User talk:Crzrussian/Archive 35

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, P.C.

So I deleted it and was about the do the same to the talk page... but there's an interesting link on the talk page that might bring the article into the realm of WP:CORP. It at least is debatable, so I'd rather let the AfD run for now. I've undeleted the article. Gwernol 16:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The Rambam was a "Muslim" for a while?

Hi Crz: Ever heard of this? See List of Muslim converts#Religious figures: "Maimonides - Jewish philosopher, theologian, and physician forced to convert to Islam under pain of death during the Cordoba massacre of 1148. Reverted to Judaism when his life was no longer under threat.<ref>Lewis (1984), p. 100</ref>" I don't see which book by "Lewis" is even cited here, and does "Lewis" even say that? (I assume this refers to the Arabist Bernard Lewis.) I had once heard that the Rambam did issue a heter for this kind of procedure (it must be written somewhere) but I had never heard that it had also happened to himself personally. I read an article in the English Yated a couple of years ago that the Mashhadi Jews in Iran relied on such a ruling from the Rambam, and that it was controversial, yet acceptable according to Halachah. Can you help with verifying this, especially if it happened to the Rambam? Thanks. IZAK 17:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow..... No, I have never heard of this. - crz crztalk 17:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

From what I recall in the Yated article, the basic premise of the Rambam's ruling, as relied upon by the Mashhadis, was that in general, Islam is not avoda zorah and the type of threats that the Mashhadis were facing were from a particularly "pure" form of Islamists, so that they were not regarded as apostates (although some rabbinim did question this) and were allowed to continue with their lives as Jews once the threats against them passed away. IZAK 18:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Specialized Bicycle Components on deletion review

I have asked for a deletion review of Specialized Bicycle Components. Since you speedy-deleted this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Twinxor t 21:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Darrent Williams ESPN Promophoto.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Darrent Williams ESPN Promophoto.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 23:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Levin.jpg

Good questions on this. I believe there was dispute over a previous picture used for the subject, so I went and found this image on a promotional page for subject's show. From my reading of the Fair Use policies at the time, I thought this was appropriate. Not sure how or where one would get permission from subject/subject's producer(s) to use this, so I'd err on the side of caution and delete it to avoid any copyright violations. Thanks for pointing this out. Hope you had a wonderful holiday.NYCTommy 23:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

atlas Strategic

how does the page attempt to promote the band? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikqick (talk • contribs) 00:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

Atlas Strategic on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Atlas Strategic. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Mikqick 03:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Darrent Williams

Re: [1], ESPN wishes to make money too. The image I restored was of higher quality, larger size and the uploader followed the procedures to include fair use images in Wikipedia. Your image was small, low quality, had less "personality" (though that is a subjective measure) and you did not follow the rules to include fair use images in Wikipedia. The "animosity" in my edit summary is because you did not follow the rules, and thought (and still think) "your" image was/is better than this image. Please read the fair use policy, specifically where it says to provide a rationale for images. It's also on the text of the fair use copyright tag that you used on "your" image. I further find it confrontational and more proof my decision was correct by your action of coming to my talk page regarding this matter. Especially the phrasing you used in the second image. --MECU≈talk 01:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Guy Sykes

I think this SD tag was a mistake made by Lupins AV Tool as it detected an edit conflict. Thanks for correcting it, I will be on the look out for this bug again. I have placed an apology on the users talk page. Can you please remove the warning. Thanks Oliver202 02:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, but it wasn't my fault that this error occured so why should I be warned for a bug in a tool

Removing Maimonides from the list

See my responses at Talk:List of Muslim converts#Removing Maimonides from the list. Thanks, IZAK 04:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Biohacking

Yes, please undelete it. -Paras Chopra

Done. - crz crztalk 09:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 1	2 January 2007	About the Signpost

Effort to modify fair use policy aborted	Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer"	News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Hi CRZ! I realize your interaction with me has been entirely on the Judaism articles, but why not take a look at some of my other edits and then decide? Best, --Shirahadasha 09:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Because you are the primary admin on Judaism-related articles. --Chussid 11:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi CRZ, I appreciate your advice regarding my RfA. It seems to me that, given that my RfA has been visible this long and has attracted this much attention, I might as well let it fail a little longer and gain some additional feedback. Best, --Shirahadasha 01:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Welcome

Thanks a lot crz! Appreciate it, mate Gaillimh 17:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

School vandalism

Not an urgent matter but 209.195.165.6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) appears to me a school IP which appears nothing but vandalism. I seem to remember that there have been some changes and with the advent of {{anonblock}} or {{schoolblock}} it is possible to block those. I was wondering if there is a particular procedure, or if I could just go ahead and do it. Agathoclea 18:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Question about page creation, synonim links and disambiguation

Hi CRZ! I have a question regarding a page I would like to create from a subsection of the diode voice. Precisely, Step Recovery diode, Snap-off diode and SRD are the same electronic device: I would like to create the voice Step Recovery Diode and this is the easy part, and I would also like to redirect there from any Snap off diode link. Also, since there exists a disambiguation page for SRD, I would like to place there a SRD (diode) link, redirecting to Step Recovery Diode. As you may have understood from this confusing explanation, my question is about how to create global redirections in a smart way: can you help me? :) Daniele.tampieri 21:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC). P.S. I wish you a Happy New Year! :)

Thank you for your consideration

Thank you for the consideration you gave to my RfA. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. You were one of the oppose votes, and raised concerns. I am more than willing to discuss those concerns with you if you are interested. Please let me know. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 03:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for watching my talkpage while I was gone. JoshuaZ 04:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Shirahadasha

Ya might want to revise your "moral support" in some way, now that the RfA has more support than opposition, and is continuing to move in that direction. :-) Grandmasterka 05:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

W00t AfD/DRV

Sorry I got my hackles up so badly over that. I should have been more respectful of your comments. Pax? -- weirdoactor ^t|c 19:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

I would gladly accept your nomination for adminship. Let me know what I need to do to help you with the RFA. Thank you. · j e r s y k o talk · 19:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's posted at RFA. I appreciate your kind words in your nominating statement. · j e r s y k o talk · 20:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Haha, I beat you to support!! --teh tennisman 20:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration

But I feel sad and somewhat unfair... The blocking was a mistake, and the administrator who blocked me obviously have not read the block policy, which states bot should be blocked only at running and for up to 24 hours, but that admin blocked me 10 days after my last bot edit, and for a period of indefinite... Could you please reconsider you vote, thank you very much. Yao Ziyuan 22:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Funny Swastika

Hi Crz: Take a look at these templates:

• {{Hindu Links}} (top left)
• {{Hinduism small}} (bottom)
• {{HinduFestivals}} (top right)
• {{Hindu Deities and Texts}} (top right)
• {{User WikiProject Hindu mythology}} (left)

with Image:HinduSwastika.svg displayed prominently. Honestly, of all of Hinduism's symbols' did this one have to get "headline" billing on these templates? Alternatives are aplenty if one were to look around on articles listed on {{Hindu Deities and Texts}} where there are dozens of less offensive symbols that could be chosen for the same purpose. While the swastika may be ok with some Hindus, it should not be flashed around "in all innocence" because for the rest of the world that was caught up in World War II it was the symbol of literal EVIL, DEATH and DESTRUCTION emanating from the Nazis. It was Hitler's personal diabolical "symbol of choice" and for that reason it is VERY far from neutral, no matter in what context it is used. It violates Wikipedia:Civility to have it displayed in such an "in your face" fashion on these Hindu templates, giving it a dubious "place of pride" it does not deserve. Need one say more? IZAK 22:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Central discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism, by the way. --tjstrf talk 01:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I am ignoring the above wholesale, if anyone cares. - crz crztalk 01:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I care as I am sure many of your friends do. IZAK 02:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I care too, mostly because I wish I'd had the good sense to follow your example... Tomer^talk 11:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, re: Hindu swastika

• Hi just a note to let you know: NOTE: Talk about this is now centralized at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism#Use of Swastika. Thanks. IZAK 02:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I did nothing more than offer some protection to what I thought was a very well done entry for an urban legend that has been circulating around the web for a couple of years now (Notre Dame Cookies)

Delete was unwarranted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FootballManiac (talk • contribs) 02:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Mentoring-type questions

I have a couple of questions I hope you can answer. I spend a lot of time cleaning up articles in the Computing category tree and am getting pretty good at knowing which articles to label for speedy delete (very rarely not deleted), which to AfD, spotting and handling copyvio and prodding articles. My most recent db-spam (Solidcore) you deleted as "a7". Is there a more appropriate label other than db-spam that could have been used in this case? (I chose db-spam because the users name, "Changr1", was related directly to the product in some way, it was a SPA and the article was a repost.) I want to make sure I do the labeling in a way that makes the deleting admin's job as easy and straight forward as possible.

My second question has to do with removing link spam. I tend to get a lot of grief for doing that, almost always from an editor who is commercially affiliated with the link. If you have a moment, could you skim through my talk page and tell me if I am on the right track with my actions and responses or if I need to alter my way of doing things. Thanks for any advice you might have. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 04:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Taking liberties with speedy deletion

Anthony, in what way was this appropriate? Under which CSD criterion would you have deleted it? Even if A7 were applicable to books, does it not assert plenty of notability on its very cover? If I had seen this at the time of your RfA, I would not have supported. - crz crztalk 14:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• I would not have deleted it. Since I do not yet have power to delete, I felt it safe to mark it and let someone else decide. There are so many routine novels. Anthony Appleyard 15:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I Dont Bite

Sorry Mate ..Iam just trying to stop Wikipedia from becoming Another Opencycle OR Worse Encyclopediadramatica(Cant Provide the link its Spammed).These Sites are Trying to imitate Wikipedia in a bad way and so its safer to delete articles which might in the future become a real Problem--Cometstyles 18:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Rabbilau.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rabbilau.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 19:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:WelcomeBotResearch

Please can we insert this category into the {{welcome}} template so as to assist with our very imptnt research into new user trends. The main aim right now is to work out the total number of welcomes dispatched against the total of new users. Please see the talk page for more details. frummer 20:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:TJATTBDWBSI

I imagine I ought to draw your attention to this new policy; as I explain here, your original {{bite}} appears to support the policy's proposition...  :) Joe 21:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muslim Jew

Shavua` tov, crz... I'm curious to know whether or not you've read my comments on this AfD? Tomer^talk 03:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

You'll notice, I haven't !voted on the AfD...I just think your proposed renaming is a rather poor choice. Tomer^talk 19:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Crap. Thanks. Tomer^talk 19:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It's been so long since I've closed an AfD...I couldn't remember the template for the talkpage, but I made do w/o it.  :-\ Tomer^talk 19:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Meh. You missed one.  :-) Tomer^talk 19:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Beaver Damage

Thanks for the tip. Interestingly, WP:HOAX says that hoaxes can't be speedied, but WP:CSD says obviously ridiculous hoaxes can be. I think I'll clarify HOAX.--Kubigula (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Crzrussian

You are a sad little person, and I hope you develop a social life soon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.135.229.143 (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Also, I hope you enjoy your teeny, tiny ounce of power over the lives and work of others. Congrats on that, sad little man.

You might wanna tell me what this is about so I could try and exercise my puny powers for the benefit of mankind. crz crztalk 16:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Judaism isn't anti-Semetism

These really aren't the same topic, see my unaddressed arguemnts here. I guess I will just continue working in user space for now and pick this back up tomorrow. By then it will be hard to insist this is fork. -- Kendrick7^talk 18:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean its not content forking per Wikipedia:Content forking. -- Kendrick7^talk 19:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)