User talk:Mannafredo/Archive 1

Buck

I can't figure out how to use Twinkle.

Can you explain the reasons for your revert of the Buck page. Thanks.Mannafredo 12:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't revert your edits. I'm not your instruction manual. - Bennyboyz3000 12:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say they were my edits, and I didn't ask for instructions. Are you sure you're cut out to be a police officer. Mannafredo 13:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Remove URLS from External Links

If you remove some links from External Links then remove all links.

It is not fair that some companys get links and some do not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.37.166.32 (talk) 04:20, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about that spammer. I removed his link, as well as the other linkspam around it (from barcode). Keep up the good work. =Axlq 04:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket machine

This article is specific to self-service ticket-vending machines. It makes no mention of portable ticket machines that you may find carried on trains and ferries, the built-in under-desk ticket machines you may find in cinemas or tube stations (manned counter), the old Almex ticket machines that a bus driver might use, the small desk-top ticket machines that you might find at the entrance to Blenheim Palace etc etc, the list goes on. As I say, not all ticket machines are ticket-vending machines, so the title of the article should be what the article is about, i.e. ticket-vending machines. I wonder if you would mind reviewing your assessment of my logic. Regards, Mannafredo 14:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you make some very good points that I hadn't thought about. Having said that, why can't this article stay named 'ticket machine', with the view of including such machines in the future? As far as I'm aware, none of those you mention have articles, neither are they notable enough to have articles. They could, however, be mentioned in this article. _TheIslander 15:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the process of doing just that, when I got some kind of wiki-error and lost the lot. When time permits, I'll have another go. Regards, Mannafredo 16:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch, hate it when that happens :-/. Best of luck ;) _TheIslander 16:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of banned books

Dear Mannafredo, thanks for rectifying the error I made at List of banned books page. THANKS. --Aileee 11:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome. Mannafredo 12:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:Three Musketeers I

How can you say I am a non-existent user? I am here! Only created the account recently, will start editing soon. Three Musketeers 16:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's my userpage, I can put what I want on it. Wikipedia:User page says "Some people add information about themselves as well, possibly including contact information (email, instant messaging, etc), a photograph, their real name, their location, information about their areas of expertise and interest, likes and dislikes, homepages, and so forth. (If you are concerned with privacy, you may not want to and are by no means required to emulate this.)" which I have done. Three Musketeers 16:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm, strange one. I thought long and hard about nominating a user page - for whatever reason. Yes, your right, I guess, people can do pretty much what they like to their own user page – I say ‘pretty much’, because there are, I’m sure, lots of things that you are not allowed to do – but what is in your page is definitely not one of those things.

I decided (very possibly wrongly) that your user page was a subtle/?artistic? form of vandalism (just because I nominated it for deletion, doesn’t mean I didn’t find it interesting – some New York subway graffiti is very impressive, but it’s still vandalism).

“How can you say I am a non-existent user?”

sigh - I know, what a reason to pick!

I only decided on that one whilst looking down the list of reasons. I was hoping there would be an “Other reason: please state your reason in the following box” type option at the bottom of the list, alas no. It seemed to me that you were not a ‘real’ user - in some sense of the word at least. You had, and still have (at the time of typing this (which is taking me ages - between guisers/trick-or-treaters at the door), made no other contributions to articles other than your user page – which isn’t an article).

I immediately rejected User:KieferSkunk’s preferred deletion reason of patent nonsense as I would argue that patent nonsense to be something a bit like ‘kakamoondy&%$())ndfmalfkd_ilovedish_fl9u49orlfljroo8y+(_**^bliblibli’ - I wonder if some bot will get upset by that and revert this edit. Your text is more akin to a page that might be found in Trainspotting or Last Exit to Brooklyn.

Anyway, looks like someone called Erica has decided what’s best. It’s somewhat disappointing that she neglects to explain her opinion, even though another administrator and I both made a delete nomination. Regards, Mannafredo 08:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for such a great response! One of the best I have read on here. I hope your 'trick-or-treaters at the door' didn't disrupt your Wikipedia edits too much! Thanks for the response, regards, Three Musketeers 10:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blame ambiguity in speedy-delete criteria for my nomination. It looked like this user page was either blatant nonsense or a copy of another page, or something along those lines, and it was difficult to discern if there was any real content here. Keep in mind that User pages are about you as a Wikipedian, not a personal hosting service - that's why I nominated the page for delete. But that's as far as I was willing to go with it. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 14:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, speedy-delete criteria could be better, and you make a very good point regarding Wikipedia not being a hosting service. However, lots of people have personal stuff on their user page, and it's not worth getting upset about. I'm with you in not wanting to go any further with this, and I hereby take back my nomination for deletion. It has raised some mildly interesting questions though - that's good. Regards to you both. Mannafredo 15:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the speedy-delete criteria really could use some work. I'm going to start raising some questions there. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:Three Musketeers II

User talk:Three Musketeers. Mannafredo 08:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about it? --Fang Aili ^talk 15:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was slightly annoyed that you removed the deletion tag without any explanation at all, even though two people (one an administrator) had made speedy delete nominations - or have I just not seen it. Anyway, it's all academic now. Regards, Mannafredo 15:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Sorry about that. I didn't think it was appropriate to delete because users are generally given a pretty wide lattitude when it comes to their own userpages. Since this user has since made constructive edits (reverting vandalism), we can hope he will become a Wikipedian--in which case he can have pretty much whatever he wants on his userpage. Cheers, Fang Aili ^talk 15:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Fife

The userboxes on this page [1] and this page [2] both point to the council area of Fife in Scotland, rather than the musical instrument.

Is this something you can fix? Mannafredo 11:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit messy, but I replaced the template with the hardcode. I posted about this at Template talk:User instrument-gen‎; maybe someone knows a better way. But for now this should work. --Fang Aili ^talk 15:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Mannafredo 15:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: User talk:164.92.181.154 is back...

Thanks for the headsup. Looks like someone else caught up to him already and blocked the IP again. - eo 16:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting the vandals

Hi FileMaster If you look here and here, you’ll see that your reverts simply reverted to a previous vandalisation. I fell into that trap a good few times before I realised it. What I do now is hit the Diff link and if I see vadalism, I hit the History tab and go for the undo next to the vandals first edit. It’s not as quick, but stops a lot of vandalism getting missed. Keep up the good work. Mannafredo 17:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Sorry, I'm wrong. It's worse than that. What I do now is hit the Diff link and if I see vandalism, i look to see if the edit on the left is by the same user. If so, you can keep hitting the older edit link until the you get a good page and click on that revision and save the page, or hit the History tab and go for the Last link on vandals first edit. Then select the 'Revision as of... link on the left hand side and then go down and save the page. If you download Mozilla Firefox, and enable Twinkle the process becomes faster. Sorry for the mess. It's your page, just delete it all if you like. Mannafredo 17:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Bloomsbury Spammer

FYI The Bloomsbury Spammer is back. Mannafredo (talk) 13:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elati

Hello Nkroup. I notice that ArielGold has made some Good faith edits to this article that may be incorrect. You use the word amphitheatrical, I assume to describe the bowl-shape of the resort, and ArieGold has changed that word and surrounding sentence so that it now reads as if resorts-people actually have built a amphitheatre - which I'm guessing they haven't. I know nothing about Nkroup, so am not willing to quiz ArielGold on her edit. You obviously have more knowledge of the Elati, if the above assumptions are correct, I think you should go boldly to ArielGolds talk page and explain things. Mannafredo (talk) 13:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this man a photographer of any note?

(Prompted by this edit.)

I take photos. Maybe you do to. I don't doubt that Otto Felix does.

User:Mannafredo writes: It says so on the front page of his official website - second external link. Right: on ottofelix.com/ we see a picture of some digital camera and Otto Felix - Still Photogaphy - Actor Head Shots starting at $150. I also see a turquoise mess that may be an icon for some ad requiring a plug-in that I don't have (I didn't check).

So, Felix sells photos of head shots from $150. So do lots of people. How does this make him a photographer of any note? Has anyone remarked on these or other photographs by Otto Felix? (Has he for example had any solo exhibitions, or books of his photos published?) This is a question asked over six months ago; how long should one keep waiting for an answer before deleting the unsupported claim? -- Hoary (talk) 13:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any better? Change it anyway you like - I'm not that bothered. Regards. Mannafredo 13:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You reintroduced the link to the category. I reremoved it. Again, his site says Otto Felix - Still Photogaphy - Actor Head Shots starting at $150. Nothing wrong with that, but by itself it's entirely unremarkable. Lots of people offer this kind of service. When somebody takes note of these photos and arranges for a solo exhibition or non-vanity-published book, that will be a different matter. -- Hoary (talk) 11:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry, I didn't notice the category bit (he almost certainly doesn't warrant that). Reintroducing it was an unnoticed side effect of my previous revert to GeneMoser's main text - since edited. Regards. Mannafredo 12:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, and sorry about my testiness. -- Hoary (talk) 13:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:62.12.0.125

FYI This person has been adding porn links again this morning. You may want to warn/block them. Mannafredo (talk) 10:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Examples: Odysseus, Trojan Horse, Persian Empire, History and CMDB. Mannafredo (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've warned the user. --Oxymoron⁸³ 16:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Barclay

This guy, 88.89.143.180, has inserted some text in the middle of your paragraph about Field Marshall Prince Michael Andreas Barclay de Tolly. This makes the second part of the paragraph refer to a different person. I have no knowledge of these matters, but it seems to me that this article has been messed up by our Norwegian editor - I may be wrong. I think you should take a look though. He has some dodgy spelling at very least. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 13:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does read badly now. I will edit. Thanks (Nfras (talk) 05:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Speedy Deletion of John Paul Higher Secondary School

You say "This is clearly a stub about a school"

From WP:Stub

Any registered editor may start a stub article.
When you write a stub, bear in mind that it should contain enough information for other editors to expand upon it. The key is to provide adequate context — articles with little or no context usually end up being speedily deleted. Your initial research may be done either through books or reliable websites. You may also contribute knowledge acquired from other sources, but it is useful to conduct some research beforehand...

It seems to me that this one-line 'article' falls below the stub radar. Okay, it's only existed for a couple of hours, and maybe it will be improved upon shortly. However, if not, and you consider the name of a building and its location to an acceptable encyclopeadic article, albeit a stub article, then please explain why you think this.

However, I do not like, what I consider to be, your dismissive and superior use of the word 'clearly'. This implies my edit is wholly inappropriate and that I haven't given proper consideration to my actions, which I don't believe to be the case. This is not conducive to assuming good faith. Regards. Mannafredo (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, that was both in content and tone indeed not a good summary. I was trying to say that the context seems to be clear enough to identify that the entry is about a school and therefore not to delete it per CSD#A1 taking into account that we do not speedy delete articles on schools, in general. While I don't have a link handy, we let them fly somewhat deliberately under the radar. I then also added a stub label and added an edit summary in a way that conflates those two issues and even sounds dismissive. So sorry once more. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Regards. Mannafredo (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Farah Khan

Please refrain yourself from editing Farah Khans birthdate. She was born in 1972 NOT 1965. If you have any queries please go directly to my talk page. Please find a reference that PROVES she was born on 1965. I will warn you that if you continue to change and give false information on Farha Khan I will have to contact an administrator and report this as vandalism. LOTRrules (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday 211.31.240.29 made, what I consider to be, a good faith edit to the Farah Khan article. I noticed that the edit was made in the main text but not followed through to the info box. I followed This link at the bottom of the page to verify the edit. Yesterday, I can assure you, that Bollywood Village page said her date of birth was 8 October 1965 (it has changed since then). I therefore decide to change the info box to match the main text, and did so in good faith.

Do not tell me to refrain from editing articles. You do not own this, or any other, article.

Do not 'warn' me.

Do not threaten me with administrators. (On second thoughts, go on, show our swap of words to an administrator)

Do not accuse me of vandalism. Look at my contributions. Show me any hint of vandalism.

Do not accuse me of 'continuing to give false information' after a single good faith edit.

Do not shout at me with bold and capitals.

Do read this. 2007 - 42 = ...I'll let you work it out. No, it's not proof, and in good faith I will not re-edit the article - for now. I will allow you the benefit of the doubt - that you know better than the Bollywood news people.

Finally, there's a proper way to speak to people, and you need to learn it. Mannafredo (talk) 09:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This one says she'll be a 43 year old mother. Oh, and I've calmed down a bit since this morning. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 14:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's more. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do not tell ME what to do. I only wanted what was best for the article. Do not make up a list which I should follow, see I can do the same...but I won't go down to that level... LOTRrules (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were extremely rude and threatening and I reacted as anyone might - pretty much as you have just reacted to my tirade.

You say - 'Do not tell ME what to do' - it is you that gave me 'orders' before I returned the complement. It's not nice is it, so why do you do it to others? I think you should learn to treat people as you would hope to be treated by them - that's not an order, just a suggestion.

You say - 'I only wanted what was best for the article' - well maybe you should have looked about a bit as I did to find the last three links rather than simply denounce my edit and 211.31.240.29's edit as vandalism based on very little evidence. If you really want what's best for the article, why haven't you changed her date of birth back to 1965 - or do you still think it's 1972 - I'm more than happy for you to prove it so.

I'm going to stay away from the Farah Khan article for a while. You can do with it as you see fit. I suggest we put this episode behind us, as I think it is obvious that we are both trying to do what's best for Wikipedia. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I didn't realise it was "threatening", I thought (without looking for your edit count) that you were basing it on false I-know-everything kind of way. I only said it was going to be REPORTED as vandalism NOT that it was because sombody, and I don't know who, wrote false information, and untrue statements on the article. It took me ages to clear that up and find what she actually DID win in the awards section. I just thought it was happening again - you see I'm VERY defencive about articles, particularly the ones I spend a lot of time on, and when somebody writes something which I assume to be false I take it personally...I do that a lot. Sorry if I somehow managed to offend you. Anyway I do what I can for Wikipedia. FYI I did look on Google for her age but the only one I could find was the one that you took to be wrong. Truce? LOTRrules (talk) 18:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? Firefox?

how can it be messed up? I'd give it a few days... LOTRrules (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Low Energy Vehicle

I realise that GerfriedC's edits usually are OR soapboxing editorials with huge POV problems, and that he is incapable of working in a normal Wiki way, but compared with his usual standard those changes you twinkled were actually an improvement. So if you zapped them just because they looked like vandalism, then you might reconsider. If you zapped them because they read like the ravings of a madman that is fair enough. My real problem with him is not the stuff he puts in, it is his habit of deleteing ^{[citation needed]} requests and referneced counter statements that are inconvenient to his POV. Greg Locock (talk) 01:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I edited 5 of GerfriedC's contributions yesterday, 2 of which were rewrites of text, not simple deletions. Those two articles would not have survived simple deletion, as there would be more or less no article left. The other three articles, however, are able to stand on their own without GC's seemingly insane ravings, and his bits were just so bad that I zapped them. To my mind they were hindering rather than helping the article. True, I may have been less inclined to revert his tripe, if I hadn't looked around at some of his other comments and found him so wanting in civility. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 08:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Airfield rubber removal

You deleted a link to my companies web page from the Airfield rubber removal page, and I was wondering if you had taken the time to see if there was actually useful information on this site that could be linked to or if you just saw .com and decided to delete it. I realize now that as an employee of a company that does runway cleaning, I should leave the desicion of external linking to our pages up to an impartial individual. I plan to add a video of Runway rubber removal to our website and I look forward to having someone else link that to the wikipedia page. The goal of our website has always been content driven with hopes of promoting and entire industry. I am learning the rules of wikipedia as well as it's intent. I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks Kinetiscope (talk) 13:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Elz old granny nottttttttttt!

I wonder if you might explain more fully why you regard this an inappropriate user name. It's unusual, certainly, but I don't see what guidlines it breaches. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usually I'll block usernames that make themselves unnecessarily long by repeating letters at the end because they're confusing and are almost always used disruptively (e.g., to vandalize). Either way, I simply softblock so that they're free to create a new account outright and go right along their merry way. :P Cheers :) --slakr^\ talk / 12:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Low-energy vehicle

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Stop deleting parts of acticles which you don't like but have good references in it!

The above unsigned warning was placed there by 213.229.57.77, who I believe to be Gerfriedc. Before assuming this is a valid warning, please review what I, and at least one other editor, consider to be weasely, OR and POV edits to the article Low-energy vehicle amongst others. Mannafredo (talk) 14:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heck, I'm gonna revert it again - just to see how the 'last warning'/'you will be blocked' threats get on. Mannafredo (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Stephen Medcalf

Dear Mhsb, This article has been around for less than half an hour. There is lots of scope for improvement over the coming days. The 5 obituaries alone give enough information to make this into a well-sized and interesting encyclopaedic article, and when editors' time permits, I'm sure the article will expand nicely. In fact why don't have a go at improving an article for a change instead of simply requesting speedy deletion for every short article you come across. I would hope you find it more fulfilling. Mannafredo (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

right, speedy declined by admin.DGG (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Profanity

Dear User:Ryanjcole, I have some negative feedback for you. I wonder if you might refrain from using the words 'jesus christ' (or any other profanities) as you did an a recent edit summary. It's annoying to many at very least, and certainly does not show the assumption of good faith. Mannafredo (talk) 09:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Skille scores.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Skille scores.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Skille scores.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mannafredo (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHY?!--Ryanjcole (talk) 16:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested that you were using Wikipedia as your personal gallery, and an administrator agreed with me, is why. Mannafredo (talk) 16:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Jimfbleak deleted it, citing it as blatant advertising. To me it was more of a vanity page. We don't come here to look at your photos. Mannafredo (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear User:Tivedshambo, I was in the middle of a discussion regarding this image, and you've just deleted it (the discussion). Why? Mannafredo (talk) 16:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image has been deleted (by another administrator) as "Blatant advertising" [3], so the talk page was redundant as per WP:CSD#G8. Note that adding {{hangon}} automatically logs the pags in CAT:CSD, even if no speedy tag has been added. If you wish to discuss the deletion of the image, I suggest you contact User:Jimfbleak who deleted it. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 16:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: Just looked at the discussion and realised you weren't the uploader. To be honest, I don't think an orphaned talk page is the best place to carry out a discussion, as it is always under threat from WP:CSD#G8 as explained above. Best to discuss on a user talk page. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 16:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that watermarked images are accepted - it appears to be advertising you, if not the images, and I don't think it's in the spirit of Wikipedia. Still, I've restored the images. In the article, an editor changed the date of birth by two years, which I rolled back, but I don't know which is actually correct. Jimfbleak (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the image for deletion, and User:Jimfbleak obliged. Today, User talk:Ryanjcole asked the question 'Why was it deleted?' on the image's talk page - which doesn't seem wholly unreasonable. I was in the process of explaining things to him when you zapped the page. I've looked at WP:CSD#G8, and think the page should have survived due to the 'ifs and buts' of G8, especially taking into account the dates of the comments on that page. Ryan is now left with no answer to his question and probably a bad view of us all. I would suggest you've been a tad 'quick with the red pen' on this occasion, and that perhaps you could have explained G8 to us and asked us to 'go and play elsewhere' (on one of our user talk pages).

However, now that you're involved, I wonder what you think about all this. I think Ryanjcole (talk) is using wikipedia as his own personal gallery here and here. The first one, it seems to me, exists on wikipedia for no reason other than as a vanity page. As for the second one, does that guy really justify six images in his article (does he even justify having an article at all - I suspect it was photographer Ryan who started it as a vehicle for his images).

Things have moved on, see here and here. Ironically now, the image is back and the discussion page gone. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the talk page while the page exists - You might like to raise the general issue of Ryanjcole's contributions at WP:AN. Apologies for breaking up you discussion! — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 18:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watermarked images are generally not acceptible for use in Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Image use policy#User-created images. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 18:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on User talk:Ryanjcole‎ about watermarked images, though I'm not convinced that it's a criteria for speedy deletion. It can be argued that it's advertising, but it may be better to play safe and take it to WP:IFD instead. In the meantime I've restored the talk page. Apologies once again. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 18:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I knocked up a terrible edit removing the watermark: Image talk:Skille scores.jpg. Mahalo nui loa. --Ali'i 19:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's amazing that you managed to do that. I'd like to know how. However, my point from the start of this saga is that I don't understand why this picture is on wikipedia at all. What purpose does it serve, other than fanning Ryanjcole's ego. I clicked the 'what links here' button and it said nothing - but I'm not an expert at wikipedia, so don't know if that's enough. What I was about to do, just before User:Tivedshambo zapped this talk page (absolutely no need for apologies) was that the original zapper of the image, User:Jimfbleak, had a number of wikipedia-irrelevant images on his user page, and that, pretty much, that's ok, and that if he really loves that image so much, then put it on his user page. SIGH This is all getting a bit convoluted and I think I'm going to back off now. However, my leaving thought is this: User:Ryanjcole is using wikipedia as his own personal gallery and vanity platform. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Palmerstown Credit Union

Why did you remove *Palmerstown Credit Union from the Palmerstown page? It's a voluntary organisation that has been supported by residents for decades?

I don't mean to take away from them, but you left the links for SuperValu and Xtravision, and they are commercial websites....--Barry (no Wiki Account) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.225.70 (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barry, I regarded that external link as spam. I probably came across it on the recent changes page, and rather than examining the article as a whole, limited myself to examining your edit alone. Your edit, as I saw it, was to add spam, so I undid it. The other two links you refer to may well be spam, and if they are, they should be removed. If I can be bothered, I'll check them out, and delete if I see fit. I will continue to delete any spam that you add - if I can be bothered.

Having briefly looked at your site again, I really can't tell if your selling a service or providing one free of charge. You say your voluntary - does that mean none of your staff get paid? Does it mean you give your services for free? If not, where does the income go - to a charity? Anyway, I'm passed caring now. Do what you like. I'll not hound you.

Finally, I'm moving this conversation to what I consider to be its correct place on this page. I you are going to edit Wikipedia articles, please try to take some note of the way things are done regarding placement of edits on users' talk pages and edit signing. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mannafredo, Thanks for the explanation. To answer your questions, a Credit Union is a non-profit making financial co-operative run entirely by the people for the people. They generally are of great service to a community, as Palmerstown Credit Union has been to Palmerstown and Chapelizod for many years. Some staff are paid, however it is founded on the basis of volunteerism, and the majority of those who work there (the board of directors, supervisors, and most of the committee members) are volunteers who give tirelessly of their time, which means that yes, they give their services for free. The income (or rather the surplus) is redistributed entirely to the community.

By the way, just to be clear, I'm an independent observer in this, they are not "my" staff or "my" site by the way. I just happen to live in Palmerstown.

Finally, I do respect that you are trying to keep wiki free of spam etc - appreciate if you leave this one though, as it is definitely not spam.

As or signing/observing format, as adding that link is the only edit I'm ever likely to make on wiki, sincere apologies for not observing all the rules (I did my best). Hope this reply is ok. Thanks, Barry. 86.42.254.57 (talk) 00:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll leave it alone, but wouldn't be surprised if someone else decides to remove it. Good luck to your town, and sorry for being so pernickety about your edit. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]