Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Altiyan Childs, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.
Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
Please note that non-free images are not allowed to be used on articles like Altiyan Childs. Only images taken from the person who uploaded it onto Wikipedia are allowed. I have reverted your edit once again. ozurbanmusic (talk) 09:11, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are contributing to the article but the image is not allowed to be used on articles like that. Were you the one who took the photo? if not, then its a non-free image and it has to be removed. ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite simple. There is an Altiyan Childs, wikipedia page, sitting there, without a picture. I uploaded a picture. You were a dumbass and kept taking it off. I have one thing to say to you. F*CK YOU AND F*CK OFF. kthxbai
Craesius (talk) 10:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Craesius[reply]
You understand the image is copyrighted. You don't own the image and don't have permission to use it. Only images taken from the user who uploaded it are allowed to be used on articles like Altiyan's. Swearing is not going to solve this matter. ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
guess what? on facebook i could have a nike symbol has my profile picture, no one gives a shit. i could go on twitter, upload a picture of me standing next to a big adidas billboard, again, no one gives a shit. stop bitching damn it and the picture does not have any visible copyright. if we could only use pictures we use ourselves, you gotta admit, the internet would be a pretty fuckin boring place.
Craesius (talk) 11:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Altiyan Childs. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please also remember to remain civil in your discussions with other editors and resolve disputes on the talk page. Thanks.Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 12:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your concern, but I am editing the page to add content to the page, ozurbanmusic is removing my edit, so it is ozurbanmusic's fault. You go look at his talk page, there is lots of people saying to him about how bad his "fixing" is.
Craesius (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I feel that I should not be blocked because my edits are for the better of the article, ozurbanmusic's edits, are taking away from the article. Take a look at all the other famous music artists pages. They have a picture in the infobox. I try and do the same for Altiyan Childs, this person (ozurbanmusic) keeps removing the picture. I feel you should block him permanently from editing, just look at his talk page. It is full of complaints from people about the apparent "fixing" of articles. What he is really doing is just making them worse, moving stuff to the wrong place (Guy Sebastian Page) and deleting pictures from infoboxes (Altiyan Childs Page) Craesius (talk) 05:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
If you disagree with another user, you should discuss the issues on the talk page rather than keep reverting. If this fails, seek dispute resolution. Your unblock request does not indicate to me that you understand why you have been blocked, or that you will cease warring. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 06:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
If you look at the Altiyan Childs article, you'll see that all the information on there has been added by me. You have only added images. The only reason I keep removing the images is because its copyrighted, they're not allowed to be used. And NO, they don't come on my page and tell me my editing is bad, because it isn't. I have had much more experience than you editing Wikipedia articles and I know what I'm doing. I sometimes go on their page and start discussing the problems and they reply back on my page. The user that moved the personal life section in Guy Sebastian's article to the Early life section was wrong. Guy got married during his music career, not his early life. And a user has reverted your edit for that. I hope someone will explain to you that copyrighted images are not allowed to be used in infoboxes for musician articles, as I seem to be not explaining this to you clearly. Yes other musician articles have images in their infoboxes but they are not copyrighted images, they are free images uploaded by users who took the image off their camera, not images they found on Google. You are only blocked for 36 hours. ozurbanmusic (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Images I find on Google are now available to the public to use. I added half the information on the Altiyan Childs page, so don't try and take the credit. If you used your brain, you would know that no where, and I repeat NO WHERE can I see a visible copyright. I don't think someone took the picture from the Kylie Minogue article on their camera, nor the picture from the Spice Girls, Beyonce, Leona Lewis articles. Stop trolling. Craesius (talk) 09:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the case. Google make no claim that the images provides are copyright free - on the contrary, it clearly states when you click on an image "This image may be subject to copyright". Copyright laws assume that all images are copyright, even if no copyright notice is displayed, so Wikipedia can only use images which have been specifically released for free use (unless fair-use rules apply, which is not the case here as it is still possible to get a free-use photo). The photograph of Kylie Minogue, to take one of your examples, is such an image, and the copyright has been accepted by the OTRS committee. For more information, see WP:COPYRIGHT#Guidelines for images and other media files . — Tivedshambo (t/c) 09:48, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't make a blind bit of difference. Unless the image is clearly identified as being public domain or having a free licence (e.g. CC-BY-SA), we can't use it, no matter where else it's used. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 12:40, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck you people are dumb.... Facebook IS a public domain and the picture is not fucking copyrighted. Get that through your fucking thick skull. Craesius (talk) 05:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From section 2 of Facebook's terms and conditions: "You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook", i.e. the copyright is retained by the original poster (assuming of course that they haven't breached copyright in the first place). As you still don't seem to get it, and seem determined to abuse others, I have extended your block. Any further abuse and I will make this indefinite. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 05:58, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not abusing others, I am simply stating why I am right and they are wrong. What I don't get is why you are making such a big deal about me putting one picture on an Altiyan Childs article? If anything, whoever owns this picture would be flattered that I am using it. Craesius (talk) 11:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because that's not how copyright works. Wikipedia has to be 100% copyright compliant, because people can print it and even sell it if they want to (and this has already happened before). To be fully compliant with our own copyrights (GFDL and CC-BY-SA) we have to be sure we aren't violating copyrights ourselves. Those pictures that are copyrighted must have valid fair use rationales (and your picture doesn't qualify). We must have a free (as in "released" not "I can take it from somewhere public") image. Please be sure you understand these restrictions before continuing to upload images. Regards, Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 20:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is outrageous. GET A LIFE. I'm not gonna sell the fucking picture, I just want to contribute to the fucking article. DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? NO? WELL UNDERSTAND NOW. Craesius (talk) 03:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I still do not understand why I am still blocked. I WANT to contribute to Wikipedia, but you are NOT letting me. I try to contribute a picture that was off the Altiyan Childs Facebook fan page, it gets removed by ozurbanmusic. I was not aware of any rules that were on Wikipedia. I was not aware there was a three revert rule. Someone should have informed me. Craesius (talk) 09:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Your block has expired, but if you go on as you have begun, you are likely to be blocked again, perhaps permanently. Before you edit again, read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. You say "someone should have informed you" about the three revert rule: Shirik did, and his warning included "do not edit war even if you believe you are right." Your response was "it is ozurbanmusic's fault." Edits like this are absolutely unacceptable, as well as being factually wrong.
Thanks for uploading File:Altiyan Childs Photo.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
You have been warned repeatedly about this. The fact that the page gives no copyright infoamation about the photo makes no difference. If you upload this photo again you will be blocked. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 14:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You, tivedshambo, have got to be the most annoying person I have ever seen, even more annoying than ozurbanmusic. Wow. It's just a picture. Get over it. Do you want the article to be contributed to or not? Because it seems to me that if someone puts something on an article they are attacked by numerous users saying "THIS IS COPYRIGHT" "THIS INFORMATION IS FALSE" "YOU'RE NOW BLOCKED BECAUSE WE KNOW YOU ARE RIGHT". It is nothing but frustrating. Craesius (talk) 20:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck Wikipedia's policies. If their policies say I can not contribute to an article without being harassed by users, then I say fuck wikipedia. 05:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Altiyan Childs. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please also remember to remain civil in your discussions with other editors and resolve disputes on the talk page. Thanks. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 12:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
