User talk:Clown666

Re: NX2000 page. C'mon, dude, let's not get into a pissing war over this stupid SR20 forum issue. This is a page for factual info. It was silly for you to change the forum name from one to the other, you could have simply ADDED it (as I have done). Let's just leave it at that.

Possibly unfree Image:Alpine_SubwooferTypeR.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alpine_SubwooferTypeR.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 16:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:1987 Nissan EXA.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:1987 Nissan EXA.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to English Defence League, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Do not remove properly cited material from articles. The Far-right information is reliably sourced. GimliDotNet^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 18:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The group has publicly stated they don't consider themselves to be right wing. Citing a left wing source that labels them that is not proof. Clown666 (talk) 18:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you're mistaken. How they describe themselves carries a lot less weight than how they are described by third-partys GimliDotNet^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 18:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can provide sources saying that Earth is flat, it doesn't make it a fact. The article should deal with the accusations of right wing and the corresponding denials, or it should not mention right wing at all. You are adding opinions as facts, and opinions have no place in a factual article. Clown666 (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should read WP:RS to see why your flat Earth fallacy falls down. – Richard BB 18:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A left wing newspaper accusing a political movement of being "right wing" is not a reliable source. It is opinion, not fact Clown666 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed a thousand times on the talk page. Please reread it and take it there. – Richard BB 18:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at English Defence League‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. – Richard BB 18:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how I am accused of edit warring but GimliDotNet is not, after all it takes two to tango. You clearly also have political bias. Clown666 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop assuming bad faith. Not everyone who disagrees with you is biased. I really think you ought to have a good read of WP:AGF before you continue accusing other editors of things. – Richard BB 18:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at English Defence League, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Discuss this issue before continuing, and do not mislabel edits as vandalism – Richard BB 18:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 18:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English Defence Leauge

The problem with your edits is that Wikipedia uses reliable, 3rd party sources for it's information. How the EDL describe themselves is not what is important when defining their political ideology it is how others view them. The Far-right tag is well sourced and well established and unless you can come up with some equally relevant and reliable sources that disagree it is not going to be removed from the article. GimliDotNet^{(Speak to me,Stuff I've done)} 19:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:N13 Nissan EXA.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:N13 Nissan EXA.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:23, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]