User:Wizardry Dragon/Userpage SubPageHeader
I don't like for outdated discussions to remain on my talk page; I absolutely hate clutter, and frankly, there is no real reason for a week-old discussion to still be sitting on my talk page. I believe old discussions make the page hard to read, both for me and for other users, and they make other users less likely to leave a message. In the spirit of clutter-free talk pages and uncensored archival, I present here all previous discussions, in the order they were removed from my talk page.
Note: Some discussions are archived on separate pages either:
- Because I archived them there before I created this archive, or
- Because they were too long for this archive.
Bam!
editHey thanks for the hammer and your kind words. They're much appreciated! Let me know if there's anything I can ever do to help. Cheers! --AbsolutDan (talk) 01:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Don't worry - if I ever need you to swing that hammer at something, I'll let ya know! :) And you don't have to thank me - you deserve it. -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 01:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
re: warning
editthat was not a test, that was for real. Daniel happens to be a real person and all this has happened in his eventful life. Please dont delete this article as others may want to refer and view it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Cooksta05 (talk • contribs)
- See WP:NOT. If you consider to add such nonsense you may be blocked. -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 16:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
user:216.11.79.23 needs an indef block
editHe has vandalised again. I am sick of him, he has worn my patience down. Suicidal tendancies 19:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Should be blocked now. -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
popular prints
editwhy did you do it anyway? as Wiki keeps logging me off without me noticing, I have a fair number of edits under my number (which has a user page also). Plse do know as I don't know how to & am still working on the article Johnbod 19:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC) aka 82whatever
Please see WP:MOS, WP:N, WP:V and WP:VANDAL. -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
yes but who is the vandal here? Johnbod 19:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- See also WP:NPA. If you continue to harass me on my user talk page, you may be blocked. -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
harass??!!! Johnbod 20:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
popular prints
editRemove your Revert now please!! Johnbod 19:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). -- ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi. You recently uploaded Image:Antispamhammer.jpg. You tagged it as "public domain". You obtained the image from http://www.sxc.hu/photo/604247. The license given for the image on that website clearly states:
- SELLING AND REDISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGE (INDIVIDUALLY OR ALONG WITH OTHER IMAGES) IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN! DO NOT SHARE THE IMAGE WITH OTHERS!
Uploading the image to Wikipedia and tagging it as public domain is a blatant violation of the terms of that license. You will need to change the license tag and assert that permission to use the image has been granted, or request its removal, otherwise it will be listed for deletion. Thank you – Gurch 22:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know where you're seeing that on the image page. Specifically, it is stated Usage Royalty free, no restrictions. In any event, what it means is commercial use is forbidden. I merely chose the license that seemed the closest. Since the usage is royalty free with no restrictions, and SXC.hu is NOT the only stock site that user posted the image on, I did not see it neccesary to contact the author. I will do so, if you wish. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 23:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Look immediately below the image. There's a line that reads:
- Photo #604247 | Add to favourites | View image license
- Click the "View image license" link. Thanks – Gurch 04:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: Articles for Deletion
editSuperfluous? Please try to assume good faith. I genuinely believe that those articles should be deleted. Puerto De La Cruz
Please stop disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. If you continue, you may be blocked. Thank you. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:14, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- WP:POINT requires that someone have a point to make. The fact of the matter is that each of these articles went through VfD at a time when our inclusion standards were more relaxed than they are at present. I feel that they thus merit further discussion, and have listed them at AfD accordingly. I do not understand why you are making these accusations. There are literally hundreds of such articles which I feel should be discussed likewise, but have nominated only eleven of them for deletion. Please read my nominations for each article to obtain further insight into my reasoning. Please stop accusing me of harboring motives which do not exist. I am performing cleanup, not the deliberate disruption which you are accusing me of. Puerto De La Cruz 19:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- 10+ AfDs is hardly legitimate cleanup. It's disruption, spam, or an axe to grind, and I choose to believe disruption. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Again, please try to assume good faith. As I said before, there are literally hundreds of these, and doing a chunk at a time seemed to me to be the best way to work through them. Puerto De La Cruz 19:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe before quoting policies you should read them. Whilst reading WP:AGF, I also recommend WP:SNOW. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
spam
edit??????????? who keeps changing my com site —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:thedeadlest (talk • contribs)
- Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Please do not add material to Wikipedia that reads like an advertisment. See the Manual of Style. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 20:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with the POV check. I've decided to post an expanded version of the request on WP:PR as well (see Wikipedia:Peer review/Socialist Studies (1989)/archive1), as I'm still leery about releasing an article on a contentious issue without the review and input of several disinterested parties. Incidentally, based on your reading of the article, what's the impression you get of the Socialist Studies group? —Psychonaut 02:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Melancholia 1
editYou aqain! Don't you ever read stuff before you revert!
Your humble & obediant servant Johnbod 18:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you followed the Wikipedia guidelines before posting, you wouldn't have to worry about reversion. I don't know what you're talking about though, since I haven't had an edit in the article namespace for a few days now. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (My Contributions) (Page Moves) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 18:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Apologies, it was your equally over-enthusiatic colleague the Ranger. I misread the talk page & picked up your name from the previous message. I thought it was just you, but obviously there is a more widespread problem with the anti-Vandalism unit than I thought.
Sadly, your first statement is clearly not true Johnbod 19:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Johnbod - you have not been following the Wikipedia guidelines. Please read WP:N and WP:V before editing the article namespace again. Thank you. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (My Contributions) (Page Moves) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 19:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Your colleague has now apologised in a courteous fashion, which is of course fine, so I'm afraid I'll have to ask you to explain what you mean, Johnbod 02:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Happily. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If you want your content to be included, it must be encyclopedic, following rules of verifiability and notability. If something you add does not follow these fundamental rules, it will be removed. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (My Contributions) (Page Moves) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 16:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Walt Disney
editI have never touched Walt Disney's page. Just wanted to let you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrosney (talk • contribs) 18:33, 13 November 2006
- Someone from your IP range has and it (wrongfully) got attributed to you. This is a known issue with AOL if that's your ISP. Otherwise I don't know. You can feel free to blank the warning off your talk page but leave a clear edit summary so people don't take it as vandalism. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (My Contributions) (Page Moves) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 18:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry
editSorry about the edit. I meant no vandalism. I was just trying to make it a bit neater. -- Visual planet 12:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I didn't think it was a bad faith edit, just that it wasn't acceptable. That whole AfD really needs a good blam if you ask me. ✎ Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (My Contributions) (Page Moves) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 18:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)