User talk:Yamla/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Yamla. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

→

i'm not asking you to accept me as a source. i added a link to verify information i corrected regarding the bodies. what i removed was editorial style comment. i did not edit the story based on my opinion or on my experience.

image

you can just delete this image Image:Famous logo.jpg, unless you could tell me what it needs. Sry for the inconvinence.

Please Block

This moron vandalized the Rolling Stones page. Please block him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75pickup (talk • contribs)

User:The exclusive bad apple=User:Mactabbed

Greetings Yamla, seeing as you've had contact with the first user above I thought it would be good for you to know about this user's sockpuppetry/block evasion. User:Pschemp indefinitely blocked Mactabbed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as well as Exclusive bad apple (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) a result of these ANI threads. Now this user is puppeting again as User:Juror 8 and has again been blocked by User:Pschemp. Given your negative interactions and prior blockings of this user I thought you should be aware of his continued disruption. Thanks. (→Netscott) 06:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ellen_Feiss.jpg

I'm hesitant to believe that this image is "replaceable". To begin with, I've yet to see an image of the girl that was not derived from one of the two advertising videos. This article is not really an "actress bio" of Ellen Feiss, it's more an article about an advertising character played by Ellen Feiss, as Ellen Feiss isn't notable for any other achievement, and wouldn't be notable for this one either if not for her cute, goofy, and slightly doped-up appearance in the TV commercials for Apple Computer. Even if she got cornered by paparazzi next week (not likely), she's like age 20 now and likely no longer resembles the girl in the video. —freak(talk) 23:54, Dec. 9, 2006 (UTC)

User:Made of people=User:The exclusive bad apple

Hello Yamla, I noticed your block review message and just wanted to let you know that you originally repeatedly blocked that user (under another sock) for fair usage violations. User:Pschemp eventually permablocked for the same reasons, etc. under another sockpuppet →User:Mactabbed. Hope that helps to jog your memory. Thanks. (→Netscott) 05:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Copy vio image

There's a copy violating image on the Ajithkumar page from the film Aalwar. Just thought you should know.

Hilary Duff's album covers

I added the Fair Use rationales for Image:Hilary Duff - Metamorphosis.jpg and Image:Hilary Duff Most Wanted.jpg is it okay to take off the No Fair Use templates now. Quasyboy 15:20 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ric.mc

About Nicole's image.I want that you he helps me in a photo for the page of the Nicole because when I you place the image in the same page of it strap with copyright certain.

PSP Protected

i think Playstation Portable should be protected...

Image:8a457c0b.jpg

if u want to then delete it but as i said earlier its only for illustrative and informational purpose - i have given two sources links - if that is wrong please then tell me step by step what to do, thanks cusulli

User talk: Sasquatchjon

You recently gave this account a vandalism warning. I would like to know what he (he being my brother) posted so I can put an immediate stop to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasquatchjon (talk • contribs)

RE: image:Pacsnoopsuge.jpg

The only tag I removed was the one indicating it was cited for no fair use rationale and would be deleted. A fair use rationale for Tupac Shakur was already provided on that page so the tag was unnecessary, and had indication to be removed under the circumstances.

Image:NBBimg.jpg

This image is specifically used to display for The Naked Brothers Band film, and TV series. I know it's a fair use image, but its a promotional image for the NBB project. It is only used for those said pages and not for the people in the picture. Is a freely licensced image really necessary if it being used for those pages and with those reasons that I just mentioned. QuasyBoy 24:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you please get back to me about this? QuasyBoy 24:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Since you didn't get back to me concerning the subject of this image, I put a {{db-author}} tag on it and uploaded a new image (Image:NakedBrologo.jpg) for The Naked Brothers Band articles. QuasyBoy 15:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Images

Just wanted to know. So, I wouldn't get a warning. Sorry to bother you. Have a nice DAY. --Batmanrules677

Verdict

back again, this time under the guise of Kurt Angle Fan Bmg916 ^{Speak to Me} 03:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Four minutes after Kurt Angle Fan was blocked, Kid 90 showed up with a seemingly similar agenda, asking me to revert Brock Lesnar. -- Richard D. LeCour ^{(talk/contribs)} 02:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Kid_1990, next one.. also i regards to your responce, your right and i really dont have time to keep trying to get through to him --- Paulley

Although this user, No Surrender Never (talk · contribs) has yet to edit the Brock Lesnar article I think it's another Verdict sock considering the uploading of Lesnar related images claiming pd-self, poor spelling, creating a user page for User:Daniel90-11 consisting of "Dont inslult[sic] Goldberg like you did your[sic] little fat ass pussy!" and the name itself possibly being a reference to Verdict's crusade. –– Lid^(Talk) 05:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh they also requested an unprotection for the Brock Lesnar page, yeah this is a sock. –– Lid^(Talk) 06:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Probabily back again as Rocky 360 (talk · contribs). Hasn't edited yet, but the images uploaded are the same ones uploaded as before and name matches the 360 used in a few other account names. -- oakster TALK 20:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, as Brock Lesnar11 (talk · contribs) (same photos uploaded again) and it looks like Verdict might have the IP address of 71.111.248.108 (talk · contribs) (placed those uploaded photos in the articles and reverted your edit, saying "Eric360´s edit was way better"). -- oakster TALK 09:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Oakster. This user occasionally changes the image names. I thought I had the images on my watchlist but it turns out I didn't. I should be able to pick up Verdict socks more quickly in the future but please notify me of any I haven't caught. Hopefully fewer will slip through now. Just an account name is fine, I can quickly block and then roll back any edits so there's no need for you to even revert the changes. I appreciate your efforts at keeping this particularly troublesome user out of Wikipedia. --Yamla 23:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

David Manchester (talk · contribs) (you're right about the images), Raul 9 (talk · contribs) (reverts). Thanks for the advice. -- oakster TALK 07:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Shelton Benjamin Best (talk · contribs). -- oakster TALK 19:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry again, The Choosen One (talk · contribs). -- oakster TALK 19:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Just want to make sure you're aware of the Brock edit proposed on User_talk:Nishkid64... -- Richard D. LeCour ^{(talk/contribs)} 08:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Golfwagon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) –– Lid^(Talk) 10:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Add The Choosen One Version1 (talk · contribs) to that, along with some proxy IPs 81.230.38.145 (talk · contribs) and 168.103.68.113 (talk · contribs). -- oakster TALK 13:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The logs of The Choosen One show several other sock accounts being created that also need blocking. –– Lid^(Talk) 15:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oaksta (talk · contribs), now it's getting to the point where the information is irrelevant and the annoyance is the actual factor here. –– Lid^(Talk) 16:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly. --Yamla 16:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Responding your email, no i dont mind that at all, and yes i am willing to. And i want to personaly apologize you for those things. It wasnt anything personal, as i think you do your job good and i like the way you are. But still you have to understand that i am a very big fan of Brock Lesnar. He is inspires me alot in the gym. And i have followed his career since i first saw him in real life a couple of years ago. So i hope you understand that the effort i am constantly putting in the Brock Lesnar article is not to make harm. And at the same time, i am also a fan of WWE, so i like to edit some other wrestlers article´s, though only those i have knowledge off. So i hope you understand, those things are my only goals on wikipedia, not to cause any harm. And of course, i would rather have friends while im doing it, rather than enemies, so i hope you understand my goals, and also understand that i mean no harm. And my goals around here are definitely not deal with you or anyone, just do the my thing here when i pass by wikipedia while im on the computer. So the last thing i want to do is to deal with anyone here that gives me orders beacuse thats just waist of time. So theres no need for dispute, i hope i can feel free to edit when i want without dealing with you and so its all good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verdict (talk • contribs)

I see that your agreement to stop violating Wikipedia's policies was yet another lie. That's a shame. I sent you an email hoping we could get you into dispute resolution with the possibility of getting you unblocked. But while you continue to lie, threaten, and violate Wikipedia policy, there is no chance of this. --Yamla 22:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

First of all that thing i wrote above was not under the account verdict (i am done with that stupid account), secondly i was not lying, but when i saw you blocked me again without responding i figured you obviously didnt care about all that i wrote so i said to you that well then im bringing in friends. Just for the record i do not create all this accounts, its a friend of mine. I was just about to ask you how i can prevent from violating the fair use policy, since i dont know how it works or where to find out about it, but then as i was clicking on save page, i was blocked again, just when i thought we where on good terms i got blocked, when i had put effort in trying to explain to you and be friends instead but you just blocked me, of course i got mad. So that was not a lie, and that was the reason i threatend, now those things are worked out. And as far as vioalting the Wikipedia policy, well i was just about to ask how to prevent from doing that before you blocked me before. So i hope you understand that what i wrote was not a lie and i still want to be on good terms and i want to know how not to violate the policy, but when you blocked me without answering i figured you didnt want to. I hope you understand me now.

So what i was about to tell you before was that i am willing to go through whatever you put on me to learn the Wikipedia policy that you claim i am violating in order to stay clean because like i said i do not want to make any harm whatsover but you have to also understand that i am only here for a couple of articles and i really dont know anything about wikipedia´s policy´s but with your help i am sure i can stay clean here but with all these blockes and not trying to help me understand stuff around here, you have to understand it makes me frustraded and of course its going to make me write this stupid things. So i hope we can start over, and i hope you are willing to help me stay clean here on wikipedia instead of keeping me out of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verdict (talk • contribs)

You say this but you have set up yet another abusive sockpuppet account. It is rather hard to believe you when you keep on deliberately violating Wikipedia's policies. But I tell you what, I'll let this one account stay unblocked so long as you only use it to communicate with me, respond on your user page, or pursue dispute resolution. Even one instance of image uploading or article editing, however, permanently terminates this offer. I will try to work out some form of dispute resolution in the next few days. You will have to be willing to accept that the results of this will be binding on you. --Yamla 23:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi

hello.

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Bernard McGuirk

I have excised the offending sentences from this article. Would it possible to get it restored to where it was? Also, I'm interested in doing the same for the Wes Freed article. I know we're waiting for "whomever" to give approval on the copyrighted material, but I have a completely original article waiting to go up there and don't want to have to put it on the temporary page. Please advise if we can do this. Thanks.

Mister Jinxy 18:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use

I know you are very busy, but try to notify contributors to an article that a relevant image is a candidate for speedy deletion by inserting {{subst:refu-c}} into the image caption. --Iamunknown 07:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets...

Thanks for dealing with RaptorRobot/Jackp. Just for some background, he is some info I posted on another user's page a month or two ago.

PS, I've created this page of evidence and poor editing, but i stopped collecting recently. [1]

--Merbabu 10:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Problems with Copyright information.

Can you advise me how to handle the following

User:Prince Godfather hs uploaded an image,[2] which has had its copyright info, including a 'reply' from the copyright owner, blatently copyied from this image [3] See the replies from both the companies. This is clearly a cut and paste. I have left a message on his talk page, which I expect will be ignored as he has not discussed such issues before. I am not sure whether to contact the company who publish the image to confirm copyright or to try to resolve this within wikipedia 1st.

He has also not corrected or responded to my requests to correct OTRS infomation on several other images Image:Rajini in spain.jpg, Image:252157716 887607f66c.jpg and Image:Vijaytamil.jpg, all of which link to the same OTRS ticket. GameKeeper 16:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can find out. --Yamla 17:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

This user was caught falsifying OTRS permissions and likely, email permissions as well. This user has been blocked indefinitely, along with his sockpuppet/meatpuppet, and the incident noted on the Admin Incident noticeboard. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. --Yamla 20:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I want to congratulate you on this catch. I wanted to bring this user to your attention. I have a suspicion that Anwar and Prince Godfather are connected somehow to each other. Anwar has a history of abusing wikipedia's copyright policy. Can you look into some of his uploads. Many of his uploaded images get deleted due to false copyright info or copyvios. Regards Aksi_great (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I have protected Godfather's talk page for abusing the unblock template and for making legal threats. [4]. I have also made a note on ANI about this. - Aksi_great (talk) 12:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think he is back, I have raised this Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Prince Godfather. I hope I followed the proceedure correctly GameKeeper 18:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Back again by the looks of it, this time as User:Maddy92. GameKeeper 00:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Legal threat

I dunno who the hell you are, but stop sending me nonsense messgaes. If you have any proof that i edited anything on wikipedia in my life then let me know. If not then i suggest you keep your opinios to yourself befroe i sue your ass for libel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.89.25 (talk • contribs)

Here is the proof of your contributions and this is the reason you are now blocked. --Yamla 15:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:24.236.237.88

You need to remove the unblock notice. Computerjoe 's talk 18:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

TY. Computerjoe 's talk 18:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ullal.jpg

Ok now I understand this a little better. Thank you for clearing this up. Unfortunately I was late in correcting this. I haven't been active in wikipedia recently. Tut74749 21:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha!

You can't block me because this is a public computer at a library :p 68.153.114.240 23:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I award Yamla this Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for showing a user named Miss.Awsome that she shouldn't mess with the Miley Cyrus article. Keep up the Awesome work...(get it "Awesome") Haha. §†SupaSoldier†§ 00:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

re: your vandalism notice

Yalma – I received a notice from you that my IP address vandalized the article on Kareena Kapoor on Feb 12, 2007. This is the first time I have ever added anything to Wikipedia, let alone vandalize anything (and I am pretty sure sure that I have never read that article). I looked through the history on Kareena Kapoor and see that it is my IP address listed. How is this possible? What can I do to prevent this from happening again? Thanks.

Hello there! I can help you with your question. Since you use an IP adress, your adress may be shared by many users, even if not at the same computer. To prevent being warned for another user's vandalism, creating an account is your best bet. If you would like further info on this, feel free to ask me here, and add comments on the bottom, just for future reference. Hope this helps! Ryan ^{Got something to say?} 20:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Yamla

Incase you are wondering, this is User:Prince Godfather talking to you under this account. So you are saying I can't redeem myself by creating another account and making sensible edits under that? I BEG of you, I have become incredibly depressed ove rthe last couple of days since my block - I have been upset and in a neglected mood as I had put atleast 7 months into it making 7500 edits along the way. It makes me weep to think I have to restart. Please if you unblock that, I WILL NEVER UPLOAD AN IMAGE EVER AGAIN. Thanking you. Weeping for an answer in the positive.

PS. Can you reply to this anon user account about your decision. Cheers 81.158.123.187 20:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You most certainly cannot create another account. What you can do is prove to the Wikipedia that you have no intention of violating our policies and stay away for at least twelve months. If you are able to refrain from any edits for a full year, the Arbitration Committee (?) will consider your request for reinstatement. In fact, if you promise to and succeed in staying away for twelve months, I'll even put in a good word for you at that point. Given your long history of abuse (lying about image permissions, a great many abusive sockpuppets), though, this is the best offer you are likely to get. You have caused a great deal of harm to the Wikipedia and you knew better. Let me restate. Under no circumstances are you permitted to create a new account or in any way continue editing the Wikipedia. --Yamla 20:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Christina Mowle

Not sure where else to leave this notice, may as well appear immediately after in my contribution log. I created an account, Christina Mowle (talk · contribs), per request on unblock-en-l. This is not a sockpuppet of mine and as soon as she changes the password, I will no longer have access to it. I do not know Ms. Mowle and have never met her. --Yamla 22:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Greets Yamla :)

We are not adding the link for pagerank, so rel=nofollow has no bearing on our idea that a detailed wiki on the person in the article would be of value to people who use wikis... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.191.184 (talk • contribs)

Nevertheless, the link is inappropriate. Please do not add it again. --Yamla 01:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

What would make it appropriate? Not being smart, just want to get educated :) - Lisa

Perhaps WP:SPAM and WP:EL will fulfill your desire for education. :) ^HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Bigsidfan (talk · contribs)

Ok this is not related to Verdict as an individual however the same thing is starting on another page and I could use your help to stem this new users behaviour before we get another Verdict on our hands. This user was created and then uploaded a tonne of fair use pictures to the article Sid Eudy aka professional wrestler Psycho Sid. That turned the article into this, which resembles a fan page more than a wikipedia article.

I reverted his edit and then he reverted it back stating "I made this page much better than it was before, and someone keeps changing it back to the crappy version with no update." even though his update was, substantially, nothing more than fair use images that are there for decoration. I reverted him again and left a note on his talk page here. However he has now replaced his talk page with his version of the article violating the fair use criteria as these images have no place in userspace as well as removing my warning.

I'm not sure how to proceed as I think the user, honestly, believes they are helping wikipedia however their version of helping is far removed from actually helping the encyclopedia and given the pattern of the excessive fair use images for aesthetics, all pretty much lacking copyright and some not used at all, I was hoping you could help me convince this guy to stop before it becomes a big issue. –– Lid^(Talk) 16:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll try. --Yamla 16:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

IP Block

Thank you for blocking anon-only the IP 198.163.219.19. Now I can edit something that I see is wrong, without having to wait 5 hours, and forgetting. Tyman 101 16:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Verdict

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Verdict has a few socks of Martin181 categories. Since Martin181 is a sock of Verdict, would it be okay to recategorise the socks and suspected socks of Martin181 as socks and suspected socks of Verdict? It may be confusing to others who the sockpuppeteer and sockpuppets are otherwise. I started to do this, but then found that there was more than just one category that would need attention. Wodup 03:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this would be perfectly fine. I've been meaning to do it myself but I haven't had the time yet. Please feel free to do this yourself or once I get some spare time, I'll do it. We initially didn't settle on which was the sockpuppeteer account and so various admins blocked the accounts as sockpuppets of one or the other. --Yamla 03:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. User:Verdict was created 14:25, 27 September 2006 and User:Martin181 was created 18:21, 4 January 2007. I'll start merging Martin181 socks into Verdict socks. Wodup 03:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I've done everything except the following (the pages are protected):

change the puppet tags and categories on User talk:Coolioj and User talk:Mandalore11 from socks of Martin181 to socks of Verdict
change the CAT to Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Verdict
delete the then empty CAT Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Martin181).

If you could do these last few things, I'd be very appreciative. Thanks. Wodup 09:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I,m Sorry

Really please forgive me!qwertyukiller 19:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwertyu868 (talk • contribs)

You will be forgiven if you stop using Wikipedia for a chat forum (see WP:NOT) and start making productive contributions to articles. --Yamla 19:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanxs

Hi Yamla, just wanted to thank you for your efforts in removing the Verdict socks. I havent been on wikipedia much over the last week and it was nice to see you and other pro wrestling project wikipedian's like User:Lid working round the clock to find and remove him. I also hear he's is sending personal emails to you like he did me (very annoying isnt it). Anyway just wanted to thank you again for all the admin work and your persistance in helping stop this threat. --- Paulley

duplicate

check this out Image:Liakhoff.JPG and Image:Liakhov.jpg --169.232.125.176 00:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Which one is the genuine one? --BorisFromStockdale 00:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing the second one but I really have no way to tell. --Yamla 02:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Time Yamla?

Hey Yamla can you atleast tell me how long it may take for use to have settle´d this dispute, so i can take some time from the computer, and before you also take some time away? Do you think we will have settled this before that? An answer would be appreciated on this. Bigteenagemonster.

Thanks!

Appreciate the Barnstar man. Thought you were ignoring me about that Naked Brothers Band image. But you've always made a good judgment as an editor. QuasyBoy 11:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

No, not ignoring you at all, just overloaded. :) --Yamla 17:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

You definitely are dude. ;) QuasyBoy 12:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:199.71.136.69

Maybe you could just sprotect that talk page instead of vprotecting it, so that when the block expires, he/she can be warned again. Thanks. Part Deux 18:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Note that the protection is set to expire around the same time as the IP's block. --Yamla 18:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you take a look at this?

There's a lot of parroting of the first fair use criterion going on at Image:Riya Book.png. I don't mind the image getting deleted (it's not my picture anyways, hahaha), but can that happen for a sincere reason? Or may be it is I who doesn't understand the first fair use criterion all that well. Since I have learned so much about image use from you and in the past you took an interest in the article, could I ask you to shed some lights on the image talk page? Cheers. Aditya Kabir 04:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added some material to the article Riya Sen. Would you, please, check if that's alright? Aditya Kabir 17:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yet another User:Verdict Sock

Would you mind taking a look at User:Shawnrocks? His contribs seem highly familiar. -- bulletproof ^3:16 20:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. It's Bad Boy133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) this time. -- oakster TALK 10:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

My vandalism notice

Hello, Yamla. I just received a vandalism notice from you saying that my edit to Corbin Bleu is removed. This is my first vandalism notice, by the way. Can you help me learn about this? It wasn't my intention to vandalize the section, it's just that I saw that the website was missing the www. and I refered the site back to the note. Thank you.Calebaldwinjun9 05:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Who are you??

Who are you? Why did u leave a message?

Regards, Maddy92

Babels

Hi Yamla! Where can I find the babels? MM 19:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Your recent block of RaptorRobot

Hello. You recently blocked RaptorRobot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and they have asked to be unblocked. Is there any evidence that you could point me to which indicates that this user is indeed a sock of JackP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? Thank you, Sandstein 20:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I have responded on User talk:RaptorRobot. It is my belief that this is definitely an abusive sockpuppet. If you read my comments and disagree, I would not consider it wheel-warring to unblock this user. I would be sure you are wrong, mind you, but I am happy to allow you to override me. --Yamla 23:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Your insults

I am going complain to the arbcom both about your removal of my link in C++ article, and your insults. As you know very well, Wikipedia:Vandalism is a delibrate attempt to compromise the integrity of wikipedia.

As for the link, it is about C++. It is more important than most of other external links. I know very well that you, probably together with some other admins, are now going to follow me, call my editions "vandalism" and/or "spam" becuase your friends asked you to do so, and use any opportunities to ban me from editing english wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Urod (talk • contribs) 04:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, your external links are often inappropriate for the Wikipedia. Nobody asked me to leave a warning on your page. Nobody had ever mentioned you to me. I saw your inappropriate link added to C++, saw that you had been warned repeatedly, and added a warning about your further violation. I would suggest that there is no conspiracy against you. --Yamla 14:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:02pic.jpg

What exactly does URL mean? And If I put the FU rationale for this image would it be okay to stay. QuasyBoy 13:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The URL in question is http://oh-hilary.com/. Chances are, this image appears in some sub-page. Anyway, with a detailed fair-use rationale, this image could stay provided it adheres to WP:FU. At the moment, though, the image does not seem to be used to provide critical commentary on the film so it is in violation of the image's license. In other words, it is just being used to illustrate the article which is not permitted. --Yamla 17:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I get what your saying. It doesn't really add much to the article anyway. If it was a movie poster it would have been a different story. So I put a {{db-author}} tag on it. Also I added the FU rationales for the other Hilary Duff images that you tagged. 13:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

My user

OK, Yamla. Please deactivate my user. MM 20:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

What exactly are you asking for here? Do you want your account blocked? Do you want your user page and user talk page deleted? Last time you asked for this, you started editing shortly thereafter and so I had to revert the deletions. Please tell me specifically what you would like me to do. --Yamla 20:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the userpage as a user-request but left the talk page alone. Unless the account is indefinitely blocked, so that the talk page can be undeleted upon the user's return, I agree that it should remain as is. auburnpilot talk 20:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

sigh of relief

Awesome! I'm so glad that somebody who has personally taken varied professional-quality photos of supermodels is finally stepping forward to license their work under the GFDL for Wikipedia. If these images are representative of the high-quality work of the contributing Wikipedia userbase, I can't imagine anybody uploading any of those "fair-use" images anymore. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 23:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Randy Orton image

That image you changed too is horrible and really poor quality. Do you have a better one to change too? Govvy 23:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

No I don't. However, we are not permitted to use fair-use images there which is why I made the change. --Yamla 23:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Whyed you take off the info I put on Randy Orton's page? If you need a reliable source, all you have to do is ask every person in the St.Louis Metro Area, and even what I put about him being a jerk in life is a little unfare(even though its true) whyed you take off the part about what highschool he graduated from? Jwrite

Please read WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:CITE. We require reliable citations, not just the opinion of people in a metro area. --Yamla 02:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Randy Orton

Hey, another question. I read an article, someone was interviewing Randy Orton and they asked him a lot of questions. And they asked him who was his best-friend in the WWE and he stated that it was John Cena. And again, I put that in his personal info. that Orton was in fact best-friends with Cena. And I put the internet source and again got DELETED. Another suggestion? Zerorules677

Well, it could be that the person considered it not particularly notable. Hard to say for sure in this case, though. I personally looked at that edit initially, checked the reference, and thought it was reasonable to stay. Now, if only everyone on the Wikipedia believed I was the ultimate authority on everything, we'd have none of these sorts of problems. ;-) --Yamla 02:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

John Cena question

Hey, I have a question. Since your an administrator and stuff. I've met John Cena and have asked him what's his favorite baseball team and he responded by saying "The Boston Red Sox". Now, I put that on his personal info. page and it got deleted, because some said I needed a "reliable resource". So, I find his bio. on another website and stated there that his favorite baseball team is in fact the Boston Red Sox. Then I checked and it was gone because some said that wasn't reliable. So, where does that stand at? Zerorules677 16:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Good question. The policies in play here are WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:CITE. The key points are that the information must be verifiable and reliable. So, when you ask Cena a question, that's not verifiable. There's no way for me to double-check this. I suppose I could ask him myself but he may have changed his mind, at which point there's no way for me to tell if you were lying or if Cena changed his mind. So, what about a bio on another website? Depends on whether or not this is reliable. If they cite this information and state that Cena said this in a specific interview in a specific magazine, say, then this would probably be reliable. If they just make the claim without saying where they got the information, though, then it's not reliable. Many biographies (and, interestingly, very many bios on imdb) contain false information. Check the policies I pointed you at above and let me know if you have any questions. --Yamla 23:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, what about a fan site? Cause their reliable. Right? Zerorules677

No, fansites are rarely reliable. --Yamla 23:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Steph mcmahon.jpg

Hey, again, I e-mailed Jen, the owner of the imahe of Steph_mcmahon, she said it's fine to use the image. As long as its used fairly. So, does that count? Zerorules677

So long as it is fine to use outside of the Wikipedia, so long as it may be used commercially, and so long as people are free to modify the image. Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission covers this in detail and explains how to forward your permission email to the appropriate people. If you are doing so, please make a note on the image page because it can take the permissions list a while to respond. --Yamla 23:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try to copy the verification of the e-mail. Zerorules677