User talk:Brilliantine

Welcome to Brilliantine's talk page! If in doubt about what to do, take a look at the following points: If you would like to start a new discussion, please use the "+" tab at the top (located to the right of the edit tab), or click here. Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). If you do not, SineBot will do this for you. If you leave me a message here, I will respond here. If I leave you a message on your talk page, it's fine for you to respond there, as I will be watching it. I probably have made and will make a number of mistakes while editing. Feel free to draw my attention to these. (Be nice, though).

Minimum wage

Hello--Please put a comment at Talk:Minimum wage indicating what problems you see. (I can seriously anticipate people on either side of the minimum wage debate feeling the article is unbalanced.) CRETOG8(t/c) 13:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Museum of Bad Art

Please don't insert jokes into Wikipedia articles, like this. As an experienced editor, you should know we don't have senses of humor here, and jokes like that are considered vandalism. -kotra (talk) 01:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Definition of "libel"

You've commented a few times on whether certain statements meet the legal standard of "libel" in your opinion, 'tho you've also mentioned that you are not a lawyer. Are you familiar with the legal standards for libel/defamation in the UK or other countries in the European Union? I'm not sure where you are from, but the standards there are quite different than they are in the United States. Nathan ^T 21:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, your userpage says you are from London. Perhaps you are very familiar with the standard, then, but your opinion seems to be at odds with those expressed by a number of other folks usually well versed in the subject. Nathan ^T 22:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

(ec) I am normally UK-based. If DG attempted to bring a libel case in the UK, I very strongly believe a fair comment defence would be successful. I don't think a decent lawyer in the UK would look at this for more than a minute before turning it down. Brilliantine (talk) 22:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a heads up

You reported 207.166.19.32 to WP:AIV for blanking their own talk page (while under a long term block). This is allowed, per WP:BLANKING, and it is assumed that the deletion of the warnings indicates that they have been received and understood. Yes, it makes it harder to track long term abusers, but unfortunately, aside from very specific edits, like deleting denied block appeals or adding attacks, users can do what they want with their talk pages. The HelperBot removed your report anyway (since the IP was already blocked), but I thought you should know so you don't waste your own time on this in the future.

That said, it looks like the user may have removed templates in the Category:Shared IP header templates, which is forbidden. In that case I'd take it to WP:ANI, where someone can evaluate the case and decide if they should have access to their own talk page blocked. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi - I know talk page blanking is generally permitted, sorry about the poor phrasing of the ANI report. It was the removal of the shared IP templates and the note telling users from the school to log in as IP editing was disabled that led me to post. I see someone else has now requested the page be semi-protected, if that doesn't come about and the IP keeps removing the headers I'll ask at ANI as you suggest. Thanks for the tip. Brilliantine (talk)

No problem. I made the same mistake on the blanking policy myself a few months back (though I didn't have the added problem of fighting the HelperBot), figured I'd pass on the info. Keep up the good work! —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 22:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of The Barbs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Barbs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Barbs until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 20:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)