User talk:Courtney Akins/Archive

Welcome, Courtney Akins!

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off
• Meet other new users
• Policies, guidelines, and rules (have fun, but watch out for these, as well!)
• How to edit a page and write a great article
• A handy tutorial, and a picture tutorial
• Writing well
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. Also, if you don't want to jump right into editing articles right now, why not check out the sandbox? Feel free to make test edits there.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or problems, leave me a message on my talk page, and I'll try my best to help. Otherwise, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We hope you stick around, and make sure you enjoy yourself! Cheers, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 03:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Meandf0001.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Meandf0001.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The image was deleted by another administrator under the guise of a copyright violation. My suggestion is to provide better evidence if you took the photo yourself, and perhaps crop other people out of the photo too. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Letting you know

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article throat gaggers, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:throat gaggers. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Duane 18:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Just stub-sorting

Looks like your article got marked for deletion. Woodshed 18:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Huh?

I'd say the article is, at best, borderline keep. I'm not going to AfD it myself, but I certainly understand someone wanting to. But that's another issue.

As far as its suitability for FAC, if you want to be taken seriously, I would suggest actually reading Wikipedia:What is a featured article? and withdrawing your nomination (at least for the sake of avoiding publicity likely to lead to AfD) until the page at least approaches the criteria. That may also mean a peer review first. Otherwise certain parties may suggest that your activity is actually trolling and/or sockpuppetry, particularly given the topic and the fact that your user name could be construed as an attempt to slander a third party. I'm not saying that myself, but I'm warning you that others might consider that, so a word to the wise...

In any case, good luck, have fun, and remember that it's not personal - all we're trying to do is write an encyclopedia as best as each of us believes we can within the site policies and guidelines. Girolamo Savonarola 02:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

No it wont be deleted. It IS notable, my boyfriends and I watch it all the time... I can guarantee that it will be kept. Thanks,Courtney Akins 02:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC) - That is what I am referring to with reposting. If that is how you plan to "keep" the article, then speedy deletion and possible vandalism charges are all that will happen. Please also keep in mind that all editors have watchlists to check on things like this. Girolamo Savonarola 02:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Throat Gaggers

This article is about a non-notable movie series and as a result will be deleted. Even though you don't appear to take Wikipedia seriously, the rest of the community are trying to build an encyclopedia here. Please stop using this as a venue for self-promotion and trolling. There are plenty of free web hosts that will provide you with space. Thanks, Gwernol 02:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Like I said on the AfD discussion, you'll need to provide sources that show its notability. Unless you do that, the article has no place on Wikipedia. Please read the notability criteria. "You and your boyfriend like to watch it", is not a demonstration of notability. Gwernol 02:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, reposting a deleted article is grounds for speedy deletion (ie, deletion by an admin without community review). Protracted reposting is considered vandalism, and may lead to blocking. Girolamo Savonarola 02:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Association with Throat Gaggers

Sorry for the mixup, when you mentioned that it was "your article" I took it as implication that you were involved with the series, comment has been edited. Canadian-Bacon ^(contribs) 02:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The "bad faith" nomination was also under the assumption that you were affiliated with the series, and will be duley changed. Unfortunately Wikipedia doesn't cite how hot a series is as a reason for inclusion, but rather it's notability. If you really want the article to be kept, my best suggestion is to dig up outside references to the series, showing it's importance. Canadian-Bacon ^(contribs) 03:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

When people say they're looking for outside references they don't mean links to the DVD for sale. What they're looking for is facts about what you're talking about from a credible source. In this case your best luck would be trying to find a write-up about it in any of the sources mentioned by Wikipedia:Notability (pornographic actors) since they're the ones most likely to publish information on it(usually people look to major news source like CNN, the BBC, FoxNews, etc... but they don't tend to write much about pornography, so any of the sources on that page would be ok). If there anything else you're not sure of I'll be glad to try and help you.Canadian-Bacon ^(contribs) 03:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the history of your user page it hasn't been changed, meaning that the picture itself has been deleted from wikipedia. If it was a personal picture(I never saw it while it was there) it was probably deleted as Wikipedia doesn't host personal photographs that are non-encyclopedia related. If that was the case, please don't re-upload it. Canadian-Bacon ^(contribs) 03:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually it was deleted as a copyright violation. See the message further up this talk page from OrphanBot about not tagging the image with a copyright status. Images that do not have a valid copyright tag may be deleted at any time. Gwernol 03:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Myself and a few others have self-pics on our userpages, some of whom are former arb com members. I'd mention Jimbo, but I suspect his image is used in article namespace as well. Is there a policy against this? BigNate37_(T) 20:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -- Selmo 23:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

From Zscout370's talk page

So I got your message. What do you want to talk about? Oh BTW that pic has never been on myspace. ick.!Courtney Akins

I want to talk to you about the photo and about other things.

First, the photo. The reason why I gave out those examples (myspace, other) is that this can shore up your claim of "I took this," since it is true that many Wikipedians have their own photos on here. My other suggestion with the photo is to "crop" out your friend, so we can show just you in the photo. This is mainly for privacy for the other girl, which could have been a reason why your photo was deleted. I tagged the photo in a way it will not be deleted now, but I want to hear you out.

Second, is your contributions to Wikipedia. Personally, I think you are a good person and can help Wikipedia in many areas. But I just think what happened is that your first edits as an editor was caught by other editors who think they do not want the information in. Trust me, it sucks, but it happens and I move on. What I want to suggest to you is find out what can you do to help Wikipedia and I will show you the way. Just work with me and thinkgs will be fine. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Remember, if you need anything at all, please let me know. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello Courtney. After your, uhm, unusual introduction on the Reference desk, i had a look at your contributions. You certainly have made a splash in your short time here. Anyway, i just wanted to warn you that you some editors may be offended at your comments here. Its generally a good idea to err on the side of politness when discussing another editors contributions - even if you think they are nonsense - otherwise you risk being violating WP:CIVIL. I note that others haven't always been particularly welcoming to you, let me apologise on their behalf. I hope you continue to be bold in your contributions here, but i would also recommend having a read of our policies and guidlines. WP:5P is a good placed to start. Happy editing! Rockpocket 06:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome

I have been around some time but I edit infrequently. Nevertheless, welcome and nice pix you have posted. sumal 17:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fairlawn, Florida

Hi, User:Dalbury has unearthed new information. Cheers,  :) Dlohcierekim 14:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering, miss

At the vote for the deletion of the category "Rouge admins", you mentioned that it was pointless and unencyclopedic and should be deleted. I was wondering, then, how you feel about that picture of yourself on your userpage, because I'm not sure if scantly-clad self-pics qualify as "encyclopedic:, or pictures at all for that matter. In the interests of keeping Wikipedia "encyclopedic", don't you think it would be best to remove it? I'm not going to do anything about it myself, but I thought that this might be a good oppourtunity to inspire some thinking. Perhaps in the future you will examine yourself more before judging others.--70.240.15.231 04:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Users are allow to post pictures of themselves on their userpage, and since the photo is licensed appropriately, it can stay. Plus, as others will mention with harsher terms, Wikipedia does not censor itself due to minors or other people, such as parents, Christians or other groups. While users have generally more freedom with their userpages than with articles, there is nothing offensive about what this user has done to their userpage. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't say that there necessarily was. I personally am a universalist, and believe that right and wrong are subjective. The point I am trying to make is that, seeing she finds a "Rouge admins" category "uncyclopedic", "stupid" and "elitist", I don't understand how she doesn't seem to think anything of creating a vanity-oriented userpage.--70.240.15.231 05:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I do admit that what this user has done in the begining has caused a few people to think about her in a negative way; that is where I come in. I have a gut feeling that with a person helping her with her edits, some mentoring and some time, she can become a very great user. Just give me some time. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia Becoming Myspace?

Note: I wanted to post here, instead of cluttering the admin noticeboard. Yes, I do feel that a lot of people who begin to join us now, though they know of us since they probably used Wikipedia one times a-many for their research papers, they think it's "neat" to be on WP and begin to use it for networking. Did networking happen way before this recent issue of the underage users; certainly. That is why we have many user categories and the "babel boxes;" users can find each other if they needed things done like translations or image sourcing or grammar help. But now, I think some network more than write, and that is causing a lot of concerns for us. While the underage users do not bother me as much as the others, but I would not be surprised if there are cases where I might be called in the future to prevent "illegal hookups" that you hear a lot happening on MySpace. However, I just hope that with some mentoring, we could turn most of these "myspace users" into good editors, or just hope that MySpace doesn't lose most of their servers and get DOS messages every 10 minutes. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Some administrators and other users have a problem with young users in general for reasons out of either fear or safety. Given how a good portion of admins have children or younger brothers or sisters, they probably have a higher awareness than I do (as a single, male, Wikipedian with no children running around). Some have been concerned about the actions the young users are doing, such as hooking-up with older people or talking about sexual subjects. Given how we cannot verify a user's age, we could be watching a crime in progress. This second concern bothers me the most, since this is the same kind of issues that got MySpace into a lot of trouble and caused a complete overhaul of that website. Here, given how much attention we got in the last year, could cause similar issues and perhaps more overhauls to WP. While I would not mind answering questions to the police if this does happen, but just the thought of doing that not only worries me, but I am worried about how WP will look after it. Plus, on a personal note, I am known at my college for being the Wikipedia-admin, and I feel kinda ashamed when I see people "Hey, look at what is going on at Lolicon!" or "Watch out for them pedos!" I got that a lot when I was in the Scouts, and I do not want this merry-go-round again. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That slut smell

I'm sorry, but I feel that one was a little less than encyclopedic. Here's why: "Is the sexually arousing scent a woman sometimes..." What is? You don't want to start a sentence with "Is." Secondly, sexually arousing to whom? "comprises a bit of sweat, smoke, and cheap perfume." Citation? "Is is alternately known as the "Stripper Smell."" Citation? Thanks, CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Caesar and Courtney, I did a quick Google search and most of the links I get are NSFW, from MySpace or from our friends at the Urban Dictionary. Courtney, what you added is what we consider a "neoglism" or a word that only has a small following among a group of friends or a sub-section of culture. Generally, we do not add the words at all, unless they become really popular, like woot, owned, pk or tk. Also, the websites I have mentioned should not be used as sources, since most of those websites are like Wikipedia: you can always add or remove from it depends on a users liking. So Courtney, please keep in mind this and try not to add it again. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ahahaha, Zscout. Anyway, stripper smell/toliet de prostitute, I don't think is a neoglism. — [Mac Davis] (talk)

I know many people used the phrase before "she/he smells like sex" but with the way Courtney formatted it, it sounded like it was a neoglism. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi

You seem like an interesting addition to the mix we have here on Wikipedia, so welcome! I'm glad you're interested in Wikipedia, and as aforementioned, we encourage you to be serious about it. There is a Three revert rule to prevent Edit wars, and it is just plain immature and stupid to keep changing an article to how you want it, while the other person keeps modifying it to their desire. Don't get caught in it. — [Mac Davis] (talk)

"Drop a Deuce in your Can, Brah?" (radio prank)

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article "Drop a Deuce in your Can, Brah?" (radio prank), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:"Drop a Deuce in your Can, Brah?" (radio prank). If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Scientizzle 01:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

My other suggestion is to perhaps turn that above article into a redirect to the article of the station WOCL. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hiya, just saw this article. If reliable sources can be found for this, a merge of the content into the WOCL article and then a redirect there would be fitting. If the WOCL article doesn't mention the phenomenon (and it only should if sources are found), I don't think a redirect is appropriate. Ultimately it would be nice to have a source or two for this, because I think the information would help expand the WOCL article from the stub that it is. BigNate37_(T) 20:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Policy_Change_Proposal

IMHO, this is a very, very, very bad idea. Personally, I kinda wish for you to perhaps just focusing on editing Wikipedia more than focusing on policy issues mainly because not only you are still pretty new to the project itself, but there is a whole host of issues that have been taken care of before you showed up and also a lot of stuff we just do without a written policy backing us up. So, please, just drop this idea and try to move on and edit whatever you wish to edit. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Courtney, that is your decision about the photos, but just make sure you read Wikipedia:Uploading_images. This is one area where I am pretty good at. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Indefinite block

Hello. Now let me get this straight. You propose a clearly absurd policy with laughably draconian penalties, which ostensibly, you yourself do not even come close to meeting, and now you offer (on the admin noticeboard, no less) to upload anal sex pictures of "yourself" (or so we are told). This looks highly suspicious (i.e. a provocation), so I've blocked you indefinitely for disruption. Thanks. El_C 04:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont know why I'm being blocked! Someone please help me!!Courtney Akins 04:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Use the {{unblock}} template to get someone's attention. --Golbez 05:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I am discussing the block with El C now via email. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Courtney, I hope you are vindicated, this seems rediculous. I think a warning would have served better than a block. HighInBC 15:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Courtney, you should also include a reason you want to be unblocked. You can do this by modifying your {{unblock}} request to something like {{unblock|Reason to unblock goes here}}. Good luck, Gwernol 16:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your Support

Thanks all you guys for your support I'm currently reading about on the "Incidents" Noticeboard! It really makes me feel better -- ya know, for a (small) while there I actually thought I did something wrong. haha. Well, let's keep up the good work and enjoy our weekends too! Courtney Akins 16:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Courtney, I have offered [1] to lift the block and monitor your actions going forward. Would you be willing to be mentored by another user such as myself? Some of the things you've contributed might be considered by some to be less than positive and it might be good to avoid those.. ++Lar: t/c 17:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

To "lar": Ok hey I just got home. That sounds like fun! Tell me about yourself... and you Zscout too!  :)Courtney Akins 22:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Everything you need to know about me wikipedia wise can be found here: Lar (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) and here: User:Lar. My email link works if you ever need to contact me offwiki. I have not yet received consensus among other admins to lift this block, and I should warn you that you will be under some scrutiny, there are many that think your contributions are mostly trolling. But if you sincerely want to contribute in areas of interest there are lots of folk who will answer your questions. ++Lar: t/c 23:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

• • As with Lar, everything about me is on my userpage, which I think you read a few times. Also, my email works, so if you need email contact, press "Email this user" at User:Zscout370 and you can email me. I am not going to lift your block just yet, but with the promise from you below, the hope of you being unblocked has grown. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 00:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Please understand that most of the support you recieved was due to the lack of warning you were given before the ban. Looking through your contribution history it is clear to me that unless you begin to comply with the policies and guidelines of the wiki that such support will dwindle(specifically WP:POINT). If you need any help or advice please feel free to ask me on my talk page. HighInBC 18:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

New Comment: Ok I see that "El C" has stated that he does not oppose my unblock if you should wish to. So that handles that objection, so yes, I am interested, you sound cool :). furthermore, to sweeten the pot, I hereby promise, after I'm unblocked, to not upload those anal sex pictures we talked about if you promise to unblock me.Courtney Akins 00:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable so far. The anal sex photos are probably the most important thing we were worrying about thus far. That, and you have been a tad disruptive in the past. As long as your willing to comply to every policy and guideline, you could be unblocked soon.. Another major concern is your using of Wikipedia as Myspace. This isn't Myspace and it will never be Myspace, thus you shouldn't be treating it like so. El_C, the admin who blocked you may have some doubts as to why he should unblock you, so I suggest "shaping up" for the better. Regards — The Future 01:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked

I have unblocked you. As the responsible admin, I'm going to be watching carefully. If I see signs that you're trolling or being disruptive, I won't hesitate to block you again.

My advice here is

• Edit carefully. Make positive contributions to articles you're interested in, and don't revert, instead if you think you're not being clear, take it to the talk page and discuss reasonably.
• Avoid making policy suggestions till you build up a body of good solid article contributions. They'll carry more weight that way anyway.
• As for images... I think my view differs from some others. I have no problem with images, if they are clearly useful to illustrating an article, no matter how risky or outre they might be. The problem iwht images rather is proving that you have the right to be uploading them. There are many unfree images out there that people claim they took. It's a problem, and it's worse for images that are "racy" if you see what I mean. What was suggested to publicgirluk is not totally unreasonable, prove it's you by a pic of yoruself holding up a sign saying "I am user Courtney Akins" and then it's difficult for anyone to see how there would be a problem about the images coming from you. Not saying you have to do that, it's up to you, but images that we can't establish clear rights to are just too risky for us to have here, there are people that don't like WP and want to see it fail.

Hope that helps and happy editing. My email and my talk page are open to you any time if you have questions. Again, make productive non controversial edits and you'll be fine. Seek controversy, and you won't be, there will be people clamoring for you to be blocked again and I won't stand in their way. ++Lar: t/c 01:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

PS if you have questions please do ask first. I'm often on IRC, you can find the contact info on my user page, or you can email me or leave me talk messages if you have any concerns or want advice. Good luck. ++Lar: t/c 01:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I am also on IRC, so pretty much, there will be someone you can reach at almost every time you need. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...

Thanks guys I just came home from the club -- but I'm still blocked... Even though it says I'm unblocked I still am blocked somehow. Can you please look into this?Courtney Akins 05:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I've just cleared a couple of autoblocks on you. Please try editing again.-gadfium 05:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Indef block

You narrowly escaped an indef block. You have a chance to make sound edits to show your good faith. Instead you choose to participate in the most sensitive area currently on wiki, where there has been a lot of upset.[2][3] Your comments can only serve to inflame the wound. This is an extremely bad move on your part. If you go near that debate again, wherever it's taking place, I will block you. I will let Lar deal with anything else. If you want to take proper advantage of the community's good faith, you have the opportunity to make sensible contributions to edits. If you feel people are ganging up on you,[4] it's because you're annoying people, as soon as you get the chance. It's your choice. Tyrenius 03:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Courtney, I concur with Tyrenius, If you do go near that debate any time soon I'll either block you myself or support his block. It's just not a good idea to plunge headlong back into controversy after coming off a block. Please heed the advice I gave you, make some constructive edits in relatively non controversial areas. A number of my fellow admins think I'm on a fools errand trying to mentor you, please help me prove them wrong by editing constructively. ++Lar: t/c 03:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sadly Courtney, I have to agree. I think you are way too inexperienced to get involved with policy level debates. Just relax, avoid those areas and just edit the encyclopedia. Of course, I can help you edit and all of that stuff, but just for now, avoid policy debates. This is where you got hurt before and I do not wish to see a cuite like you hurt again on here. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit reversion to Snowballing (sexual practice)

Your edit to Snowballing (sexual practice) [5] just got reverted by someone who was not able to substantiate it after searching part of the text. [6]

My advice: don't revert war over it. Instead, try to find the cite for it and provide it on the talk page. Or if it was a prank edit, just admit it on the talk and say you're sorry. ++Lar: t/c 22:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

If I may suggest, let's try to keep the discussion about suggestions for edits and other mentoring activities to one page. Perhaps this one, or whatever page you like but I see you replied on Zscout's page. It might work better here. I agree with the advice you got, if you can find the page number again, and a few words from the text to cite, that will strengthen the claim. People just like to see things cited if possible. ++Lar: t/c 04:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

So am I the only one on the whole of wikipedia that has read that novel and remembers that scene? What are people reading these days I ask you :)!!!Courtney Akins 04:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I haven't read it and I consider myself fairly well read. So don't worry about it, find the page nad the passage, and make a reference. If you put the text on the talk page (a few sentences quoted, and what page number and edition from the front) I'll help you turn it into a citation in the article. ++Lar: t/c 04:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

This link [7] may be of some help to you to find the ref if you don't have the book itself to hand, it lets you text search in the book. If you can remember a few words from the passage. It may or may not work as the search does not return all pages. ++Lar: t/c 05:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Admin support

Hi. I'd love to support you for admin, but at 132 edits (if I read your history correctly), you’re just a few edits shy of what it takes (about 2000 based on my observations). And you probably want to be around long enough to have witnessed a few edit wars and resolved a few NPOV disputes. If you don't make it, and I'd be extremely surprised if you did, don't give up. Put in a few more months, do well, and I'll be happy to round up others to co-nominate you for your next run. Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 04:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Blocks don't help the cause either, if your admin serious. Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 22:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for an hour

Courtney. You were counseled to focus on constructive edits to articlespace as a condition of your mentorship and lifting of your indefinite block. Your last 4 contributtions are not exactly in tune with that. I've blocked you for an hour to get your attention. Please, discuss these things with your mentors first before you do them. ++Lar: t/c 04:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok I'm sorry, I wanted to do a few edits here tonight after I got home from work (its raining) but couldn't think of any article edits, so i just let my philosophical side run free. I didn't know it would upset you hun. Anyway, I'm off to bed . . . did you see that I got a few support votes already though? But I understand...Cya.Courtney Akins 04:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not about me being upset. I am not upset, you're just another user, we have millions. It is that your mentoreeship is going to fail if you don't knock off the goofing around. You're not listening to our advice. Edit some articles. Find the reference you were asked for from the deSade book. But starting an RfA in your case is disruptive. If you don't see why, perhaps there is no help for it and the community will have no choice but to return you to indefinite block status. ++Lar: t/c 05:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh one last thing, I am NOT a "sockpuppet" of "Mostly rainy" or that "Jar Axle Artemis" guy. They seem to be pretty established users to me. Personally, I think if you let the voting run, I might be elected, it was 2 to 1 when it was called off, right?Courtney Akins 05:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

We know your not a sockpuppet, so whoever is saying that doesn't seem to know what is going on. As for the RFA, I am not putting it back up: it will only set you up for more failure and causing more issues than there has to be. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Forking off

Moved from WP:ANI

I have read many users complaints about the heavy handed way Mr. Wales runs this site. I was thinking about downloading the entire wikipedia, which is free under the GFDL and starting my own version of Wikipedia where users would have more rights and consensus is more respected. Do you know how much that would cost perhaps? Has anyone tried this yet?Courtney Akins 04:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Uhh...I am not sure how much that will cost, but from what I seen of the entire Wikipedia database dump, it will take a lot of computers to even store that data. So it will cost a lot to start up, then lots of dough to keep it going. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

On a side note, as her mentor, I have agreed with Lar's blocking of Courtney for one hour to get her attention. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there are many forks and mirrors of Wikipedia. We encourage them, so long as they adhere to our licensing terms. See WP:FORK for a list. There are also alternative Wiki-based encyclopedias, set up by people who want to operate under different policies from Wikipedia. One example is Wikinfo. There's also Uncyclopedia, which is a parody of Wikipedia.

I can't tell you what it will cost, because that depends on your bandwidth costs and how popular your site becomes. You can start off with a single computer, and expand as your popularity grows.-gadfium 04:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)