User talk:Dawnseeker2000/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

CubeSat

Hi. mc is the acronym of minor change and the equivalent here for what I usually use in the summary in other wikipedias. I'm basically new in editing pages in enwiki, so if this behaviour is not the standard or is prohibited, please, only tell me.

I changed the interwiki link because I was creating the article Xatcobeo, now I realize that I should create first the article and then change the interwiki... sorry for the error and thanks for show it to me. I'm open to any comments. Thanks again! --Xosema (talk) 22:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow you're fast - but what was wrong with my edit?

I made an edit to the Niburu page, correcting the dates from 2010 to 2012 and the date from May 2003 when it was infact April 2003.

EDIT: juveline vandalism considering my 8 year old brother was just on my computer for 5 minutes? I come back to do some research and I notice the dates are wrong, I look my confused, my little brother says 'edit' so I do and put in the correct dates that where originally put forward by ZetaTalk, problem being?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.250.125 (talk) 01:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your edits are juvenile vandalism that's why. Dawnseeker2000 01:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your talk page contains all the information that was necessary for me to revert your edit. Please buy a dictionary. Dawnseeker2000 01:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

AES Disambiguation

Thanks for your advice. Cheers, Shinkolobwe (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

About external links in House music

All the external links in this article have been removed and replaced by a link to dmoz. Other articles ( Dubstep, Techno ) have some interesting external links. Even if Wikipedia is not a directory link, some links might be seen as pedagogic. For example, the Gridface link i added ( http://www.gridface.com/tags/houseroots ) could be a good approach to understand the roots of House music. Maybe, a new section ( for example further readings ) could be created. --Groovenvibes (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

That one looks fine. Feel free to re-add it. Thanks. Dawnseeker2000 14:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Linksys WRT54G Series

Hi. A note about why I removed your addition to this article. These types of articles are always creeping towards being "how-to" articles. The editors that are making these changes frequently embed external links to their link of choice right in the article. I've been trying to help maintain this article as per WP:NOTHOWTO and WP:EL for some time. There are tons of other articles where these types of howto articles exist, but there just aren't enough editors to help maintain them properly. Dawnseeker2000 15:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

After reading what you wrote, then the links to WP:NOTHOWTO and WP:EL, I still fail to see why you removed the link. It was not turning the article into a "how-to". It was a link to a "how-to", and according to WP:EL, "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail." Well, the link fits the description. I could understand if a how-to was posted inline in the article, but just an external link does not make an article creep towards being a "how-to".

rezin8 10:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezin8 (talk • contribs)

OK. Links aren't to be used in the body of the article. That's a good reason for not having the links present. Dawnseeker2000 16:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

'Vandalism'

How is referencing the HQ of a large corporation by linking to a random site useful at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.23.161 (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Your edits have been hosing the inter-language links. That's vandalism. Dawnseeker2000 19:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I like how you don't answer my question and instead bring up some other issue. Let me try again. How is linking to an unofficial site (Manta.com) useful? It is an obvious MFA site. I look forward to you accusing me of vandalism when I change the links to their official site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.23.161 (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Look at your edits. Do you see how the inter-language links are toast? You may have a problem with your browser so please stop editing so that this does not continue. Dawnseeker2000 20:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Heartbreak Hotel

Hi, just wanted to say thanks to you for the work you did uploading the audio sample to the article Heartbreak Hotel. I had never uploaded an audio file before and I messed up my attempt. I felt it was important to the article to showcase the impact that it may have had on some (perhaps most) people at the time. I'm curious about why my upload didn't work; was it too big a file? Or too long? Maybe it wasn't accepted because I hadn't filled in all the information fields correctly? Anyway, many thanks, again. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I've fixed a few of those now. It was in Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request & that's how I stumbled across it. So yes, it was too long of a sample & the info fields should be complete also. Anyhow, cheers! Dawnseeker2000 21:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Shop list at Portland International Airport

Hi Dawnseeker, alas my edit which removed the shop and restaurant list was reverted, claiming that there would not be any general consensus about not including such information into airport articles (see here or here). Maybe you want to discuss on this matter, too? Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 14:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

User: 190fordhouse

(Sigh of relief)Thank you! That is the exact problem I have with them. They also sockpuppet, because I recognize the same pattern of changes and behavior from User: Statmo1921 and User: SonnywithaChancefan. I figured this out by linking all of them to simultaneously making edits to the Stafford Municipal School District(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stafford_Municipal_School_District&action=history). On their Statmo1921 profile I gave them several warnings and as a result they changed my words to vulgar language. If you check the editing history you will see that. I've tried to report them for months, but I haven't been able to since I've never had to.Carmaker1 (talk) 03:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

OK. I will watch what happens at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/190fordhouse. Dawnseeker2000 05:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a joke

As I requested of Pinethicket, please stop revising my post on Purvis, Mississippi. I've read all the rules (noting where it says things are illegal actions versus "generally frowned upon") and I've violated nothing. Your opinion of "vandalism" doesn't constitute vandalism. I'll have you know I actually AM from that town, and a well known one at that. The link I provided was valid. Your objection to my post, however, was not. I'm not a joke, and don't appreciate the reference. I apologize for having accomplished many more notable things than sitting around editing Wikipedia all day. Any information gained on the internet should not be taken seriously or as a credible source, and if people want the closest thing they can get to "real" information, they should go read a "real" book. On top of everything else, your jealous shenanigans are costing me a $500 wager that an acquaintance made with me. It was requested that I provide a valid link in compliance with the guidelines, and I did. ~~Kit-Fox8~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kit-Fox8 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

User that was recently banned...

Is editing again under an I.P. address, despite being blocked for 2 weeks. Should I report them for defying the ban?Carmaker1 (talk) 10:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism warning on Web 2.0

Annoying though these "Hey class, here's how to edit Wikipedia" edits are, it's rarely justified to go straight to a threat of an immediate block. The problem is that an empty threat is worse then nothing, and it's unlikely that anyone would get blocked for merely a second vandalism (it usually takes 4-5 minimum) as WP:AIV would tend to reject that as "Insufficient prior warnings".

Personally I just revert first vandalisms and don't warn, unless it looks like a genuine test edit and they simply need a pointer to the sandbox. The kids who want to scrawl their names on things or write "poo!" are seeking attention as much as anything, and being ignored is probably the most annoying thing that can happen to them. The ones who need blocking are the persistent ones, not the drivebys - they just need fixing and moving on. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

That person could have just as easily been the type that would go on a twenty minute rampage. I gave a "one more and that's it" just to make sure. Too many folks like that running amok here. Carry on... Dawnseeker2000 14:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

So wait 10 minutes and stomp them then. There's not much vandalism (outside WP:BLP) that really needs fixing that quickly. Most of the one-hits are just that, one-offs - whether by renouncing vandalism or by switching IP we don't usually find out, but most of them do go away.

There's a more persistent one busy there right now, if you've still got your Clueiron warm. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

IP editor changing dates

I saw your revert on CHiPs‎ and warning on their talk page User talk:173.67.108.94. They are at it wholesale [1]. I didn't revert any of them before because I thought they might be genuine errors that the IP editor corrected (I did make some reversions and give them warnings on other grounds)... but it seems that they might be adding errors to dozens of articles on purpose. Rapido (talk) 00:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I see they're going to town. The person doesn't leave edit summaries so there's no way to know. They could be one of the many people that are destroying Wikipedia for all we know. All I know is I can not wait for the shift to turn to making a quality encyclopedia. We certainly don't have that yet. Thanks for stopping by. Dawnseeker2000 01:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Why did you remove a charming example of Anguilla church architecture?

Hello, I live here in Anguilla. We are religious people, with more churches for an island of this size, I am sure, that any other island.

I enjoy the section about the Anguilla church architecture. It is stunningly simple, yet beautiful. A Web page was given as an external reference ( http://www.anguilla-beaches.com/anguilla-photos-churches.html ). If you scroll to the bottom, you will see that other Anguillians have added their own photo and love this page.

I do like the reworking of the article you did, except for this. This page has been a reference for years. By removing it, I believe the the point is weakened. Can you explain to me why you removed it?

I do not know how to create an account and I have never contributed to wikipedia. I just like, like other Anguillians, I am sure, checking what people have written about us. Thanks very much for your explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 22:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

The link is not a quality link. It's more like spam, and it cannot be used as a source for anything. A source must be a recognized authority. Dawnseeker2000 22:43, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

How can you say this is not a quality link? The photos are beautiful. If I search at compete.com, I see that the site itself has more traffic than any other site about Anguilla (Compete is a very interesting resource I recently discovered that you should check out it's amazing how this wonderful site about Anguilla gets more traffic than the government sites. I guess it's because people like it more.) The link that you talk about has been there for years. Are you saying the only good links are the ones YOU like in particular, government links, your own links to wikitravel and other wikipedia projects, and to the spammy Open Directory Project? Sorry, I thought this was an ubiased dictionary, not cronyism and governments. The Anguilla entry for Anguilla is worse for your deletion. And Wikipedia is starting to feel like a closed system that does not want any other contributions. Too bad for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you simply add it to the Open Directory Project? That is a great idea. Dawnseeker2000 17:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

That was not the point (Open Directory Project). I never even use directories. I like the site (anguilla-beaches.com) for many reasons, but the site owner can submit to directories. It's not my job. I did not add the church-architecture link to Wikipedia. The link to that beautiful church page from anguilla-beaches.com had been in Wikipedia FOR YEARS, as an example of the charming church architecture that we have. Suddenly, you come along and, without providing a better link, decide it is "spam"? If you cannot find a better page that illustrates the architecture, you should restore it as the authority that visually documents our church architecture, or just remove the whole point about our beautiful, simple and varied places of worhip. And it is not just me who enjoys that page. Scroll to the bottom and see how tourists and we "Belongers" (Anguillians) alike have submitted their own photos of other churches, too. Sorry, don't tell me to submit someone else's site to a directory as an answer. Instead, give me a reason why you would remove a link to a page that documented a point very well and that had presumably passed countless other editors. I don't understand who you are or what you do at Wikipedia, but if it's a position of some kind of authority, I feel you've made an error. If it's not, I should restore the link but don't really want to fight with you if you have the final position of authority and can arbitrarily overrule my logic anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel like the website adds much to the article. It's a low quality no-name website with some pictures and a bunch of promotional material. User NVcats just added a similar link (http://leewardislandguide.com/leeward-islands/anguillaleewardislands.html) to the article and got blocked for spamming. Dawnseeker2000 23:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Who are you to decide? Search Google for Anguilla and you will see that they seem to think otherwise. Compete.com shows it gets more traffic than EVERY other site about Anguilla. You know more, I hope, than to mistake a typical spam site with no character (your leewardisland example) or passion or history, for a site that is 8 years old and is considered here in Anguilla as a truly wonderful site about Anguilla. What makes it bad? Her Google ads? You never answer any of my points or justify your answers. You don't provide a better example of a pictorial for church architecture. Again, who are you and on what basis beside "you feel" do you make the decisions that you do? I give you real information and you give me "you feel." How can you not feel that photos of most of our churches doesn't add to a point about architecture? Do you enjoy books about architecture without photos or illustrations? It makes no sense. Do some research and you will see that your leewardisland example is irrelevant and non-applicable to this. No one "just added" that link. I spent some time on that site just now and can't imagine that site adding any value to any article. Have you actually spent some time reading anguilla-beaches.com? This is a real site about a real family who portrays Anguilla with love and passion, that covers the island with more personal stories than any other site I have ever seen, Anguilla or elsewhere. And you call it a "low quality no-Name webiste?" Wow. You would be laughed at here in Anguilla for saying that. I'm sorry, but you make no sense. Could you tell me if you have authority at Wikipedia or if you're just a regular person like me, except you know how to use Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 02:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I am a contributing editor. That's it. And I think I've spend enough time on this. Your persistance about this website is astonishing. Take care. Dawnseeker2000 02:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I persist because 1) I love that anguilla-beaches.com as do many people around the world (more than any other site about Anguilla, as I've stated but you ignore despite data that you could verify); 2) I tend to persist when people don't answer good points; and 3) your evasivness and lack of a single solid answer is istelf "astonishing." I come back to read about my country every now and then, watch our article evolve. Now that I know that Wikipedia is far from its PR of a "people's encylcopedia," but instead is ruled by autocrats who decide and ignore genuine feedback, who wipe out contributions (not just this one) made by so many others over the years, you won't see me back here again. I now sense that you merely need to win by asserting authority and YOUR baseless opinion, not by actually answering any of the points that I make above. That calls the entire concept of Wikipedia and what it is supposed to be into doubt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 02:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that link would survive the critique of a featured article review. Probably wouldn't even squeak through a good article review. Sorry you're disappointed. Dawnseeker2000 03:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, you are back to "you think" again and refusing. I am offering valid points and you keep offering YOUR individual opinion, ignoring the points I make. The site anguilla-beaches.com does meet the standards you refer to. If it does not, please point out another site that is more complete, better written, and more ENGAGING. And that is not MY opinion. I'm sure you know of sites like compete.com and other resource that compare the opinions of who REALLY counts, not you or me, but all the people who visit these sites. The more research I do, the more the site impresses me. Despite the fact that this "girl" started the site at 14 years old and had no budget, you will find that no site gets more visits or pages per visit. Sites like the government's sites have the natural authority of "pre-ordained" authority and hire expensive AMERICAN Web firms, have many more links to it from other major sites like the New York Times due to it's built-in authority and yet the people's choice is the work of this now 20+ year old woman.

Wikipedia's own article does not, in fact, pass your standards as it is far less engaging, lacks many references or the references are circular, has many inaccuracies (the coral reefs are not "spectacular" by international standards, the religion part alone has been funny to watch over the years and I could list 20 other inaccuracies at a glance but why bother when the only thing that really counts is ONE person's opinion, yours). The Wikipedia article is less complete in every respect (from weather to out-island coverage) except in history, which is not the job of a site that is dedicated to informing tourists about our island. You should have more faith in your own judgment and REALLY read that site, or just admit you have a built-in bias about "no-name" sites. Let me open your eyes. There are people out there in the real world writing extraordinary sites. They are better than big business, government, and religion. If those are the only sites you deem worthy, along with whatever "facts" people enter, and you eiminate documentation of a fact ("Anguilla church architecture") because the site is no-name and yet no better resource exists, well, Wikipedia is in trouble if they are all like you. If you're truly "sorry I'm disapopinted," please explain to me how other sites are superior to anguilla-beaches.com AFTER you've truly read it. It's not the New York Times, I agree. It's far more engaging. The standards you put up are merely an excuse to, once again, go to YOUR autoractic opnion, without offering any real rationale. Your answers boil down to "because I said so" while I take the time to explain and document why your opinion is wrong, at least in this specific case. Will your last word on this once again boil down to your opinion and pretend-palliation? If so, don't bother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

My argument for not including the link is based on Wikipedia standards. The article needs some quality book-based sources, not some person's "Hi, come visit Anguilla" website. That's all there is to it. The Open Directory Project is our solution here. Use it. Everyone knows some "charming little website" to add to Wikipedia. We can't add them all. Dawnseeker2000 14:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah-ha. So the wikitravel.org article on Anguilla, which is an outline, badly out of date and has no book-based sources -- THAT one makes the cut? Sorry, it sorely misses the criteria. On that basis, can I delete it and replace it with anguilla-beaches.com, anguilla-vacation.com and anguillaguide.com, the big 3 travel sites about Anguilla and all of which are infinitely better than the wikitravel link under its own heading of TRAVEL?

And what about anguilla-vacation.com which is also a fine site but is also a "Hi, come visit Anguilla" website and has no book-based sources. How did it survive your knife? Why, by the way, would an original Web page with original photos need "book-based references." That page IS original research. It illustrated the architecture. So that does not fit your "everyone knows some charming little website," this was a specific documentation of a specific point which had survived as valid for years. Suddenly, though, YOU and YOUR bias decided you don't like no-name Web sites even thought others had obviously thought that this external link, serving as a specific reference, did serve its purpose. Why don't you just quit making excuses and admit that an article is only as good as the bias of the last "contributing editor" who reviews it? Is everyone as closed-minded when an opinion is called into question and makes a good point? There is no other valid explanation that you've offered than pure personal bias. Everything you say is either opinion or is contradicted by other links that are there. At the end of day if you just want to link to each county's government Web site, the CIA Factbook site and your own wikitravel site (a horrible resource which does meet the standards you set but which is part of YOUR "wiki" family, it has no redeeming values), why don't you just state that policy and hope that no one notices all the "facts" in the article itself which are undocumented and/or wrong. Realize that anyone could say that Anguilla has wonderful church architecture. Who would delete such a bland statement even if our architecture was no different than any other island (it's not, it really is special and unusually numerous for such a small population. But how do YOU know that? With photos. Without a page of photos, how do you know it's true? SUMMARY: The answer is OFTEN not from a "book source." It's from charming Web sites created by real people who were really there and took and grouped those photos. It's stunning to watch a closed mind at work -- does none of this make any sense to you. Or is the wiki-religion just to strong to actually call anything into question? And really... What the heck is Wikitravel article doing there? Can I delete that, please? It meets absolutely none of your criteria. Zero. Useless. Out of date. Inaccuracies. Is the real reason you want to chop "charming sites" like Anguilla's big 3 is that they make the wikitravel article look so horrible? If wikitravel belongs in a special section for Travel, they all do. How did that link make your cut? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 17:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't notice the anguilla-vacation.com site. Sorry for the confusion. I replaced it just now.Dawnseeker2000 17:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Amazing! Amusing! You delete a good site (this one is the official site of the Anguilla Tourist Board, but as far as you'd be concerned it's just another "visit us" site). Instead, you ignore my REAL SUGGESTION and you keep a horrible one, the wikitravel article on Anguilla. Why? Why keep Footprint Travel Guides, it's just another tourist book,for that matter?

Your Anguilla history link is broken. Why keep that one? Anguilla News (news.ai) is inactive and is also just another "no-name" site. Hey, let's get rid of all of them! The UCB Libraries is a good link, its article is much better than Wikepedia's. The link to DMOZ is full of crappy sites and commercial sites renting villas, etc. that you hate, far "worse" than the ones you've been dropping. Why link to them? BUT the biggest point... don't you care that the article is full of inaccuracies... population out-of-date and not documented, GDP 2004??, errors in the history, too much emphasis on slavery which never thrived here, no mention of governor's role, the economy is not expanding (been hard hit by recession), Luis and Lenny are old news, airport data is incorrect, ferry incomplete, buses exist, Nigeria???, Chinese Indian and Mexican workers now mostly gone since development halted, on and on -- none of it is documented. But you will aggressively delete the documentation that does exist because its photos were taken by a "no-name." Do you realize that your entire Anguilla article is written by "no-names" and they've got a bunch of it wrong? And finally, just to repeat, what the heck is the link to wikitravel doing there? It's an abysmal article that meets none of your specs. Why would you delete anguilla-beaches.com, anguilla-vacation.com, yet refer the reader to wikitravel and DMOZ (Yahoo!'s directory listings are higher quality, by the way.) Bizarre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I made two changes per your specifications above, removing one very poor quality link (wikitravel article), and also one no-name affiliate site that also failed to meet the criteria you lay out above. Finally, please note that the link in References to http://www.gov.ai/elections/anguillahistory.htm is broken but I cannot remove that for some reason. Please take it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I made one more change, removing the link to DMOZ Anguilla, which links to mostly commercial sites about specific villas, etc, and changed to Yahoo! Directory which has a smaller number of higher quality sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 14:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that you reversed all my changes, despite the fact that they met the specifications that you laid out, despite the fact that they made Wikipedia's Anguilla article (such as it is) better. I replaced the link to DMOZ (Anguilla) which was full of "no-name" commercial sites renting villas and the like and replaced it with Yahoo!'s equivalent section which contains a smaller number of superior sites (according to your criteria). You ignored my recommendation to remove a dead link (from a section that I cannot access), which is hard to understand for someone who's put so much effort into this article, unless the hidden goal was to actually make the article on Anguilla worse? You did make one change that I truly did not recommend, removing a fine link to the Anguilla Tourist Board's site (an official government site). So you basically do the opposite of what I suggest while violating the very criteria you lay out. And now, you reverse my changes that were superior to yours, by any logical measurement. Truly, this boggles the mind. I don't expect an answer from you since you have taken the wise tack of ignoring me because you know that, on the merits, you simply cannot build a case for what you have done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 13:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I didn't "reverse" anything. The last thing I did was replace the anguilla-vacation.com website at your suggestion. Dawnseeker2000 14:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

THAT was not at my suggestion. And I see that you simply called another editor, Ohnoitsjamie, to reverse my changes. Clearly there is some sort of policy that the not-for-proft DMOZ directory is full of BETTER sites than the for-profit Yahoo! Directory, even if it's loaded with spam and is largely out-of-date. Any sane person who knows anything about the two can tell you that (aside from the fact that they don't use directories) Yahoo! consistently has better and more up to date listings -- and with Anguilla, there's no contest (like I really want to see all the sites that are villa ads in DMOZ!). And anyone from Anguilla would puke if you tried to tell them the Wikitravel article on Anguilla belongs there on its own merits, let alone be considered the ONLY acceptable TRAVEL link while sites like anguillaguide.com, anguilla-beaches.com and anguilla-vacation.com are better in every way you care to mention. Let's face it, this is just nepotism, cross-linking to the other wiki family members even if they are worse than the wiki parent. Meanwhile broken links that I have pointed out (ex.., http://www.gov.ai/elections/anguillahistory.htm ), links to sites that have been inactive for years ( http://www.news.ai/gl//article.php?story=20060425160749670 ) and other errors remain unchanged (no point in me making changes, you'll reverse them all). No one from wikipedia actually bothers to debate any of this (except to say "that's the way it is") and I do feel that I have given you fair chance to do so in this discussion. This will be an excellent article for major Internet Marketing blogs and tweets. So, before I publish this, is anyone at Wikipedia actually interested in defending any of the above on the merits, on the basis of real quality, countering the points that I have made? Or are we merely to accept "because I said so" as your answer even though the real experts, people who live in Anguilla and know that your DMOZ-over-Yahoo! and Wikitravel-even-if-its-crap policies make absolutely no sense. Since these changes have nothing to do with quality, it's all about politics and supporting the wiki-family of sites that ultimately do become for-profit. I do hope they pay you well, because anyone still volunteering at Wikipedia is missing that the light of idealism has gone out. That shining that you see is the money the owners are making off your free labor. OK, I better VIEW SOURCE this so I can quote accurately from it before you change it all when this becomes an article about "How Wikpedia Really Works and Why" for public consumption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.57.237.58 (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

How do I contact dawnseeker2000

Do you add comments here to contact dawnseeker2000 or is there a way to "message" this admin directly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbmillercode (talk • contribs) 18:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You just did contact me. I am not an admin. I am a contributor. Dawnseeker2000 19:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

?

I've never even heard of Shannen Doherty, let alone edited her page, I think you must be mistaken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.61.117 (talk) 22:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

No. I'm not. This edit was made by the IP address that you're using. IP's sometimes change and this is why you've recieved the vandalism warning; the person that had the IP address previously is the one that made the edit. Apologies for any confusion. Dawnseeker2000 22:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/ Editors deleting appropriate content under news and media sources for Caribbean. For the Mediation Committee, Seddon talk and Xavexgoem (talk) 17:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Engine Control Unit page ideas

I see you've been active on the ECU page. I added some comments to the discussion page there. Comments welcome. James Murray 80.176.88.36 (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Austrians = nazis

Oh come on dude, you know it's true. Are you a sympathizer to the huns?--192.12.88.2 (talk) 04:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

You're working on a long-term block. Dawnseeker2000 04:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

You're a kraut. Scheisse!--192.12.88.1 (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what that means. Dawnseeker2000 01:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Kelly Services page

Greetings - I made minor edits to the company information section and you flagged a copywrite infringement. I noticed the first reference was not accurate so I removed it this morning. Hopefully the page is ok now.

I'm not sure which editor you are. There's been a flurry of editors that have been changing the article to include a portion of http://ir.kellyservices.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=443213

That's not OK. Please sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes (~). Dawnseeker2000 15:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The information you reverted back to is not accurate or current. We are simply trying to post current/accurate information. It was not cut & pasted from another Web site. mcconbc12.159.45.210 (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The content matches that of the link that I provided. We must use our own words. This is the reason that I've reverted to previous versions. Did you look at the link? Did you see how the text is a verbatim copy? Content on an article that is not current is not a reason to use text that is pulled from a copyrighted website. Dawnseeker2000 16:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

What?

You sent me a message referring to Dirty Harry or something, but what are you referring to? Was it on a Discussion page? Please elucidate before "deleting" for "good taste" or some such non-1st-amendment nonsense.

The message I left on your talk page is very clear. Dawnseeker2000 23:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Phil Harris (fisherman)

On February 22, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phil Harris (fisherman), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 06:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

External links

Thanks for all the cleanup work. I thought I'd drop a note though about something that I noticed. I appreciate that it's not appropriate to link to external sites directly off of terms or names appearing in Wikipedia but as you clean things up please take care not to remove what appear to be legitimate - indeed necessary - sources for article content. See for example Cranbrook Educational Community, where I restored, as footnotes, in line citations that you'd removed entirely from the article. Here's the diff between your edit and mine: [2] Thanks! JohnInDC (talk) 22:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Saw your subsequent edits. I'll take your point about "Designintelligence" if you'll take mine about US News and World Report! JohnInDC (talk) 22:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

But - if you're going to remove the link that supports the text, as linkspam, then shouldn't the text come out too? It's either a credible source for the article text - in which case both belong in - or it's not, in which case both belong out. Right? (Sorry for the quick series of Talk messages.) JohnInDC (talk) 22:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Of course :)

When I'm not fighting vandalism or spam my work includes adding correctly formatted and quality sources to articles. Usually the high quality sources are recognizable and even have Wikipedia articles themselves (MSNBC, Time (magazine)). So when I see an unregistered user plastering links all over the place I clean it up to align with the manual of style. We can definitely find higher quality sources in some of these cases. Dawnseeker2000 22:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. But now I find myself a bit confused - I took a look at the article's history and discovered that that "DesignIntelligence" link (or whatever it's called) has been in the article, essentially unchanged, since mid-2007. It's not a recent addition - what prompted this edit? Is it a notably not-credible site? Something particularly spammy? Right now I'm having trouble figuring out what's wrong with it other than that it lacks its own Wikipedia article. Thanks - JohnInDC (talk) 22:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, is this an WP:MOS issue or one of WP:Reliable source? Certainly a source can be reliable, and properly cited in an article, even if it's not particularly well known. Thanks again for any insight you can offer! JohnInDC (talk) 22:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I have responded on my own Talk page in order to keep this all in one place. JohnInDC (talk) 22:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Oscar Grant/Oakland case. (Thanks for advice.)

I understand better now.  :)

Will have to become able -- here -- to make available sometimes the reference in a *pair." IMHO.  : The newspaper in which the article-concerned appeared, and a Web-site reproducing the article from the newspaper.

Thanks for your explanation. I had expected to fix broken-refc later today

Cyclist-eddy (talk) 01:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Dream Academy - Life In A Northern Town.ogg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dream Academy - Life In A Northern Town.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Word choice

Please be careful when using the word 'vandal', as it only meant to apply to edits which are clearly malicious in intent.

An edit may be completely inappropriate and out of place, and yet have been done in good faith. Your description of what was done here as vandalism could be perceived as unnecessarily harsh.

That said, keep up the good work. DS (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

OK thanks. Dawnseeker2000 15:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism on Output device

Thanks for reporting this. I have semi-protected the article, which may help, and asked Oversight to suppress the last three instances, also three on Input device a week ago. I see some earlier ones on Output device have already been suppressed. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Why are you constantly removing my links

Good day,

I am Clement Dupuis the maintainer of the www.cccure.org web site which is the number one reference for CISSP in becoming. I wanted to know why you constantly remove the links that I submit for my website?

I am referring to links under the CISSP entries and more specifically to:

• The CISSP and SSCP Open Study Guides Web site
• The FREE CCCure Quiz engine with over 2000 CISSP practice questions

What is your motive?

Thanks

Clement —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clementdupuis (talk • contribs) 17:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I'm afraid I can't say anything more than what I've already said. Take care. Dawnseeker2000 17:09, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Utah

Thank you for being an avid Wikipedia user, but some of your changes seem to be inaccurate and against Wikipedia guide lines. Listing utah.travel as the official Utah tourism website in the Utah Wikipedia article rather than the actual website: http://travel.utah.gov/ is for commercial purposes and violates the policies of Wikipedia. In addition it provides those who use Wikipedia as a reference with inaccurate information. Please use Wikipedia for its intended purposes in the future. In addition if a website added offers useful and relevant information, please do not remove it, especially in cases when it contains no advertising and you are replacing it with a website that contains advertising, offers less information and is inaccurately labeled. Thank you Goal423 (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

The Link You Added To The Utah Page

Thank you for your avid use of Wikipedia, but please refrain from adding spamming, commercial links. Adding utah.travel which is a highly commercial website and obviously not the official Utah tourism site which is located at http://travel.utah.gov/ to the Utah page and removing a non commercial link that contains no advertisements and offers useful information is damaging to the user experience of those who trust Wikipedia and against the Wikipedia guide lines. It is also a fraudulent claim and misleads those who trust the information they find in Wikipedia.

I think as an active user, your heart is in the right place, but please allow others to participate in Wikipedia and please accuratley label links. I'm not entirely against the utah.travel link being in the article, but I am against labeling it as the Utah Office of Tourism.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goal423 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I did not add that link. I don't ever add links. I add sources. I'm merely trying to protect the page from spammers. You are the one that manipulated the page to suit your preferred link. I have Wikipedia's interests in mind; I'm not as sure about your primary interest here. It does appear that you had a good idea about changing the link to a better site. As you said the one may have been misleading.

These two accounts and one IP address all appear to be working toward the same goal; getting http://www.top10traveldestinations.org/utah.html into the Utah article.

• 98.172.168.52 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Goal423 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Thompsonlives (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Dawnseeker2000 04:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Ode to My Family

No, it's you who must be thanked for adding this audio file. ;-) Europe22 (talk) 23:17, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Your "fix"

Please try to use more frank edit summaries. Your edit was clearly a correct application of WP:ADL, but the IP you reverted seems to have been working in good faith and in any case should be helped to know where xhe went wrong for the next time.User:LeadSongDog come howl 16:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't instruct everyone. There's too much vandalism going on. I corrected it & moved on. You instruct them to read the big red letters. Dawnseeker2000 16:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Point is this wasn't vandalism. Treating every IP as a vandal drives away prospective editors. That's why we have WP:BITE. I understand the frustration, and I've done what I could to improve that edit notice, but still, incivility begets incivility. Let's play nice with the newbies. I'll advise this one, per your request.User:LeadSongDog come howl 17:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

It's nowhere near being uncivil. I don't think you're going about this the right way. If you really believe that the user should be educated you would've done that already yourself. But you haven't. This effort of yours is worthless banter. It wasn't uncivil. Dawnseeker2000 17:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Think grey. Like, "fix - read instructions before editing", which is neither almost cryptically short nor anywhere near "educating". You might even throw in a "please" - heard that term before? Some people become overeager, and newbies might require the occasional reminder to read even the RED CAPITAL. Just point them in the right direction. No one's asking you to educate anyone. --G-41614 (talk) 09:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Well LeadSongDog did say that I should be helping users for "the next time". And my response was that I didn't have time for each and every instance. Please is nice, but fix is sufficient. Anyhow, c u later. Dawnseeker2000 13:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Yemen

Hi Dawnseeker2000. You reverted a vandalism contribution on the Yemen article recently. There have been three such 'contributions' in this month from the same ip-range: 66.154.144.xxx ([Whois]). March 5, March 15 and March 16. Three different warnings on three different talk pages, each with only a single 'contribution' to Yemen. Are there better methods (than each individual revert) to prevent vandalism from a variable ip address? Rwos (talk) 19:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Yes I see the range of IPs that you are referring to. They're all on the 66.154.*.* network. There is what's called a rangeblock, and I've asked for this specifically at WP:AIV, but it's only used as a last resort. I've never actually seen it put into action. Those of us that maintain Wikipedia are asked to just deal with the vandalism with the tools that we have. Thanks for stopping by. Dawnseeker2000 19:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

nav templates

You did a yeoman-like job on the Template:Portland Public Schools nav template. Cheers! tedder (talk) 01:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You mean like a diligent, dependable worker? lol thanks Dawnseeker2000 01:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I mean doing the dirty work necessary to keep a place running. It doesn't pay well tedder (talk) 02:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Tiësto

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as it has been tagged for some time with a number of issues. You are being notified as this project's banner is on the talk page. I have delisted it because of serious concerns which you can see at Talk:Tiësto/GA3. If you disagree with this reassessment please bring it to WP:GAR, otherwise if the outstanding issues are addressed please renominate at WP:GAN. Thanks. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Bon Jovi - Raise Your Hands.ogg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bon Jovi - Raise Your Hands.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 00:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

"Unconstructive edits" about touchpads

Hello, my name is 93.105.203.24, and you have recently written on my talk page in response to my vandalism of the Touchpad page.

I would like to take a moment to point out that, unconstructive and silly as my vandalism was, the article on Touchpads does not represent the socio-cultural circumstances surrounding the 'tap to click' feature. Let's face the facts, or rather, statistics: searching for 'disable tap to click' on Google provides over 70 thousand pages of users asking how to turn it off. That is over three times more people than women who search for 'getting pregnant with triplets naturally.' In fact, when googling 'tap to click,' 9 out of 10 results are posts of people asking for help on how to turn the "feature" off.

Despite this, the annoyingness of the double tap "feature" (as 'tap to click' is also known) is heavily underrepresented and not taken seriously. I don't suppose the lovers of touchpad tapping go as far as to seek out and silence those annoyed by it, but many ignorant members of the society do not believe or know that turning it off is possible, while developers continue to support this option as default, often without providing immediate means of removing it - many "minority" operating systems have no default driver support for turning it off, and drivers are not provided for them by companies responsible for some Touchpad models (e.g. Sentelic).

Double tap forces computer users to waste time disabling what they don't intend to use, and assuming that the feature is what people want by default is not only incosiderate, it shows lack of respect for individuals with gesture impairments (or whose fingers don't fit the standards Touchpad producers assume for human beings). Going further, not being able to turn off the feature brings forth annoyance and frustration to perfectionists worldwide - by buying content including a touchpad, you're essentially forced to pay for a feature you don't want, and often you can't even turn it off.

Talking about underrepresentation, I personally believe that the stress relief value of Wikipedia vandalism is often unappreciated. It is virtually harmless (especially considering the results are often reverted), and it is a better means of venting frustration than more aggressive or socially offensive behaviours. In a way, it is like alcohol: people judge it purely on measurable merits (e.g. health effects), but neglect its cultural and social importance and values.

I hope this explains the reasons behind my vandalism - I also hope that you never experience the frustration of being an OCD-and-Tourrete's personality type trying to disable the tap to click "feature" for 4 hours only to realise that it is not possible and coming close to throwing the whole laptop out of the fucking window. I also express hope that the views of opponents of double tapping, or at least the simple realisation that most reasonable individuals absolutely hate the feature and turn it off as their first move after getting a laptop, shall one day find their way into Wikipedia.

Cheers, --93.105.203.24 (talk) 16:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't vandalize Wikipedia for any reason. Dawnseeker2000 05:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Israel Kamakawiwo'ole - Somewhere Over The Rainbow - What A Wonderful World.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Israel Kamakawiwo'ole - Somewhere Over The Rainbow - What A Wonderful World.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

This file was not orphaned in the typical sense. The file was present in the article, but the template syntax was hosed as a result of a vandal or someone really not paying attention. The problem was the result of this weird vandalism. It's fixed now. Dawnseeker2000 00:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

External Links

Our site doesn't sell anything and currently isn't for any profit not even the sponsored links...we simply have events and other postings that anyone can sign up and post to our forum and then we link them to our page. It is to help people to find fun stuff to do in the area..and if you ask me it is a great tool for people to find hotspots in the area. I am a USF college student and I got mad that nobody had a database with great places to hangout in the 813 area. We did mislink on tampa fl when we linked it to the keyword tampa in the paragraphs but that was simply my mistake as a novice poster to wikipedia and it wont happen again. I have read the external links guidelines and my site doesnt violate any because there is absolutely no revenue coming in from my site it is simply a resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmoney425 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

We're in the process of constructing an encyclopedia. We are striving for high quality and your link does not match the criterion for inclusion. Dawnseeker2000 02:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Once our site is completely built would you consider taking a look and seeing if it fits your criteria...because this is something alot of people in our area are looking for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmoney425 (talk • contribs) 03:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

We need to think in terms of what Wikipedia is looking for. It's the encyclopedia that we're concerned about here, not Tampa locals. Once the site is finished bring the idea to the article's talk page. Present the idea of adding the link and see how the Wikipedia community responds before adding the link to the article. Dawnseeker2000 03:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

rubbish

I have put links to youtube to openings of tv series on the wiki of the series, how can this be spam, there is no money earned from these clips and if you were thorough you would find that the channel that these clips from is a non profit channel. These links were not put up to attract buyers as there is no product to buy, they were added so people interested enough in these clips could view what the series intro looked like. You have no real reply to this I know as I have checked everything I can and your arguement is totally and utterly flawed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muttonpies (talk • contribs) 22:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually it's not flawed at all. XLinkBot gave you three carefully constructed messages regarding your repeated additions of these links. Those first three messages should have been a very strong indication to you that you may have been on the wrong path, so to speak. If I were in your shoes I know I would've stopped right away.

Anyhow, if you're interested in plastering links into articles the best way to proceed is to bring the idea up on each individual article's talk page. Present the idea of adding the link to the article and see how the Wikipedia community responds. Wait for an agreement, or "consensus" as we call it around here, before doing anything further with the link.

So, that's all there is to it. Please mind the XLinkBot. See ya. Dawnseeker2000 01:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Tom Dooley

Hello DS - I appreciate your recent upload of a new .ogg file of the fair use section of the Kingston Trio's Tom Dooley, but click at the end or not, there's a problem. The original file I uploaded is significantly clearer in terms of its audio, and for one simple reason - it was a monophonic recording, and that's they way I uploaded it. There is no legitimate stereo recording of that cut. In 1958, Capitol records made the intentional decision to record the Kingston Trio's first two albums in mono because they did not think an unknown group with an unfamiliar style of music was worth the risk of the significantly more expensive stereo recording.

When the record sold more than 3 million copies, Capitol rushed out what they called a "duophonic" recording of the albums - a faked "stereo" that created two channels out of one mono cut that had been carefully remixed (from a total of 3 microphones used in the studio recording) to achieve the really fine hi-fidelity mix represented in the monaural release. Since your .ogg file has the sound of stereo, it's either that "duophonic" version (despised by audiophiles to the extent of belittlement - it's a joke) or some other attempt to remaster mono into stereo. The result is - click or not - a significant loss of fidelity, first, and second the loss of historical accuracy. The mono file I uploaded is the original record - the one that sold 3 million singles and was on more than half a million albums sold. Go to the file page and play them side by side. Additionally and for accuracy's sake, the file you uploaded is not from the specified source - Capitol T996 The Kingston Trio released 6/1/58. Any file from that source must be monophonic. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 05:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds fine. I know little of the recording. I just noticed the click near the end of the file and knew that I could eliminate that. I work on music files that are not nearly as old as this one; ones that I'm more familiar with. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 15:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

File:ABC - Be Near Me.ogg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ABC - Be Near Me.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 01:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Tiesto - Elements of life.ogg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tiesto - Elements of life.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 03:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Howard Jones - New Song.ogg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Howard Jones - New Song.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 02:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For solving a mysterious issue of vandalism at my talk page. Bearian (talk) 16:09, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

farcry.ogg

Thank you for adding the correct template that referenced the previous versions I uploaded that may not meet the FUC. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 19:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

tosh.o

Daniel Tosh host of Tosh.O gave us permission to edit his wikipedia page. Therefore our edit should not be deleted. 4/18/10 Kimberoo

That is not how it works around here. Dawnseeker2000 15:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

195.54.244.248

(this is a) Copyover from Dawnseeker2000 talk page, edit in question

That was NOT a spam edit! or a disruptive edit! Jeez, just send a message, no need to be so heavy handed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.54.244.248 (talk) 15:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The link is not a reference. It's to a website that sells products. Your editing history shows that your edits frequently oppose core principals on this encyclopedia. So in that light, yes, an only warning is justified. Dawnseeker2000 15:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

If i may interrupt you here - the link was added in the {{cite web}} referencing format, and the URL pointed to a book that seems relevant for the article. It is very likely that the user wanted to use this book as a reference instead of spamming that link, as it was added somewhere in the middle of the article after an unsourced claim. {{Cite book}} may have been a better option, but i do not think that this edit was meant to be vandalism, let alone a reason for a level 4 warning at once.

Besides, IP's are often dynamic, which means that the same IP may have different users at any one time. Just look at his edit history - his edits are incredibly diverse and likely signal different users at different times. Previous blocks on IP users are rarely a reason to block them again unless they are known to be static (schools et cetera), or if man sees a lot of vandalism / indications that the IP is constantly the same user. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

This is a static ip. Look at the whois page. This user has been warned for personal attacks previously. This is why I warned so strongly. Dawnseeker2000 16:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I am quite aware of the users past history, but even if it is a static IP it doesn't change the fact that this edit isn't clear vandalism which is required to warn a user, let alone warn him for 4IM. There are now 4 sysops (including myself) on the WP:AIAV page stating that this warning was to much. I'm not going to give you a lecture or anything on this, but please - only revert edits if they are clearly bad, and only warn users if they are malicious or disruptive. And don't use 4 at once or 4IM unless it is clearly and utterly a case that warrants it. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

A static IP doesnt mean the user is the same. A library, school, workplace, etc can have static IPs that end up having many different users. Tan | 39 16:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the warning and left something more digestible. Dawnseeker2000 16:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you - that is much better :) Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Reducing Ogg files

Did not know it is possible to reduce ogg files. What application are you using? Looking forward to learn new stuff... ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Jennifer Aniston

I apologize for just receiving your final warning. I attempted to reference an article and must have done so incorrectly. Please do not block me. I will try to lean how to post updates correctly before doing so again. I am new to this  :)

However, from what i have researched, it is true. It was referred to by different media outlets including the National Enquirer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.179.96.50 (talk) 18:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh hi. Thanks for the note. The reason I left such a firm warning is that Wikipedia needs to be careful with biographies. Our articles can't contain text that is false or harmful. So that's the reason why I responded like that. In that light I would just ask that if you add the material you use a recognizable media outlet; one that is trusted. Dawnseeker2000 21:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull

Hi Dawnseeker,
I'm sorry, but I had to undo your image edit there, those images look the same, but are different dates! Too bad it mucks up the layout! (too much white space) --220.101.28.25 (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Um, look closer? They're definitely the same image... Dawnseeker2000 16:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it is 2:00 am+ local time here! I did mistake which one you actually removed, I thought you took one of the round "Approximate depiction.." ash diagrams, not a satellite picture. The round ones look quite similar, and their captions were also very similar. I myself have almost removed one, then realised it was not a duplicate, which I think led me astray.
The sat. pic you removed was dated the 17th which matches one of the diagrams labelled "Depiction of the estimated...", so now I have worked out that is what you meant. I took duplicate image to mean the exact same picture! (I hope that makes sense as it's 2.50+ am here now!) Apologies and Mea Culpa! And keep whacking those vandals, I noticed you at 'em yesterday and today. Good on ya! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the late hour can eventually lead us all to make mistakes. I see you've been quite active there on that article and elsewhere too. Good work and thanks for stopping by. Dawnseeker2000 17:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Portland! I have an Uncle in Eugene, Oregon. Small world! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I also lived closer to Eugene when I was younger. We lived in Noti which is about 20 miles to the West (past the Fern Ridge Reservoir). My father still lives there. Dawnseeker2000 17:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Didn't have an ex-Australian school teacher by any chance? 220.101.28.25 (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I went to grade school and then middle school from 1977 to 1984 in that area. I don't recall an any Australian accents at the time. That doesn't mean they weren't at either of the schools that I attended; just means that I didn't cross paths with 'em. Fern Ridge middle school was brand new in 1984 and I was part of the first group of kids in the building as a sixth-grader. Dawnseeker2000 17:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I think he taught in Eugene, and likely would have lost his accent by then. Anyway, I think we both need to go, as Vandals never sleep. I may stay up a while and watch John Wayne beat the Japanese 'single handed' in WW2 as Operation Pacific in on TV. See ya round! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi again,
I reverted this edit, DIFF, at 2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull, by 71.178.165.210 (User_talk). Followed their trail back and found a big deletion at Pork(reverted). You may want to keep an eye out for them, though the IP address has a total of 4 edits! (2 good, 2 'unconstructive') Regards--220.101.28.25 (talk) 05:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Please help, its sooo unfair

If you remember what happened in the beginning of April, i submitted 3 links to wiki, here is the talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:205.233.77.220 A.B used came in and threw everything to the spam list. i tried contacting him/her and nothing. here is A.B talk page, i left the message there a few days ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:A._B. Please help remove this site from all wiki spam lists. — [Unsigned comment added by Russianzio (talk • contribs) 03:27, 25 April 2010.]

Well first I must say that I truly appreciate all the work that A. B. and MER-C do with spam cleanup. There is too much garbage on Wikipedia and those folks are very good at helping reduce unwanted content. I remember the link that was being added and I remember retracted my statement calling it spam and I also remember saying that it wasn't a known and recognizable authority on beaches either. Having said this, I think Wikipedia will be fine without the links. Take care. Dawnseeker2000 15:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes i agree, no links anymore, i am just asking to remove this site from the spam list as it was banned by Google for this. I hope you understand! Here is what you said: "Well after having a second look I agree that the link isn't exactly spam, but it isn't a recognizable authority either. My first impression of the url was that it was a low quality item that existed to sell products or services. I apologize if I acted in haste there. The only reason I did act quickly is because there are so many low quality links being added. I would be OK if you were to re-add the links. Sorry again. Dawnseeker2000 15:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)" no more links, please remove it from all the spam reports. Thanks you

That was just my opinion at the time. My comment about re-adding isn't the final word - i just thought i may have over-reacted and so i decided to give in a little bit. My work here on the encyclopedia is just as a contributor. Maybe you could make an appeal over at WP:WPSPAM. Dawnseeker2000 19:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

This is so unfair, its a huge deal for us, this needs to be stopped, as i said , i am not a spammer. This was not spam, and you know that!!!! Please help resolving this issue as you gave me the green light for the second try "I would be OK if you were to re-add the links. Sorry again.". After that A.B chopped our heads off!!! i am glad he didn't put us to jail!!! I am asking you to step up for me please as you are a respected contributor. Thanks a lot

FYI, see User talk:Russianzio#Spam query (permanent link).

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

So why an adsense code on a site would mean the site is a spam? Please stop this Gistapo thing, this is my activity since 2005!!! We've done a lot of work for the past 5 years, as for the microscopy site i used my personal microscope to take videos of microorganizms interesting to look at. i see you removed the link from "Mosquito page" where there was a link to the video of mosquito head.... It didn't bother anyone and was only adding the value to the content... A.B. you can't sleep well because you think there are spammers around you and you have nightmares. I am fine with your removals, good and clean now, never again i will press the edit button on this site, but still, please remove the spam reports as you are ruining my life here!!!!

Hi - re: Liveleak edit

The source is the website itself - if you like I can provide a slew of links, but it's important I think in the contect of Wikipedia to identify racist-tolerant websites, especially those which do not require child verification.

Regards,

Editor

Music samples

Hi, I think you did a nice job of condensing the description page for the Blondie and Britney Spears music samples, but in each case you removed the copyright info, which is probably the most important piece of info to include. I've added them back in, without changing anything else that you edited, but if you could watch out for that in future, that would be great. Thanks Rossrs (talk) 01:53, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I'll watch for copyright details and retain that info the next time around. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 14:46, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Computer use

Hello. My English is not very good. It's about the warning received on 21 march 2010. The computer with the IP User talk:138.188.100.224, was used by many peoples, because this is a work computer, and in a day, two differents team's worked on in and it's the same on a week, i have an estimation of 10 differents persons used the computer.

Because of this problem of vandalism do by stupid idiots, i take a pseudonym on Wikipédia. This is Joe_La_Truite and i can be on Wikipedia without problems of blocked.

For the problems caused by the person used the ID 138.188.100.224 and vandalize Wafa Sultan, y give you my all apologize and i hoped that's not happened again.

For a response of your part, please use my pseudonym to talk to me about that. I'm not in en:Wikipedia for the moment. I'm in fr:Wikipedia, lot of time.

I Wish you a good day and cordial salutations :) --138.188.100.224 (talk) 08:33, 2 May 2010 (UTC) A.K.A Joe_La_Truite

Music samples - please help

I notice that you lowered the quality and faded intro and exit of File:You Got Me.ogg - thanks! I was wondering if you could tell me how to do these things (especially reduce quality) in Audacity, as online pages don't seem to be of any help; maybe I am using a newer version? I have Audacity 1.3.11. Thanks, Adabow (talk) 09:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wall Of Voodoo - Mexican Radio excerpt.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wall Of Voodoo - Mexican Radio excerpt.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, Dawnseeker2000, for removing the vandalism from my user page. This is the most persistent vandal that I have ever encountered; this is the third IP address that they have used after the first one was blocked in a raid yesterday afternoon--all from Canada. There were several other anti-vandalism editors involved along with me. But they got fixed on my username--go figure. Pinethicket (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Whatever

Im not a vandal. Wikipedia is chalked full of mistakes and I am trying to make them better. The trouble is that I dont care about your stupid rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.42.121.67 (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Images

Hi. Here is the problem. As often happens with images, we have more than one suggested guidance to contend with. I agree that ideally we stagger images. The problem is this. 1. The most important relevant guidance is that the image be near the text. The most relevant case of this is where we had the image of the items in the car next to the related text. I think we have to start by putting that back. 2. Beyond that, I think it best if the hotel and the theater pix are in the Incident section, because that is what they both relate to. So sandwhiching, though not ideal, seems to me the way to go. I would rather not that we have to delete one of those pix, as they reflect the two sides of the street the car was on. Make sense?--Epeefleche (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Not a problem. See you around. Dawnseeker2000 15:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Tx -- As the one other editor who commented when I raised the issue on the talk page said it would look funny, and I was busy w/other things, I just moved the care image back, and moved the hotel pic to a less appropriate but no sandwhiching spot. Tx for your response, though. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:07, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Republica - Ready To Go excerpt.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Republica - Ready To Go excerpt.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Sparks & Aniston

Message received, this is a shared IP, and the user has been removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.173.16.130 (talk) 01:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kajagoogoo - Too Shy excerpt.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kajagoogoo - Too Shy excerpt.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Summary of the History of Yemen on the main Yemen article

Good morning.

Thank you for your comment regarding reverting my entry on Yemmen History.

As you noted, the source is a copy of information from the US Dept. of State, which is copyright-free. The particular page from where I copied the information is part of a very well established network of websites. The main contents menu for history is at http://www.geographic.org/countries/history_index.html, and the sources of the information on it are the Library of Congress country studies and the State Dept., including pages from those sites that are no longer online.

You are welcome to verify the information regarding the summary of Yemen History that I placed, very easily, by comparing it to the information on the main HISTORY OF YEMEN wikipedia article. If you read that article, you will see that my entry, is a perfect summary of it.

I am familiar with the history of Yemen, and I assure you that the information that I posted is accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Giorgostr (talk • contribs) 07:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

History section deleted from article about Meetup.com

Noticed the latest edit to the article about Meetup.com was HelgeStenstrom deleting the entire History section. On the article's talk page Helge said Helge deleted section because of the "This article or section reads like a news release ..." tag on the section. Wanted to make sure you knew because you have edited the article in the past. --EarthFurst (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Industrial Injury and Traffic Collision

This is not spam nor promotion. This is legitimate legal and information subject matter. I do not represent nor work for any company or firm. I have reverted most of the edits, but removed the external links. ~~PhillyPartTwo talk)

User talk:71.198.180.243

Hi there,
Just wanted to let you know this editor, who you gave a final warning 24 hours ago has made unreferenced changes to Pamir Airways Flight 112. See DIFF FYI. Happy Vandal whacking! Regards, --220.101.28.25 (talk) 18:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Music samples

Good question The music sample template is intended to mesh with {{Infobox song}} and {{Infobox single}}, so when it's added to--e.g.--{{Infobox Album}} or {{Infobox musical artist}}, there are special fields for styling it. I simply use song because it looks like the lightbluesteel color used as the default in those last two templates. I wish I had something more substantial for you, but it's basically an arbitrary aesthetic choice. Thanks for adding samples and for inquiring on my talk. Please post there if you'd like to respond. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey Dawnseeker2000,

thanks for your comments and your help on the WinFS article :-) I'm indeed a newbie here... I'll do as you say: I'll write an article on Tabbles and place an internal link on WinFS.

My best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bario1 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

glad to review my chapter

Hi,

       I have tried to introduce a non-technical way for expressing the usefulness and intention of make, there might be problem with my english, i will be glad if my chapter is getting reviewed

        My intention is to show that make is simple and its application is beyond handling software development process.it could be

used in solving different level of problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uvrakesh (talk • contribs) 18:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for the warm welcome to Wikipedia! Dhulfiqar 07:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spine.Cleaver (talk • contribs)

Undoing the edits of User talk:70.173.143.104

See here: User_talk:70.173.143.104#Stan_.28song.29 Gary King (talk) 01:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:You Spin Me Round by Dead or Alive.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:You Spin Me Round by Dead or Alive.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Links

Hi Dawnseeker,

You removed 2 links to 2 different reports which we think whould be of benefit to the reader who is looking for further information on the topics in question. These reports provide best practice information and are independently written.

The pages are :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_stream_mapping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_migration

Just wondering what the reason is for their removal?

Many thanks, Concord4 (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Any update Dawnseeker? Concord4 (talk) 10:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain tools, including Huggle, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Alex han deletion

Hi

I was just curious as to whether the article that was deleted for not notable reasons was the same as this Alex han here and whether (if true) the fact that he seemed to be the winner of awards as a Jazz musician and a jazz composer as well as sponsorship from a major participant in saxophony supplies had been seen before the deletion decision was made ?

Chaosdruid (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
PS - I just watched a video of him - WOW hes pretty good lol Chaosdruid (talk) 19:03, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It may have been his kid brother or someone that tried to add him - if he's notable enough and wins some more awards I suppose he will be re-added at some point. I was going to ask for a copy of the deleted offending item for my sandbox but it sounds like it was too far gone to be rescued

I thought it was going to be boring until he got about a minute in and then I really started to enjoy it and I don't normally like Jazz or Sax lol

Thanks for the time spent anysways :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 19:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Amateur Radio Emergency Service

I added a comment on the talk page -- but wanted to point it out so it didn't get lost. Let me know if I can help out any other way. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 01:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

AN/I

Someone is complaining about you on AN/I [3]. I think they're being ridiculous and figured you would like to know about their bogus report. Kindzmarauli (talk) 02:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:ANI regarding Vandalism of talk pages and threatening users for warning you of behaviors. The discussion is about the topic Talk:Amateur_Radio_Emergency_Service. Thank you. --TheZachDOTnet (talk) 02:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

J. Austin

Yes I am J. Austin, all the songs are created by me and are MY SONGS. I am a little unfamiliar with how to properly "source" them which is why I have not done so. I am also unfamiliar with the proper format to respond back so I am writing here (as well). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quietink (talk • contribs) 16:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Tampa

My Father built the very first sign for Britton Plaza. I have this historic photo, and actually it is now in a museum in Tampa. I thought it would be very appropriate to direct users to my book, which includes this photo. I am not well-versed in the "RULES" about Wiki-pages, so frankly if this is something I should not be doing, that is fine with me and I will not attempt this again. HOWEVER I am going to offer the option to WIKIPEDIA of displaying my historic photo of Britton Plaza (the one in the museum) which I of course hold the copyright on. If there is a way to display the photo please let me know. Thanks! - John Cinchett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.207.38 (talk) 13:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hiya. Just stopping by to say thanks for this. Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 09:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... for reverting the recent vandalism to my talk page! -- Bgpaulus (talk) 17:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Removal

Another Wiki user deleted my article on the basis of POV RANT, without even discussing the issue with me. Can you please be witness and check whether my article is POV RANT as suggested by the deleter of my article. Thank you. Dhulfiqar 05:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Dawnseeker2000, I've recreated my article with appropriate citations to news-worthy material online. Please review my article so that it may be accepted, and prevented from deletion. Dhulfiqar 07:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The administrator has once again deleted by article despite the independent sources I used and the reasons why my article was news worthy and significant. I kindly as you to be an intercessor between the delete admin and myself. Thank you. Please visit deleted article Acts_17_Apologetics. Dhulfiqar 07:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The admin Jimfbleak is following my edits and either reversing or deleting them without even discussing them on the Talk Page. Please view history of Zakir Naik. I had specified why I made those edits, but Jimfbleak reversed them without a summary or discussion on the article's Talk Page. I await your response. Dhulfiqar 10:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spine.Cleaver (talk • contribs)

86.24.251.83, WP:AIV and Liposuction

Apologies for that, I didn't look at the article titles closely enough. On the basis that the IP's edits appear infrequent, I felt a short block wouldn't work: I've blocked them for a month. TFOWR 16:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. It may save us some work. Dawnseeker2000 16:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Satisfactionsample.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Satisfactionsample.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

NYSERDA

The only things that have changed since you last edited the page were the addition of the mission and vision statements. The responsibilities are laid out in the first paragraph, but bulleted later, so nothing has really changed there. How is this any sort of indicataion that the neutrality should be reviewed? Also, I was wondering, why did you delete the whole page a year ago the last time someone expanded the article? Emdec95 (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10