User talk:Kcordina/archive3

User:8bitJake

The problem continues, with a seventh and eighth revert, notwithstanding your warning. -- FRCP11 16:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

User:8bitJake has now been blocked for contravention of the three revert rule. Kcordina ^Talk 19:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

He's now polluting the article with dozens of tiny edits of POV language utterly inappropriate for Wikipedia. Help? -- FRCP11 19:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

NB also his deletion of his disciplinary record. -- FRCP11 20:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

They have been blocked again by another admin, I'll try and keep an eye on them. Kcordina ^Talk 07:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

aiv

which vnadal?

Thanks :) Dlohcierekim 14:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

User:216.56.35.6 Had already been test 4'd today. Should I have started over with a lower number?? Cheers, 14:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I've looked back at the talk page and it must have been me having a stupid moment. There is, of course, a progression of warnings. I think when I looked at the page before blocking them, the last entry on the page was under the 'June 2006' header, and I didn't look above it for the final warning - the second test4 must have appeared between me looking and going back and noting the block. Ho hum, I shall be more observant in future. Kcordina ^Talk 15:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Morton International

You're going to merge the content as well as the title, correct? Badagnani 08:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can see I did merge the only bit of content that wasn't already there, namely the existence of a sister company in Canada. If I've missed something, please add it in. Kcordina ^Talk 08:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My mistake

About the block, it was a typo. — Ravikiran 13:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

monarchy entry editing

truth has a way of tarnishing the imperial image - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.44.112 (talk • contribs)

Left after reverting vandalism by User:24.84.44.112 such as this. Kcordina ^Talk 08:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Green Party of Canada ldeology Label

I'm a member of the Green Party I agree the label "Eco-Capitalist" is incorrect - AS yet the Green Party can't be defined, as it is still in it's formative stages. The roots of the party are Eco in nature, but it is now becoming more urban - adopting issues like education, transportation, housing - issues immediately affecting peoples' lives. Social justice and sustainability are new umbrella themes emerging as the party finds its identity and purpose.

Capitalist is also not accurate because many policies of the Green Party would reign in corporate influence in all issues mentioned here. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.44.112 (talk • contribs)

3RR

Care to give an admin opinion here ? Thanks in advance, ilir_pz 11:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism to Gary Lightbody and Colin MacIntyre

Hi, regarding your decision not to block User:VoodooVengence and User:StupidMason. These accounts may only have made a few edits, but they are clearly vandalism only accounts. The second one is a personal attack on me.

Other accounts set up in the last week (most probably by the same person) to vandalise these articles are: User:Stumasson, User:Thegoldengirlwiththepinkone, User:GeorgeBiscuit and User:TheMangoInTheTango. All of these were subsequently blocked indefinitely. The vandal's original account was User:RichardKnob.

Please check the history of the two articles and reconsider. Cheers. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Cheers for the added detail, I clearly hadn't looked closely enough. Both accounts have now been blocked indefinitely. Kcordina ^Talk 11:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I suspect he/she will be back vandalising with a new account soon enough though! Is there sufficient vandalism to request protection? Even for long enough to put them off? Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Spoke too soon! [1]. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I've protected Gary Lightbody from edits by new users. I'll give it a while and then remove the protection to see if they resurface. I've also blocked the newest account. Kcordina ^Talk 12:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Why'd you undelete "Bonza Bottler Day" and please repost this updated article

Dear Kcordina:

Greetings, and Happy Bonza Bottler Day!

I posted the above-referenced article on Wikipedia in May. As today is 06/06/06 - a Bodacious Bonza Bottler Day, - I sought to update it to reflect additional details provided by the holiday founder's sister (Gail Berger) and close friend Debbie Knebel, who were thrilled with what I had contributed. However, I was unpleasantly surprised to find that all traces of the article had been deleted. I would greatly appreciate learning the reason for the deletion, and more importantly, why and what changes I must make in order to properly repost the article. I apologize if I violated any rules and view this as a teachable moment. I would like repost the article ASAP, preferably today.

I have taken the liberty of enclosing the updated version, which was co-written by Gail and me. I will also post a copy of this message with Kcordina, who deleted the article. I eagerly await Wikipedia's response and instructions for reposting. Please response at ltolliver_AT_360meridian.com. (To email me, replace "_AT_" with @.)

TITLE: Bonza Bottler Day CO-AUTHORS: Gail Berger and Lisa Tolliver CONTENT: A Bonza Bottler Day is celebrated once a month when the number of the month coincides with the number of the day (Jan. 1, Feb.2, March 3, etc.). When the number of the year also coincides with the number of the day and month (June 6, 2006) or a Bonza Bottler Day falls on an already established holiday (such as Jan. 1 – New Year’s Day), there is reason to have a bigger celebration (more food, more friends and more decorations). We call this a Bodacious Bonza Bottler Day. Bodacious means “extraordinary, impressively great in size, or enormous.” A baby born on a Bonza Bottler Day is known as a Bonza Bottler Baby which makes those birthday celebrations doubly special Bonza Bottler Day was created by Elaine Fremont in 1985 when she realized there were no special occasions to celebrate one month. She decided to give herself a reason to have a party and some fun with this special day every month. Ms. Fremont held a contest to name the day, which a student from Australia won. When Australians like something, they might exclaim, "Bonzer" or “Bonza!” which means “super,” “great,” or “fantastic.” “Bottler” is slang for “something excellent.” Thus, the celebration each month is now known as Bonza Bottler Day, which was first officially celebrated on August 8, 1985. The proper way to celebrate is with a party, but if that is not possible, a person should at least wish other people a “Happy Bonza Bottler Day.” People in offices, schools, etc., bring food to work to share. College students in dorms have lots of fun with this day. This has also become a big hit with early morning disc jockeys who love to wake people up with “Happy Bonza Bottler Day!” The day gives people in nursing homes something to celebrate every month. Religious organizations, church youth groups, schools, colleges, civic centers, offices, and individuals from around the world, as well as some of the divisions of the U.S. armed forces, are now celebrating Bonza Bottler Day, according to our correspondence. Bonza Bottler Day is a favorite with many school classrooms because it provides a break in routine for the students and teachers. Many people eat at their favorite restaurants on Bonza Bottler Day when they haven’t planned a party. We know that it is becoming internationally celebrated because we receive calls, letters and e-mails from people around the world. Some groups are even forming Bonza Bottler Day clubs. The mascot is a dancing groundhog (which has for many years celebrated on Feb. 2) that is strewing confetti and laughing amid the words, “I Celebrate Bonza Bottler Day.” Unfortunately, the founder of Bonza Bottler Day, Elaine Fremont, died in a car accident on April 8, 1995 at the age of 43. For ten years, she celebrated every Bonza Bottler day with her friends. Her sister, Gail Berger, now sponsors Bonza Bottler Day.

69.117.159.235 14:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi: I re-read your reason for removing my article: Bonza Bottler Day.

"10:25, 2 June 2006 Kcordina deleted "Bonza bottler day" (copyvio - content was:

Please note that my Wikipedia posting did not violate any copyrights because I own the copyright to the Blogcritics article that was referenced!!! You'll note that the Blogcritics article in question referenced an article posted the previous day on Lisa Tolliver On Air and Online. See

"How to access my article - "Cinco de Mayo and Bonza Bottler Day" - at Blogcritics.org" (http://lisatolliver.blogspot.com/2006/05/how-to-access-my-article-cinco-de-mayo.html) and

"May 5 is Cinco de Mayo (an historical holiday) and this month's Bonza Bottler Day (a marketer's dream)" (http://lisatolliver.blogspot.com/2006/05/may-5-is-cinco-de-mayo-historical.html).

Furthermore, I have updated my original Wikipedia posting to incorporate information that was sent to me by the friend and sister of the Bonza Bottler Day founder. Please post my updated article ASAP or provide instructions so that I may do so.

Thank you.

Hi. I deleted the article as it contained the same material as at the cited web-page. Please see WP:CP for details of wikipedias copyright policy. The article had been tagged with the copyvio template for 7 days, and since no action had been taken to prepare a version that did not infringe copyright, the article was deleted. I appreciate that you may well own the copyright of the article, but unless the articles web page is licensed under the GFDL licence it cannot be used on wikipedia. It looks like the version you've posted above is new for wikipedia, so go ahead and recreate the article with that new content. It's better you create it as then the editors will be listed as you, rather than me. If you need any help, just ask. Kcordina ^Talk 15:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

shouting on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Sorry about that. the dbase I use here at work uses CAPS only, and right after I had reverted the vandalism, it was vandalized repeatedly, so I typed as fast as possible. Did not mean to shout. Also, my perceived delay may have also been due to connectivity problems we've been having all day. Sorry again. :-) - CobaltBlueTony 16:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

boo

"patents article"

I didn't mean to run off at the mouth so much re PCT - except that I've corrected a wrong description of the European system 2 or 3 times, and hoped that by explaining it in more depth I'd put a stop to the wrong edits!

Getting enough detail in there to be accurate (and, as you say, stop it wondering away from being accurate over time) without being too long is really difficult, and in fact, probably impossible. Lets ponder it over time and see how it develops. (BTW, when leaving notes on talk pages, "sign" then by adding for tildas ~~~~ to the end - that adds your login and the time of the note. Just like this: Kcordina ^Talk 08:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your mediation of programming language. As I learn more I may offer to mediate as well. Ideogram 09:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

case closed

Tashiro.jpg

Hatto (talk · contribs) has restored Image:Tashiro.jpg after you just deleted it, and has also reverted all edits performed by you and User:Feydey on related pages. I have recently filed an RfC regarding the vandalistic activities of this user, not restricted to ignoring copywrite warnings. The RfC hasn't been responded to yet and I'm kind of strung out about this guy. Just thought you'd like to know.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  03:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've retagged the image and left a note on his talk page. Hopefully the RFC will have some useful pointers. Kcordina ^Talk 08:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Leurbost Article

Hi, I noticed the other day that the Leurbost article was a copyright violation, so I wrote a new one on the Leurbost/Temp page and noted as such on the Talk:Leurbost page. Apparently you moved the temp article into place at Leurbost but when I go there it's blank - can you resurrect it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mgdm (talk • contribs) .

Whoops, my mistake, managed to delete the article rather than the template after the move. Back now. Kcordina ^Talk 12:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. --Mgdm 20:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Please read the policy again

WP:3RR . Tnx. Zeq 14:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

See my response at WP:AN3 Kcordina ^Talk 14:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Kyoko Aizome

Hi, Kcordina. The user (Hong Qi Gong) trying to delete the Kyoko Aizome appears to be making a project of censoring Wikipedia. He has already deleted an extensive, and long-lived List of Japanese female porn stars.

He's using intellectually dishonest reasoning for doing so, e.g. claiming that any item on a list that does not have an article is not worth listing, and then deleting the list because it is simply a list of articles (i.e. a category), and then deleting the articles by claiming a Japanese actress is not notable by using American sources.

I think there's obviously an agenda to shape Wikipedia to a certain POV behind these actions, and it is certainly in violation of many Wikipedia standards, including Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and Wikipedia is not censored. -- Dekkappai 15:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

As you'll see, I didn't delete the page as it didn't meet the criteria for speedy delete. If any pages have been deleted that you think shouldn't have been - bring the matter to Wikipedia:Deletion review where it can be discussed and a decision reached. If the user in question is breaking any of wikipedias rules then you should bring the matter to the appropriate mediation/admin noticeboard who will try and help sort it out. Kcordina ^Talk 08:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew Free Burial Association

Copyright Approval

The Hebrew Free Burial Association requests that the wikipedia entry remain, as our organization allows the information that came from our website to be posted here.

In order to confirm authorisation to use the material, an email must be sent to wikimedia according to the instructions at WP:CP where the process is set out. Please state on the talk page that such an email has been sent and the article will not be deleted. Kcordina ^Talk 08:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-05-30 Razer (Robot)

I initially thought that this case was orphaned as it had never been added to the main page of WP:TINMC, and so added it to the main page of WP:TINMC and WP:TINMC/O. I then went to User talk:Lenin & McCarthy to tell him of this and saw that you had taken on the role of mediator there, and reverted myself. It's still quite confusing, though - could you add the case to the "Cases in mediation" bit if you have actually taken it? --Sam Blanning^(talk) 23:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

This came to my via a request rather than me finding it in the list - I hadn't noticed it hadn't been created properly and forgot to add it to the list. Done now Kcordina ^Talk 08:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete Cindy Chavez page?

This was a factual page about an important political figure in America's 10th largest city. Every fact is absolutely accurate and verifiable. It was original writing and violates no copyrights. I am knowledgeable about this subject and invested a lot of time to make a meaningful contribution to Wikipedia. Please explain this decision. I would appreciate reconsideration and restoration of this piece, which will, I assure you, meet the community test. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dp110 (talk • contribs) .

I have restored the article as it is clearly not as clear-cut as I first thought. I have also tagged the article for deletion, which brings it to wikipedias Articles for Deletion process, from which the community will decide what action to take. Please see the articles page at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cindy_Chavez. Kcordina ^Talk 08:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sigma Alpha Mu Copyvio

You have to permission to use the content you blocked for the Sigma Alpha Mu page. There is no conflict. I cannot see why you took it upon yourself to block access to the page. If you will not restore access to it then you are simply acting to reduce the amount of information available to wikipedians and are doing us all a great disservice. If you want to confirm this you may call the head office and we will speak to you if need be. Ask for Bill or Phyllis. Many authors put their time into that article - please restore it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.116.237.69 (talk • contribs) .

Hello

According to the history of the article "Sigma Alpha Mu" you flagged the article as violating copywrites. As a member of Sigma Alpha Mu fraternity I originally started the "Sigma Alpha Mu" page and have enjoyed watching it's progression from a stub to a full article and request that the article be restored.

The whole article does not violate copywrites, the only section in question of violation is the history section of the article where it appears someone copied and pasted from [2]. This history section is published in the "Candidates Handbook" of Sigma Alpha Mu (informally called "The Purple Book"), inside of which is a line that expressly states that the information is not secretive and can be openly shared with others. The Sigma Alpha Mu article is in-line with other Fraternity and Sorority articles such as "Kappa Delta Rho" and "Sigma Nu" which also appear to quote from their history from other sources. This argument and others can be seen on the talk page of Sigma Alpha Mu which I ask you to view.

I do feel that the history section of "Sigma Alpha Mu" should be edited but not because of copywrite violations but instead because the section is written as a story instead of a history. I hope with your power as an administrator you can unflag the article "Sigma Alpha Mu" as being in violation of copywrites and let people edit it to become a more proper article. If you cannot can remove the copywrite flag yourself can you please give me instructions on how I can go about unflagging the article.

Thank you -Greg, member of Sigma Alpha Mu Fraternity

GreatGreg 04:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I belive in your talk page in the previous message there is a message to you regarding the Sigma Alpha Mu page that was placed incorrectly under a Cindy Chavez article comment.

I appreciate the fact that not all of the article, and that blanking the whole page may seem a bit drastic, but it is the easiest and quickest way of ensuring copyvios are handled with the seriousness they require. There are a few things that should be done in this case:-

• Rewrite a non-copyvio article at the temp page linked from the copyvio template - then that can replace the existing one.

• Provide authorisation to use the material on wikipedia in a manner that satisfies the rules at WP:CP. Essentially, this means that the source material must be licensed under the GFDL or that an email is sent according to the instructions on that page giving permission to use the material.

Sorry if this all seems heavy handed, but copyright infringement is an important legal matter. Kcordina ^Talk 08:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Beth Geisel

I replaced the copyright violation notice on Beth Geisel. While not every single word is stolen directly from that link, large parts (entire sentences) are. I can give you an exact list if you want but I think you just need to look a bit closer. Thanks. --Yamla 13:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've looked more carefully, and rewritten the offending sections to avoid any problems. Kcordina ^Talk 15:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

how to start mediating?

I am interested in helping medcabal by mediating a case. How do you suggest I proceed? Ideogram 06:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi. The easiest way is to jump right in. Go to WP:MEDCABAL and look through the cass that have not yet been taken by anyone. Have a look at the request page and check some of details to make sure it's a fairly simple one, then add a note to the list to show that the you have taken it as mediator. The approach I take is to read the statements from the parties, then look through the history of the article, then the talk page of the article and then also the talk pages of the parties involved. Often the talk pages will show no signs of the problem having been discussed and the argument will have been carried out in edit summaries. I tend to then post a note on the article talk, highlighting the request for mediation, and offering a summary of the problem, and a suggested solution. Normally this is, everyone stop editing and discuss the following points here - try and pick some narrow things that are the actual problem rather than just 'mine is better than yours'. It's mostly just a case of feeling your way - sometimes user talk pages are better places to do it... It's better to be assertive in your actions and quite forceful to take control, rather than let them just shout at each other. Hope this helps - if you choose to have a go, point me at the case and I'll keep an eye on progress. Kcordina ^Talk 07:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I am now co-mediating 2006-06-13 Greg Bravo (Gary Scott) with jbolden1517^Talk. You are welcome to take a look if you are so inclined. Ideogram 06:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I have taken 2006-06-13 Red Hot Chili Peppers Ideogram 07:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC).

I took 2006-06-14 Antikythera mechanism before realizing one of the parties involved is an admin; I have been advised to stay out of disputes involving admins. Do you think I should drop the case or take it with you as co-mediator? Ideogram 11:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

You'll be fine. The fact that one of the users is an admin doesn't affect anything - other than perhaps they should know better than to be in a dispute such as this. If they try and abuse their admin powers there are sanctions for that. Kcordina ^Talk 11:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Objectman

Hello.

Profsnow and I are active members of revising the Empress Myeongseong article here on Wikipedia.

It is curently being revised for having been anti-Korean on a Korean historical figure. The predecessor article was also way too short and the one being worked on now is nearing completion. There will be at the end of the article an Analysis section that will compare and contrast the modern opinions on her. I am using numerous credible written sources to write this and it is extremely in-depth concerning her foreign policy, rule, and impacts made on Korean society. It is seen from a neutral point of view as much as it could be, concerning a historical figure that is a sensitive topic for Koreans. She's a symbol to them.

However, objectman, who has never been a major contributor or a contributor in general to this article presently or in the past has constantly reverted it back to the old version of the article and won't stop. He keeps doing it over and over and over. The article isn't even finished and he judges it quickly. He hasn't even read it thoroughly. I've left him kind messages at first to stop but he hasn't. So I left harsher ones asking him to stop or else I would report him and he just doesn't stop. So please, please, do something about this. It's just really frusterating. --Thepowederoom 08:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I see the user in question has now been blocked again for the 3RR violation. I now have the article on my watchlist so will try and watch to see if they return. I can't guarentee I'll spot it thuogh, so if they do please let me know - further reverting will result in a lengthy block. Do you know the history of the sockpuppet tag on the user? Kcordina ^Talk 08:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The Complete Peanuts

KXL (creator of pages) 14 June 2006: Thanks for signing on to this. Right now everything is on hold, as the publishers of the books are condidering hosting the annotations at their web site. If they do, I will delete them from Wiki. If they decide not to, I would like to keep them where they are.

OK, I'll close the mediation request - drop me a line if you need any more help. (When you leave a message on a talk page, add four tildas (~~~~) so that your usename and the date are added to the end. Just like this:- Kcordina ^Talk 12:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

User talk:83.166.184.226

Hi, I noticed that you blanked my granting of this user's block request. If you feel strongly about it, reblock the user, because I already unblocked the user.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 14:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Ooer, that's odd - I didn't mean to blank your message, when I came to it the unblock template was still there so I replied - our edits must have crossed in the aether and mine overwrote yours as I didn't get an edit conflict, most odd. Ho hum. No, I'm not particularly fussed, so let's assume good faith and leave it unblocked. I'll revert the page to your version. Kcordina ^Talk 14:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 15:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

anonymous editor interfering with mediation at Red Hot Chili Peppers

Can you please semi-protect this page? Ideogram 09:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

A better way to deal with things like this is to simply the page as it ends up - by protecting a page you are acting as judge on what the answer to the dispute is by selecting one version as the one to keep up. As long as it doesn't turn into a revert war, let the edits stay, and try and get discussion going. Kcordina ^Talk 10:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

programming language mediation

I am having problems with Derek farn again. I just had to start an edit war to get him to talk to me. Please look into this as soon as you can. Ideogram 00:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Here we see further evidence of Derek farn's total contempt for me: User talk:Cobaltbluetony#from derek_farn. Ideogram 00:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

medcabal case

In 2006-06-16 Amber Benson the requestor states that two users were banned and wants the bans lifted. This is clearly not something medcabal can do; what advice do you recommend I should give? Ideogram 06:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

No-one seems to have been banned. A couple of accounts were blocked for 24hrs, but nothing more. It looks like that case is being well handled by the mediator. Kcordina ^Talk 08:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

more medcabal notes

In 2006-06-16 University of Luton the requestor brings up an interesting point. He is a member of the University staff and is hesitant to edit the article but feels his opponent is violating NPOV. How should I advise him? Ideogram 06:32, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why he should hesitate to edit the article - as long as the material is vaild and suitable it's fine. Kcordina ^Talk 08:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have recommended that he just add verifiable material and he is pursuing this. Ideogram 08:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

In 2006-06-16 User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg the requestor expresses concern over the emotional and mental state of this user. This doesn't seem to really be a dispute; what can we do? Can we direct the user to counselling? Should we? Ideogram 09:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I have contacted Jimbo Wales and Danny regarding this. Ideogram 08:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

2006-06-13 Red Hot Chili Peppers has failed. The issue now is how to deal with the fact that anonymous users are constantly adding external fansite links and edit-warring over them without discussion and in defiance of consensus. I was hoping to ask for semi-protection but apparently policy does not allow it. Can you advise? Ideogram 21:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Cowman has taken this over. Ideogram 08:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Derek farn

You might want to keep an eye on my attempt to talk to Derek farn here. Ideogram 08:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Derek farn's reply is here. I am at my wit's end. Ideogram 10:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Leaving the article be is one solution, if you can't agree, simply let it develop. I'm sure you'll agree that the other editors are building a perfectly acceptable arcticle, just not quite in your tastes. Kcordina ^Talk 08:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't stomach just staying out of his way; that would be letting him win.

I am avoiding the article for now, but I expect to return. Ideogram 08:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Which is preciseley why there is a problem here - it's not a battle that is to 'won' but a group of people developing an article. The nature of such an excercise is that not everyone gets exactly what they think is right on every point. Everyone compromises somewhat and the result is a mix of everyones views. Kcordina ^Talk 08:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I am totally willing to compromise. The problem is he won't even talk to me. Ideogram 08:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

DoCB Initiative/copyvio?

Hi! I happen to watch User talk:Fawcett5's talk page mainly for news about the copyvio. I have been using the lists and verifying the ones I do. There is some discussion on my talk page relating to it. This appears to be a "tempest in a teapot" which has long been forgotten by the originators. There has been an agreement that it is o.k. to remove the signs but I'm not that brave. Fawsett5 does not appear to be around much (or at all) these days. Cheers! Stormbay 16:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I've been forthright and removed the templates and taken the listing off WP:CP, as I think the articles are fine. Kcordina ^Talk 08:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Amin Ahsan Islahi

I was shocked to know that article on Amin Ahsan Islahi has been deleted. I would agree that the article needed to be re-written but actually, he is one of the biggest Islamic scholars of 20th century. If you look at his publications that is remarkable. Even his student, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is a very renouned scholar. It would be appreciated if you can return that article back. Thank you! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saadsaleem (talk • contribs) .

The article was deleted as it was a copy of a copyrighted article and therefore could not be used on Wikipedia. Please feel free to create a new, original, article. Kcordina ^Talk 08:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

HeadleyDown -- advice please

I notice you moved the vandalism intervention request on HeadleyDown et al, from AIV to SSP, on the basis the edit wasn't apparently vandalism.

The problem is that in this context, that edit is vandalism, it's the same POV warfare and subtle deletion of cited material, as he's done for the last year under a avriety of socks and been blocked following Arbcom for. I'm not sure if SSP is useful, since he's a "block on characteristic behavior" vandal/sockmaster, rather than on matching IP's. See his entry at WP:LTA here. In fact I'm not sure where's the best place to get action taken.

Can you confirm before I post there, whether WP:SSP is still the right place for this, and clarify the reasons, so i can learn from it for future? Many thanks. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 09:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The only edit that IP has made today is the addition of a comment to the talk page of an article, which is why I couldn't block the address under the vandalism heading. This is one of those tricky ones that falls in the gaps - particularly since useful edits seem to be made from that IP. If the attention is focussed on the NLP article, that could be semi-protected to prevent editing by IP's. If the article is edited badly by an IP, let me know and I'll do so. Perhaps you can request some help from someone that sat on the ArbCom hearing to get some guidance. I'm afraid I'm not experienced enough to be more help. Kcordina ^Talk 10:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I understand and I've done what I can, though it's not much. And I borrowed the idea of your box on threading, which is something that I've asked people to do but never put on my talk page -- what's that about flattery and sincere compliments again? :) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 12:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Collateral damage

Hi; I think User:Jeremygbyrne has been collaterally blocked because of your (entirely correct) block of User:202.72.148.102 for vandalism. I would normally ask and wait to hear from you, but in this case I'm going to unblock so he can edit. If this is wrong, please accept my apologies in advance and restore the block. Best regards, Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, if you think it needs doing, go for it. Actually, an email has just landed from someone else hit by this block - I've beaten you to the unblock button. Kcordina ^Talk 14:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Tashiro.jpg

Hey, sorry to bother you again man. The image Image:tashiro.jpg was added a second time by hatto (talk • contribs) after being deleted a second time. A lot of info has been collected at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Hatto and I would appreciate a comment by you if you could spare the time, but I don't think an RoC is going to solve this case any more and I'm thinking of what to do if I want to press his case further.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  15:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, image deleted & reply added to the RfC. Kcordina ^Talk 15:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

:Image:Balor.jpg

I note you've uploaded the above image, but the copyright situation is somewhat confused. It is stated as being from a book, but also from a public image section of the wotc website. Please provide a link showing where the image is located in a publicly-useable form, otherwise it may have to be deleted as a breach of copyright. I couldn't find it in a PD gallery on the website. Kcordina ^Talk 14:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The image is from the book Complete Divine and may be found in a public image gallery on the Wizards site here. Rogue 9 17:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but sadly it seems that although the gallery is 'public' the images therein are still restricted as to their use - as per their terms of use on the website [3]. Unless there is a free licence that I can't find, the image cannot be used on wikipedia as a simple 'not for commercial use' licence is not sufficient for wikipedia's needs. Kcordina ^Talk 08:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I could launch into a diatribe on fair use rights here, but I don't have the energy. Do what you must, I suppose. Rogue 9 12:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew Free Burial Association

Hi, The page for the Hebrew Free Burial Association was deleted, even though I provided permission on numerous occasions for the "copyrighted material" to be used.

Please undelete the page.

Hebrew Free Burial Association

As per the message on your talk page, a simple note on the article is not sufficient for wikipedia to use the material. An email needs to be sent to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org from an address associated with the content. They will provide a ticket number giving authorisation for the material to be used. If you confirm you are going to send such an email, I shall undelete the page in the meantime. Kcordina ^Talk 08:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I will send an e-mail now. June 26, 2006 9:50 AM EST

THANK YOU!

Widepedia bug

Hello Kcordina I had to undo two changes you made:

1. 08:48, 24 June 2006 (hist) (diff) Image:'upa'upa.jpg (revert mistake from Kcordia, file does exist: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:%CA%BBupa%CA%BBupa.jpg) (top)
2. 08:41, 24 June 2006 (hist) (diff) Image:'ahumamaru'au.jpg (undo mistake by Kcordina, file is here: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:%CA%BBahumamaru%CA%BBau.jpg)

However you are excused as I think there is a bug in the wiki commons. Although the first file is named ʻupaʻupa.jpg and can be used as it should and so forth, it cannot be found with searching methods. Due to the special accent it seems that 'Image:' must be prefixed. If you go back to [[Image:ʻupaʻupa.jpg]] [[Image:ʻahumamaruʻau.jpg]] you will see that there are 2 NCT tags now, one as it should be, one as it is in practice. --Tauʻolunga 20:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah right, thanks for pointing that out. Looks like someone has now deleted the wikipedia versions so the commons ones are being used. Kcordina ^Talk 08:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Article on "Ghalib Shiraz Dhalla."

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond back to me regarding the copyright issues on the article on me. I have gone ahead and sent an email to permissions@wikimedia.org per your instructions. I also referred to the page of directions but am afraid I found it terribly confusing and extensive. I hope the email will be sufficient to keep the article on wikipedia. As the author and owner of the website from which the article was derived, I have granted full permission for it to be used.

I am deeply appreciative of the inclusion on wikipedia and am referring all my contacts, friends and business associates to the site when they need more information on me.

Warmest Regards, Ghalib Shiraz Dhalla

As you'll see, I have restored the page on the presumption that the email will shortly be received. When you receive confirmation, please post the ticket number on the talk page. Yes, I agree that the copyvio page is horribly confusing, I may gain the fortitude to rewrite it one day. Kcordina ^Talk 08:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Request to undelete the history of the Atomism page

Would it be possible for you to undelete and restore the pre June 3, 2006 history of the Atomism page? Thank you very much. --Rednblu 15:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The pre 3 June versions contained sections that infringed the copyright of other sources and so cannot be present on wikipedia. Those versions were therefore deleted as per the copyvio notice that had been on the article for 7 days before it was deleted. As can be seen from the edit summary, the earliest version present is the first one with the copyvio parts removed. Kcordina ^Talk 08:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine. Then please undelete the history of the Atomism page that preceded the insertion of the copyright infringment material. Thank you. --Rednblu 05:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there some specific content you are looking for? It's going to take a very long time to try and pick through all of the older versions (some 200 revisions) to try and work out what is valid is what is not (ie. probably a number of hours - there is no easy way to compare deleted revisions so I'll have to manually check every single one). Kcordina ^Talk 10:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Yikes! I would not want you spend hours doing that. You have lots of good music to groove with instead. If you undelete that history stack to my UserSpace--maybe as User:Rednblu/Atomism, I will sort through it and make a recommendation that will take you not much time at all to review to make a QualityControl check to ensure that the inserted copyright violation has been removed. What do you say? --Rednblu 03:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

After a deft bit of moving, restoring and deleting, you should now the history up to the deletion at User:Rednblu/Atomism and the recent history should still be at the article. (I think!). Let me know which ones you want to restore and I'll do that. Kcordina ^Talk 07:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks for helping us keep the record of history straight. Here are my findings.

• The copyright violation was removed in this edit which is a comparison from the 1) top of the deleted history to the 2) bottom of the current truncated history.

• The copyright violation is the text that begins:

In ancient India, from the Vedic era (from around 1500 BC to 500 BC), the ...

• The copyright violation was introduced in this series of edits.

• And the edition just before the series of edits that inserted the copyright violation is this version which is the "Revision as of 18:09, 28 February 2006".

• Hence, if you restore all of the Atomism history from the beginning of time up to, and including, "Revision as of 18:09, 28 February 2006," you will avoid the part of the Atomism history in which the copyright violation was inserted to the Atomism page.

Does that make sense? And of course, you have my permission to delete the Rednblu/Atomism history from my UserSpace at your convenience. Thank you, sir. --Rednblu 03:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Hurrah, done it! I've created an almighty mess in the deletion logs, but I _think_ it's now correct... blimey that was tricky! Kcordina ^Talk 08:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Good work! Are you a surgeon by trade? --Rednblu 03:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Dr. VS Mani

If you look closely at the article, the sentences and the words were conviniently changed to make sure that the article would not be a copyvio. Also, it is courteous to inform users that the articles which they made have been deleted, so that they may have a chance to explain themselves. I request undeletion ASAP. Although, the article can be renamed to VS Mani. Regards, --Nearly Headless Nick 14:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Given the number of editors to articles it is not generally possible to contact all of them to notify them of deleted articles. The article had been tagged with the copyvio notice for 7 days - it is generally considered that people considering articles important to them will have them on their watch list and thereby be aware that they may be deleted. I have reviewed the article & the source and am of the opinion that the changes made are so minor that the article is still considered a copy of the source. Changes need to be very substantial to avoid infringement. Kcordina ^Talk 15:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I ask you, sir; to check the article once again. There are added facts from other sources as well. As it is, I have hundreds of articles on my watchlist so it is quite difficult to keep a tab of them. If you could undelete the article I will try changing the sentences more. I suggest that you read up WP:CP; because when sentences are changed, even so slightly there is no copyright infringment; and moreoever, I cannot change the facts, as they are. Regards, --Nearly Headless Nick 08:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you might find this interesting. --Nearly Headless Nick 09:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if there are added facts, the majority of the article is a direct copy from the cited source, with very minor changes. I am fulyl familiar with Wikipedia's copyright policy, and moreover am a qualified attorney working in intellectual property. Copyright law centres around the concept of copying "a substantial portion" - changing a few words here and there does not mean you have not copied that portion. Facts are not copyrighted, the expression of those facts is, and it is that expression that has been copied in this case. If you are not happy about this, please bring it up for discussion at the talk page for WP:CP, I still stand by my deletion of the page. Kcordina ^Talk 10:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

ACTE

Good morning. I still haven't heard anything from anyone at wikipedia about the copy right violation on the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE) page I created. Can you let me know how long these things generally take. I am sure you all must be busy, just looking for a general time frame so I can provide answers to others waiting for the page. Thank you. --Mreiter 14:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Not a clue - those emails are handled by officials of wikipedia, I am myself a voluntary editor, just like yourself, with no connection with wikipedia. I see no reason to doubt that you are who you say you are and that an email has been sent so have reinstated the page. Kcordina ^Talk 14:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Majorpayne27

Why was I needlessly warned twice for one offense? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Majorpayne27 (talk • contribs) .

Because you needlessly edited his page twice. Granted the second one was only a minor addition to your previous vandalism. If you'd prefer the final warning could have been issued for your edits to your own talk page which are a personal attack on User:Skysmith. Kcordina ^Talk 16:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you really vandalize your own talk page? I would think that would be a personal opinion. Also, I can't conceive how you could possibly view the edit as a seperate offense. I just edited a mistake in my code. --Majorpayne27 18:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Skull and Bones historical connections

Thank you for implementing my suggestion. This article is just awful %( Conscious 17:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yup, it took all my self control not to be a bit over-zealous with the delete key.... Good work on the copyvios BTW, looks like we're finally getting them under control. I've been having a bit of a discussion with User:Carnildo about using his OrphanBot to help with processing images. The proposal is that when images have been up for seven days, they are reviewed by an admin to ensure they should be deleted. If they should, and they are linked to by a number of pages, they will be listed on a protected page somewhere. OrphanBot will then work from page and orphan all of the images on it, thereby allowing the admin to return and delete the images without having to remove all the links, which I personally find takes ages to do. Any comments? Kcordina ^Talk 08:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I haven't run into such images, so usually I have to remove only a couple of links. I'm not quite sure how OrphanBot works (in terms of finding images to orphan), but will just blanking the image page do the trick? (I mean, the absence of copyright tags could trigger it...) Conscious 10:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Deleting

Thanks for taking the same to do the thankless job of CSD patrol =D --mboverload@ 08:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

212.219.90.77

We both blocked the same IP on WP:AIV for 24 hours. Just as well we are in agreement over the duration, I suppose!  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  12:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

problems at Programming language again

Could use your help at Talk:Programming language. Ideogram 22:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx

Thanx

...for taking a benign view of the (spurious) copyvio allegations levelled by the Troll Who Loves Me. I appreciate it. Regards, ImpuMozhi 06:15, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Rocky Horror Rajput Show

Thanks for your quick action on the Rajput socks. I hope you find the new template-based method of reporting it at the noticeboard appropriate and helpful. The template is at User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Rajput report. Please let me know if there's anything to change or improve about it. Oh yes, if you approve of it, could you perhaps semiprotect that subpage, as it might become a target of retribution vandalism. Thanks! Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem - what a nightmare user! Do the sock's all come from the same IP - if so can we not get that IP blocked permenantly because the situation is out of hand. Template is good - and now you've changed it to include the 'subst', I have no further comments! I have semi-protected it, as you are right, it is likely to be a target. Kcordina ^Talk 10:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I think they are actually a couple of people, coordinated over a chatroom. The last visible IP was from a major Mumbai ISP, but I've also got a collateral damage report from an American company in the past. It would be useful to have a 'checkuser person' establish if the recent incarnations were all from the same range. Thanks for your help, dab (ᛏ) 10:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

User talk:195.188.173.66

Hi K, Could you review the block on User:195.188.173.66 for me please. I asked for it via WP:AIV after a couple of test warnings, for repeated what I considered frivolous additions to Jet. Having a look back at it it may have been a bit hasty. I'm willing to leave them a message on their talk page saying that if they receive a warning in future, to talk to the warning editor before trying to re-insert their text. Whaddya think? Regards

Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 11:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the block in light of the jet edits was a bit hasty, but looking back through their edits, everything up to that one is vandalism, for which they have escaped blocks. I've decined their unblock request - they can come back and try and be sensible tomorrow. Kcordina ^Talk 11:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

OK cheers, just wanted it double checked really, thanks for the look. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 12:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Wheel war!

I think User:82.198.250.126 is a dynamic IP, reset block to 1 hour. Hope it's OK. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 08:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)