think you would agree that blanking is an act of vandalism, so citing the act as vandalism is not attacking someone. PoolGuy 17:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I misunderstood the 3RR rule. I checked the page history and saw that I had reverted the page blanker's edits twice on March 14. I comfortably reverted a third time believing that it would not be a violation of the rule. Now after rereading the rule, I see that it was for more than three reverts of the blanking in a rolling 24 hour period, not just the Wikiday. I did not intend to violate that rule. Sorry. I will make sure that I fix blanking on a less frequent basis for the pages that I watch. PoolGuy 05:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, you now seem to understand the rule, but not what it's supposed to prevent. If you intend to continue your edit war against consensus, I'll just protect the page. You need to work out your dispute on the talk page. android 79 05:03, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the picture

I hope you're happy now

--TheEmoEater 19:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a generalization

It's not a generalization, in my country 12% of the population are [removed], yet 44% of the prison population (almost 4 times) are [removed]. Futhermore the stereotypical black culture today (demonstrated by the screenshot of that crime game), is to idolize criminals "rappers".

Source: http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/incarceration/

--TheEmoEater 19:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheEmoEater

Hi - no, it was intentional. Perhaps I'm not aware of as full of a context as are you but it did seem like userpage vandalism, as much as I agree with you on the (assumed) intent of your edit. After a reading of WP:UP I decided to revert the edit. Please notice that I also reverted TheEmoEater's edit to your userpage. In general the policy seems to be not to edit userpages without permission, especially if it markedly changes the tone or content (i.e. not a spelling/grammar fix). — flamingspinach | (talk) 19:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll agree with that. I'll admit my revert was a spur-of-the-moment decision, since it was performed using WP:CDVF - I'll bow to your probably greater experience. Cheers. — flamingspinach | (talk) 20:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing

Please stop signing my comments. The act of signing, as Wikiquette dictates, "may be advisable to follow...(but) it is not policy." I don't want to sign my comments because of obvious bias some users have against me. I would never sign someone else's name if they did not want it signed. Thank you.

Just because something is not policy doesn't mean you can willfully ignore it. It's simply a community norm, and this particular norm is as close to "policy" as any guideline is likely to get. "Some users" with "obvious bias" can just use the talk page history to find out, and not signing only serves to confuse the flow of the conversation. I will use {{unsigned}} when a talk page discussion becomes impossible to decipher without being able to tell who said what. I'm not trying to single you out or make you the target of attacks. android 79 16:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How'd you not notice this?

I was wondering the same thing myself but am not one to campaign. lol Thanks.Gator (talk) 18:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to call them sockpuppets

Wikipedia has a vast non-editing community that ussually just reads the articles. They may care just as much about the content as someone such as you with many credable edits. Please don't resort to calling them names just because they don't edit much. It isn't very respectful of them.--Sgore 02:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx!

Thank you for the headsup, I'm guessing it's innocent. Have a great night and thanks again. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 04:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Rule 5 draft; Infielder; A Hard Road; Chitra indica; Strikeout-to-walk ratio; Midway Airport (British Columbia); Nissan Quest; Tampa Bay Devil Rays/Team records; Kiko Calero; Florida Marlins/Award winners and league leaders; Elizabethton Twins; Jacksonville Suns; Jose Oquendo; Oakland Athletics/Players of note; Seattle Mariners/Players of note; Baltimore Orioles/Players of note; Omaha Royals; Michael Cuddyer

Cleanup: Air Jordan; Mike Piazza
Merge: Right-handed; Thriller (song); List of English words of Yiddish origin
Add Sources: Luanne Platter; MADtv; Ocean's Eleven (2001 film)
Wikify: Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office; Manku Thimmana Kagga; Brom (Inheritance)
Expand: Myth of Er; Eric Steel; American League Championship Series

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways, from comparing articles that need work to other articles you've edited, to choosing articles randomly (ensuring that all articles with cleanup tags get a chance to be cleaned up). It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spiffy! Some of them look obvious (indeed, one of my own stubs is listed) and some are a little bizarre. I removed a couple that I'd rather not have links to from my talk page. android 79 14:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afd spamming and sockpuppetry

Do you think it would be appropriate to sockpuppet-tag this user? I think it's pretty obvious, but wanted to get a second opinion. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 17:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already filed a request for CheckUser. android 79 17:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course after reading CheckUser it is clear to see that the criteria are "individual(s) in question are engaged in significant (e.g. pattern) vandalism or there is reason to believe that sockpuppets are being used to evade a block, ban, or 3RR, or to otherwise violate policy (such as to vote multiple times in a poll or to otherwise appear to represent a wider opinion in discussion than one actually does)." None of these criteria can be met from the review of this user's history.

I think it would be hysterical if you actually did find out that User:GoldToeMarionette is in fact a SockPuppet. GoldToeMarionette 05:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attack

Please do not attack me personally by calling me a spammer. According to Wikipedia "Spamming is the abuse of any electronic communications medium to send unsolicited messages in bulk." I have not sent any messages in bulk. I have sent individual messages to a finite group related to an AfD. My postings have not strayed from Wikipedia:Spam guidelines relative to internal spamming. GoldToeMarionette 05:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Votestacking on AfD is not a good thing, and it was internal spam. That's not a personal attack, it's a simple fact. android 79 12:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for facts - Votestacking - Vote-stacking - Vote stacking - Wikipedia:Votestacking - Wikipedia:Vote-stacking - Wikipedia:Vote stacking - Wow, I found it! No wait, this appears to only be a policy that is proposed by one user and has only received one point of discussion which vehemently disagrees with it in the two weeks it has existed as a proposed policy.

Wikipedia actually has a guideline to assist Wikipedians, in order to promote Wikipedia matters such as elections. "Clean up your mess. For example, after engaging in cross-posting to promote some election, be sure to remove those cross-posts after the election is complete."

Claiming I am a spammer when I have followed a Wikipedia Guideline that has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow appears to me to be unfair. I like this guideline WP:BITE. GoldToeMarionette 05:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball Player Images

Hey, the copyright status of several of the images I've uploaded have been held in question. I'm sorry if I was violating copyright laws.. the webpages I found them on either stated or suggested (Although I'm sure the 'suggestions' are coming from my mind) that the images are free to use.. I'm just trying to help clean up baseball players' Wikis and give them the nice pages they deserve, but I'm not very experienced in Wiki editing. AdmiralTreyDavid 19:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When in doubt, always assume that an image you find on the web is copyrighted. I know it really sucks that we can't use all these nice photos of ballplayers on Wikipedia, but there are other ways we can improve the encyclopedia's articles on ballplayers. Have you considered joining the Baseball players WikiProject? android 79 19:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for Hugh Deasy

Hi, Android79. Just wanted to say that this AfD has taxed my patience to the limit. Are they always like this? There have been 3 bad ones today, but this is the worst I've experienced in my short time on Wikipedia, with The Hypermodernity Club running a close second. Just wanted to vent, so I thought I'd do it on your userpage and say hi while I was at it. Slowmover 21:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, AfD can get like this occasionally, which is why I don't participate in them much anymore, favoring proposed deletion instead. Unfortunately, since this Will guy disputed my PROD nomination, I was forced to bring it to AfD. Feel free to vent (or bring any other problems you may have) here anytime. android 79 22:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]