User talk:Yamla/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Hello World in C++

Wow, what a turn of events over the last 7 months. Does the current Hello World source code look familiar to you? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=C%2B%2B&oldid=126469503. I was harassed, insulted, and even banned for trying to improve the quality of the C++ article with this exact code 7 months ago, and now that it is finally accepted as the standard, where is the apology? Where is the citation? It's nice to see that the world is now better informed, but it's disappointing that Wikipedia's mantra that everybody can contribute is a sham, as clearly the only thing that matters when it comes to making a change is who has higher status in the community. I think an apology is in order. -Norvig —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.95.70 (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Please take another look, we cite Stroustrup. --Yamla 21:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Suspected user

User:Bongobaily's edits remind me of Daddy Kindsoul/Soprani's. What's your opinion on it? --Angelo 17:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeap, thanks. --Yamla 20:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I suspect also of User:ItchynotScratchy, but I am unsure. --Angelo 14:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. --Yamla 20:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you...

Possibly have a look at this. It seems like two users are seriously against professional wrestling and seemingly are wanting to delist Montreal Screwjob from FA status. Could you give me your opinion at the link, as it seems like there is some pretty serious violations of policy possibly here. Thanks! Davnel03 16:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Nelly Furtado

Could you please block 89.180.4.18 for labeling me as Xenophobic in this post on my discussion page. This user's comments were in response to this post of mine on his/her discussion page (in regards to the entire Nelly Furtado citizenship/nationality issue again). Thanks. --Jester7777 19:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked. --Yamla 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Someone you know?

[1] No idea who this is, but a sock of someone who doesn't like you I can assume? Dina 20:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeap, it's Daddy Kindsoul (talk · contribs), a banned vandal and long-term abusive sockpuppeteer. --Yamla 20:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

KingPuppy

What's up with this KP case? — Rlevse • Talk • 21:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure and the edit I ended up reverting was not the edit that was displayed when I hit the revert button. My browser died immediately after, though, so who knows what was going on. --Yamla 21:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

THis Show Again

why did you keep deleting that article? I really like the show, saw it, so tried to fix it, but it kept getting deleted as i repaired it. do you think you could please do something about it? THanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.205.36 (talk • contribs)

The text was a copyright violation. Additionally, there was no indication that the article met our criteria for notability, WP:NOTE. --Yamla 02:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Another mouseketeer to keep you eye on =

You might want to keep an eye on User:Msoldi. He uploaded Image:Headstrong_Deluxe.jpg, which I feel pretty strongly is a hoax (note that the Photoshopper couldn't even keep all the letters lined up in the word "special"). He hasn't answered me about the source of the image, so there isn't a way to tell if he is the hoaxer or just another hoaxed. I've already nominated the image for deletion, and cleaned up references to the "deluxe" edition of Headstrong.Kww 03:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You deleted it without closing the image deletion discussion.Kww 13:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

NWA World Heavyweight Championship

This is something i've never seen before; over the last month or so, there has been an on again/off again revert war between two IP's (while, 2 users. One of them has their IP being changed a little bit each time). This seems a little silly, so what do you recommend? TJ Spyke 06:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Daddy Kindsoul

You may wish to be aware that another sock has appeared and is attempting to re-write his own LTA page Mayalld 14:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Yamla 15:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting WP:TW bug that - adding multiple Sockpupeteer tags as more reports were made Mayalld 15:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: Adminship

Unfortunately a few weeks or so ago I let myself get dragged into an edit war at Kristal Marshall over whether or not she was actually released from WWE, and so subsequently on World Wrestling Entertainment roster as well where I violated WP:3RR and I am extremely ashamed and embarrassed by these actions. However, shortly after being reported the page was locked and I came up with a compromise all sides agreed upon. But again, I am extremely ashamed and embarrassed by what I did, so standing for adminship at this time I just don't think is in the cards. Perhaps in a few months (December/January?) But thank you very much for thinking of me as someone you could trust to hold the mop, I really appreciate and am honored by that. Bmg916^Speak 17:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Everyone makes mistakes. The key thing is to admit your mistake and move on. Anyway, give me a shout when you think you are ready. --Yamla 17:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks. Bmg916^Speak 17:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Bollywoodblog

I say scrap it. What do you say? Sarvagnya 22:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll add my comments. --Yamla 04:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

It just got resolved. I think. Sarvagnya 04:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

They just e-mailed me saying they're going to change their sitenotice. The problem is that we have no way of knowing whether they have created the images or whether they're copyvios. I see some images there that are quite likely created by them and some that are obvious copyvios or screencaps. I could rigorously monitor any new images to the category and delete the fluff as it comes in, but perhaps just getting rid of the lot and finding a better resource would be safer. ~ Riana ⁂ 04:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've left my comments on the link above. I agree wholeheartedly with Riana's statements above, it is an accurate description of the situation. --Yamla 04:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've counted quite a few screencaps and then there's plenty with watermarks. Watermarks imho look ugly and unencyclopedic. Also watermarks are advertisement. Riana's offer to police them rigorously is noble but can end up becoming a pain. For example, how would we know if those who uploaded the pics didnt put it under this category? I am sure there already exist such pics (ie., from bblog but not categorized as such). Sarvagnya 04:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Remove screenshots but do not delete images which are owned by that site. I dodn't waste weeks of time for nothing ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 13:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Right I've just speedied about 10 or so images which are questionable as they are either screenshots or promotional shots the remaining are legitimate. This site is owned by Caledonian publishing , a company worth $100 millions of dollars . They employ an agency of photogtaphers based in Mumbai which deal primarily with the Bollywood film industry. Excluding screenshots and obvious promo photos this agreement is valid ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 16:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I really honestly cannot tell the difference. The Preity Zinta image, to take just one example, could easily be a screenshot. Now, you say it is not and I believe you, my point is simply that I cannot tell the difference. Perhaps this means that I should just leave the bollywood blog images alone, but I am still concerned that they claim to own all the images used on the site when this is apparently false. If you and/or Riana will monitor all images from that site and if you are absolutely sure you can tell the difference, that would be okay by me. But it's a lot of additional work. --Yamla 16:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Some more updates. Please take a look. Thanks. Sarvagnya 04:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Just wondering then how you think they get images on their site within hours ours of an event. I have often seen images posted on there before anybody else and amazingly quickly after an event on a regular basis, and often notice they don't have one or two images of some events but often appear to have at least twenty of all different sorts of angles which if they were copywrighted images I very much doubt they would be able to get hold of them so quickly and indeed so many different images of the same event. Is it really so impossible that this site does employ photographers but they do use additional screenshots or promophotos for support? They stated they have offices in India including Mumbai.

RE:Copyright problems with Image:Soul.PNG

I have no use for that image, and honestly I don't even remember why I uploaded it in the first place. Please go ahead and delete it. Sorry for any trouble.--jonrev 04:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

201.239.151.52

IP sockpuppet for Juanacho. Time to block an IP and extend a block on Juanacho, I think.Kww 14:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeap, done. --Yamla 15:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Page Move Vandal

I'm honestly not a huge fan when people come along and just move articles. A user has just moved The Great Khali to Dalip Singh Rana without consensus or discussion. Do you think you could move it back please? Thank you. Bmg916^Speak 17:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do. --Yamla 17:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Appreciate it. Bmg916^Speak 17:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The user is brand new, so I left them a welcome template and a note about WP:PW if pro wrestling interests them. I can't blame them for not understanding about page moves, it's just frustrating some times. Bmg916^Speak 17:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

That unblock request shows that he probably is still high! Nice advice ;) --Stephen 22:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha, but if someone is hallucinating, are they a good judge of when to seek medical advice?  ;-) --Yamla 22:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

Copied from user page

Please see User_talk:Mtralston. Lara❤Love 23:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

IPSOS block

It was sort of due, so I'm glad you took the decision turned down the unblock request. I'd been keeping a log of poor conduct for a while now but had left off posting it on a user RfC since I've been busy with other things. Here's some useful diffs and whatnot for you in case they're helpful:

• Meatpuppetry

[2] [3]

• WP:AGF

[4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

• Continually accusing other users during content disputes of being sockpuppets:

[11] [12] [13]

• WP:CIVIL

Yelling in edit summaries: [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]

Reverting edits by other users attempting to engage in dialogue with whom IPSOS disagrees (often labelled as 'trolling' or 'vandalism'): [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28]

Others: [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] - although user was blocked as sock, no need for this behaviour by IPSOS. [40]

Continually recruiting specific admin to tackle SSPs: risk that cases not being review objectively [41] [42] [43]

Coldmachine^Talk 23:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Tracy, ca

Is that article acceptable in Wikipedia? Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it appears to be nonsense. --Yamla 20:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That's what I thought. Thanks for the reply. Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Lizard Andrea

Just out of curiosity, was your action on the above user in response to my post on this issue or did you discover it yourself. I've been dealing with this for a few months now and although I might not have been so 'endgame' as you were, I'm glad you did what you did. τßōиЄ2001 21:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I discovered it myself. I saw that she had been warned and that her edits were apparently against consensus and not cited, and that she wasn't responding to criticism. --Yamla 22:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:SPvike.JPG

I don't think this user (White Tyson (talk · contribs)) has rights to distribute this image as the license states. I think it's a copyvio and they admittedly found it on a forum. It's a new user so I'm pretty sure it's just a misunderstanding. It might be Verdict (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), but part of me actually doubts it is. Bmg916^Speak 17:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

His only edits have been to Brock Lesnar... hmm... I believe there is a very good chance this could Verdict again. -- bulletproof ^3:16 18:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

There are some edits to Mike Tyson and Tommy Morrison though, Verdict never touched those articles. Bmg916^Speak 18:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

This image definitely has a false license. I don't think the user understands he doesn't have the right to distribute it. Bmg916^Speak 14:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've requested a checkuser. --Yamla 22:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser came back positive, I am reverting all contributions. ---- Yamla (talk) 22:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

White Tyson (talk · contribs)

Editing Brock Lesnar and only Brock Lesnar now with great frequency. I'm 75% sure this is at least a meatpuppet of Verdict (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Bmg916^Speak 14:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Nikisant159753 (talk · contribs)

Hey, I wondered, since you are an admin, can you delete this user:"Nikisant159753" for vandalism and for breaking wiki's policy on user names?

thanks

Cf38 17:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I warned user using {{vanity}}. --Yamla 17:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

thanks; but the way, I have a few ideas to help put the admins and make wiki better, do you know where I could suggest them, instead of going to wiki/wikipedia:contact_us?

thanks, -- Cf38 (talk) 20:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Cole Carson vandalisation 2 Jojo (singer) page?

Hey can u check this change. It looks like vandalisation. I think it is vandalisation. Perhaps RVP9090 is named Cole Carson? I tried to fix it but couldnt find the "this section isnt verified" template. Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.48.230 (talk) 00:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Contribs Userbox

Where do you get the Contribs Userboxes from Yamla? I know i've seen others with lower post counts around but i haven't been able to track down where they originate from. PookeyMaster 08:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I honestly don't remember.  :( The box I use allows you to enter any number, I believe. --Yamla 15:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hello Yamla! This is about Talk:Srija - What could one do for contesting the very existence of an article? I personally feel that the article should assume no importance and all that was about the article is - a young woman, who happens to be a movie star's daughter, elopes with with boyfriend. Can something be done regarding this? Regards, Mspraveen 08:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

See WP:AFD. --Yamla 15:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this but, do you think my reasoning is correct for wanting to get the article deleted? Regards, Mspraveen 15:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I'd vote to delete after reading the article. Note that I am not necessarily the best source on bollywood, mind you. --Yamla 15:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

what do i need to do ?

i uploaded an image from the movie om santi om showcasing the criteria for controversy ... how do i add its free use rationale ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatpepsi (talk • contribs)

See WP:FURG. Note that a film screenshot may only be used for providing critical commentary on the film. ---- Yamla (talk) 21:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

what do i write n article section ??? of the free image rationale ?

what do i write there for the film screen shot of om shanti om ?

See WP:FURG. ---- Yamla (talk) 21:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

rationale

i am saying that the image is being showcased to show the reason for controversy ... i am new here and trying to get good at this , can you tell me what to write so that i can learn and improve ?---- eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 21:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Brock Lesnar

I knew it was him, dammit. Anyway, if I may, do you think you could put back in my last edit? The one that clarifies he is a two time NJCAA All-American, and a two time NCAA All-American, as opposed to just saying a four time All-American, as this is a little misleading. Thanks. Bmg916^Speak 23:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Will do. --Yamla (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Bmg916^Speak 23:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Uh... what?

Noticed you left a warning on my page about "adding inappropriate external links". I don't believe I ever added a link to the Mike Tyson article... I reverted an edit that removed a link to a fan site that's been there for well over two years. No one has or had a problem with that link other than you. Anyway, I certainly didn't add it to the page. Here's an edit from 2005 that includes the link, just to prove my point: [44]

I've been editing Wikipedia for a couple of years now, and I really don't like being called a spammer. I can't imagine anyone else in my position would either. Take the time to look into things next time, thanks. -- ZoeF (talk) 00:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Fansites are generally considered inappropriate. See WP:EL and WP:SPAM. I'm sorry, however, for leaving a template warning on your talk page. --Yamla (talk) 23:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Note that if you believe the link is nevertheless appropriate regardless, I will not revert you if you reintroduce it. I will trust your judgment that this particular link is a major fansite which is specifically more relevent than any of the other fansites for Mike Tyson. --Yamla (talk) 00:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, surprisingly enough I bet :P, I'm going to leave it off. It appears that nearly all of the useful content that would have previously made this a relevant link under WP:EL, interviews mostly, now require a paid registration. There are some worthwhile articles that could possibly be used to source things, but nothing that makes me actively want to fight for this link at this point. It's the second link if you google Mike Tyson, which should be enough to indicate its notability, but if it doesn't add very much... Eh. ZoeF (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

om shanti om controversy

how about now ... i fixed the article in my own words ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatpepsi (talk • contribs)

No, sorry. The sentence structure is almost identical. You are clearly just making minor changes to the writeup from here. You need to rewrite it from the ground up. You may wish to note the link on the article's discussion page and have someone else write it up. ---- Yamla (talk) 21:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, i just restored the edit by User:Eatpepsi, as the section was well cited i never realised that it was a copyvio and by ur constatnt reverts i thought u r a vandal (now i realise that u ar an admin and have done what is right). Pls, in the edit summary be kind enough to state if a revert is a copyvio. Now the article is protected. Thanks. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 06:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

i am back now sir

well sir i forgot to mention i am a total noob here on wiki ... can u please guide as on what rationale i use in submitting the images i did for sighting the aplogy of SRK and the controversial scene in the movie ? cn u tell me what and how to write an appropriate rationale for it ?

thanks

Once again, this is all explained in great detail in WP:FURG. --Yamla (talk) 16:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

C++ Hello World

I reverted you, because what the anon IP had added was actually correct - the code had been incorrect for a while and he was fixing it. The "return 0;" is obviously needed. I had to look at it twice too - I couldn't believe "return 0;" had been missing, apparently for some time. :-) ATren (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken. See the citation. The return statement is not needed for the main function (only). --Yamla (talk) 23:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I did look at the citation, but I looked at the first version on that page, which contained the return, not the second, which didn't. Sorry about that. ATren (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Windows Vista

Hi, You have reverted my edit, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_Vista&diff=172502980&oldid=172495763 on article Windows Vista. Can u explain y? My edit was only a grammatical fix... Thanks Mugunth ^{(ping me!!!, contribs)} 16:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The grammatical fix was unnecessary, the version before was clearly better. The prior sentence talks about how the service pack targets back-end features, but then that sentence notes the contradiction, that the front-end experience was also significantly improved. --Yamla (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

why was my edit reverted?

why did you revert my edit on the NIN article?

to refer to Nine inch nails using a plural is correct, therefore using 'are' is correct, and 'is' is incorrect.Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

please undo your edit and revert to my original version, thanks.Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails is a band. The article itself states the following: "Nine Inch Nails (abbreviated as NIN) is an American industrial rock band." This seems to be singular to me. Am I mistaken? My understanding is that a band is singular and multiple bands are plural. --Yamla (talk) 17:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

It is a collective noun, which is different in British and American English, In British English a band is treated as plural, but in American English it is treated as singular...however when the name is plural ie. Nine Inch Nails/The Beatles then it is treated as plural in both American and British English. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences#Formal_and_notional_agreement Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I think it is most appropriate if you revert the correction. You certainly seem to know more about this than I do. Please accept my apology. If you would prefer that I undo my revert, let me know and I will be happy to do so. --Yamla (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I was maybe a little of an ass about it, I think I should not edit after drinking scotch, I've been teaching English all day, and I guess the English teacher in me is still at work, take careSennen goroshi (talk) 17:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

No harm done. By the way, would you recommend Eats, Shoots & Leaves? --Yamla (talk) 17:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

3RR report

I've just declined a 3RR report filed against you by A Pill. This may be a sockpuppet and you may be in a better position to determine whether it is, and if so, of whom. Sam Blacketer (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

(Windows) NT (File System)

"Windows NT" stands for New Technology (easily verified), and NTFS ditto. Are you making some obscure point that the two uses of New Technology within a single product are not necessarily related? Tedickey (talk) 16:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, as I mentioned, Bill Gates has explained that the NT in Windows NT no longer stands for "New Technology". See Windows NT. It's possible that NTFS no longer does but I have no reason to believe that. --Yamla (talk) 16:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

For your efforts

		The Special Barnstar
		Thanks for being one of the most active admins to handle unblock requests,—it is always appreciated. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Shared IP Warning

Is it appropriate to add a Shared IP Template like {SharedIPEDU|Organization} to pages I know are Shared IP's within my school. eg. when i log onto Wikipedia at School, i can check my IP and then post the message on the page for the IP using my Username. However, would it be a Conflict of Interests or just Inappropriate for me to do so? Thanks in Advance. PookeyMaster (talk) 09:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

That would be appropriate. We often will choose different blocks in the case of schools. Note that sometimes a single address can be shared amongst MULTIPLE schools, however. --Yamla (talk) 15:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) I just wasn't sure. I'll try to find out but i'm 98 % sure that they are shared across the entire state of NSW (Australia). PookeyMaster (talk) 10:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

TheWikiAuthority (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Actually, I kind of feel bad after telling him the so-called courteous comment I was trying to make, but after receiving his e-mail, I kind of feel bad, but I think he should get a second chance here while keeping the contribs, and I kind of feel bad for telling him off the comment of the UAA (I got warned already for that). So, please? Thank you, but, if something happens, yeaah. -Goodshoped 05:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Bipasha Basu

Hello Yamla!

As I saw, you are also reverting vandalism on Bipasha Basu's article. One user, User:Riaeagan keeps on adding fangush to the page, trivia section, unnecessary statements (ie "she was kissing one guy..."), controversies which seem to be rather gossip, and mostly unreliable sources (which caused to me many problems in the past). I've warned him thrice, but that's impossible. I ask for your intervention. Thanks, Shahid • ^Talk2me 07:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

If it happens again, let me know and I'll impose a block. You are right, we require reliable sources. --Yamla (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but that's not the reason. If the info was somehow notable, I would definitely try to find RS sources for that, but it's just non-notable and unencyclopedic for Wikipedia (ie she was found kissing someone...). Plus, trivia sections are not permitted and all his additions merely belong to some fansite, blog, tabloid or any sleazy magazine LOL... I'll let me know, thanks for the help! :) Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

All true. --Yamla (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

That's it. He reverted my edits again. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Already blocked. --Yamla (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Michelle Trachtenberg removal

Among the bits you pulled from the article was the statement "Trachtenberg can speak Russian fluently." saying it was uncited. Yet the interview in question has this exchange in it:

(RadioFree:) I understand you speak Russian?

(Michelle:) I'm pretty fluent, yeah.

So given that, why did you remove it? Tabercil (talk) 22:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You know, I think I need to change web browsers. Apparently, my 'find' feature simply does not work properly. Please feel free to revert that bit. --Yamla (talk) 22:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL... if it's IE you're using, small wonder.  :) Tabercil (talk) 23:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

And while I was at it, I also nailed down sources for two more items you pulled out, from Chloe Sevigny and Celebrity. Tabercil (talk) 23:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! And btw, I'm using Firefox and Konqueror. Mostly konqueror for Wikipedia business, though. The find command used to work just fine. --Yamla (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Edge

What do you make of the article's history IP edits? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What am I looking for? --Yamla (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

What are you talking about?. I seriously have no single idea what sort of copyright violation i made to this article Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific. When i checked in history of that page you said this is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Silent_Hunter_4:_Wolves_of_the_Pacific&diff=173175612&oldid=173172899T a violation]. I don't understand how that can be copy protected?. It is a common sentence to be used when a game expansion have been announced. Honestly, This copy protection is going over board. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about copy protection, I was talking about a copyright violation. The text you added was taken directly from here. We are not entitled to steal someone else's words. --Yamla (talk) 16:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

That was a mistake. I meant violation not protection. I did not relise i copied it from there. I wrote it by myself. Then tell me what should i write then?. So you are telling me not to copy from there so what should i write?. Iam not stealing anyone words. If you can do it better then add it instead of deleting it. --SkyWalker (talk) 20:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars from banned contributors?

I have to ask : You are displaying at the top of your User Page a barnstar awarded by a contributor who has been banned - along with his sock puppet - for abusive and disruptive behavior. Is this not a problem for you? -The Gnome (talk) 19:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't take barnstars all that seriously. I really need to move more of them over to my award page and just haven't been bothered yet. --Yamla (talk) 19:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible sock

The Great Wrestling Fan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I've got a feeling the above user could be a sock of someone. He seems to of got use to Wikipedia pretty quickly considering he's made a handful of major edits. This was his first edit, in which he inserted a huge amount of text (which was in fact useful) along with a handful of references. He's since done a handful of other very useful edits. It might be a reformed sock, but I was just surprised seeing as he seemigly has gotten use of Wiki so quickly. As you know many of the past wrestling socks round here, is it a possibility this is a sock of a former user coming back here as a "reformed" user? Thanks, Davnel03 22:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

I have asked for a deletion review of Image talk:Arrivavoyager.png. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RFBailey (talk) 02:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, added my comments there. --Yamla (talk) 02:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in about the Alice Ottley School image. --RFBailey (talk) 04:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Goofed

Guess I goofed this: [45], that's what I get for doing things when I'm sleepy. Thanks for catching it. I didn't notice at the time it was already protected. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Chloe

I've responded at my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeago (talk • contribs) 14:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Nikkul

I see that you have indefinitely blocked User:Nikkul for uploading images with false licenses. From what I can gather from the image description pages and the linked pages at flickr, he indeed asked the authors to release the images under licenses compatible with Wikipedia, and at least some of them actually changed the licensing. (The problem seems to be that the upload dialogue only lists the 3.0 versions of Creative Commons licenses, not the older 2.0 versions, and that's why the image description pages show the wrong licenses.) In particular:

• Image:A380.jpg [46] - Nikhil (flickr username: indianhilbilly, apparently the same person as Wikipedia user Nikkul) asked the image to be released under cc-by-sa, creator agreed to, and changed the license accordingly. (For the reason I have explained above, he marked it as cc-by-sa-3.0 instead of cc-by-sa-2.0.)
• Image:Wankhede Mumbai.jpg - Nikhil asked the image to be licensed under cc-by-sa-2.0 or cc-by-2.0, creator agreed to, but failed to change the licensing.
• Image:Bangalore Media.jpg - another image that Nikhil has asked to be licensed under a CC license, creator agreed to, but then it was uploaded under the 3.0 instead of 2.0 version.

And so on. I believe there is no reason to assume bad faith from the user, and that he should be unblocked (and asked to manually check and correct the licenses in image description pages when he uploades more images). Similarly, the images that have been uploaded should have their licensing corrected; they shouldn't be deleted. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

In at least some cases, the images were licensed with no-derivs or with no-comm. In many cases, the copyright holder agreed to the use of the images on Wikipedia but not explicitly under the terms listed. --Yamla (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not, by the way, opposed to correcting the licensing information. In fact, I hope to do this myself later this week if I have time. Images where the copyright holder simply stated that Wikipedia may use the image may not be licensed under the cc, though. That requires a specific license grant. --Yamla (talk) 16:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I have posted a lengthy message on the user's talk page, listing all the problematic images and explaining what his option are. Hope he'll read it ... - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Rgsao

Hey Yamla. Can you give some input on your above block? You have stated that if the user can explain his actions, he should use {{unblock}}, which he has done. Would you be supportive of an unblock, accompanied with a warning that it may be reinstated if he continues violating policy? Anthøny 18:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. Please do go ahead and unblock. --Yamla (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review for Arunabh Kumar

Yamla, I dont get why this page needs to be deleted. An assistant director in a movie as big as Om Shanti Om deserves mention, right. I know some details about his early life too, but due to lack of citings, I have removed them. However, why the article needs to be deleted totally, I dont know. Maybe we can have some sources in the coming months and can add to it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Crackjack (talk • contribs)

Please talk to the person who nominated it for deletion. I had nothing to do with it. Also, see WP:NOTE. --Yamla (talk) 19:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocking of sosasos2001

Please reconsider blocking me. (I'm sosasos2001) I don't think I deserve it, and I could make some good contributions, especially in rock music articles. Look at my talk page for more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.227.156 (talk) 22:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You are confused, I did not block you. You will also want to stop using sockpuppets to get around your block and provide some examples of constructive contributions made with your account. See Special:Contributions/Sosasos2001 for a list. As I say, I couldn't find any. --Yamla (talk) 22:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Chatz

it is clear that user: MplsNarco is a sockpuppet user of User: Ckatz. Today, I made a criticism about the conduct of Chatz at the Judge Judy talk page. MplsNarcothen made several comments backing up Ckatzchatspy. They both have a similar edit history. Here is Ckatz's [[47]] edit history here is user: MplsNarco [[48]]. They both tend to go to random pages trying to revise articles and leave edit summaries behind. It might be helpful to also note that user: MplsNarco hasn't made a contribution since October 17 and only now decides to make a contribution in support of Chatz nearly 2 month later, agreeing with everything he says directly after I make this edit [[49]] only because Chatz clearly is taking owner ship of that article 198.150.96.50 (talk) 02:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Yamla... sorry that you're getting dragged into this mess. I know I've nothing to worry about, but I'm certainly willing to supply any diffs etc. you might need to check into this, should you find it necessary. User:EverybodyHatesChris has really developed quite a disdain for me, even to the point of vandalising my user page on Wikinews earlier today through his IP. Anyway, apologies again, and let me know if you need anything. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:JorjaFoxVegAd.jpg

Strangely enough, yes, PETA has released all rights to its images. :-) So yes, I can confirm that permission as accurate. Cbrown1023 talk 02:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Looked a bit suspicious but hey, that's why we archive these things. --Yamla (talk) 02:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Two more socks (maybe)

How about User:Walking on water and User:Cloudstormer? Both seem to be socks of User:Daddy Kindsoul. --Angelo (talk) 14:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 15:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think full protection for Daddy's targeted articles is a bit excessive? --Angelo (talk) 15:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Depends on how frequently he is targeting them. Articles targeted by banned users are occasionally fully protected if massive sockpuppetry is used. I'll try to keep the protection to semi, though. Let me know if there are any specific articles that I fully protected which require regular edits. I actually didn't mean to fully protect things this morning, I haven't had my coffee yet. --Yamla (talk) 15:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Raffaele Palladino has a recent history of frequent edits. If you don't object, I'm gonna shorten the full protection to seven days (at least for this article). --Angelo (talk) 15:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Already converted back to semi-protection. Thanks for keeping up on all of this, it's much appreciated. --Yamla (talk) 15:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

209.68.98.241

Yamla, just thought you should know that there's a suspicious account that I recently denied that's operating on the same address that you just unautoblocked. Cheers, east.718 at 15:57, November 27, 2007

Yeap, I'm watching the contribution log. There were two unblock requests that came in at the same time and one was created a few weeks back. I'll keep my eyes open. --Yamla (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Flight Simulator X

You reverted my edit to the following sentence as vandalism:

Original: With anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering either disabled or reduced, low-end and even some high end graphics cards, such as NVIDIA's 7300 GT and ATI's X800 will perform respectably at relatively low resolutions (ie. 1024x768), even with all other visual options maximized.

Edited version: With anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering either disabled or reduced, high-end and even some low-end graphics cards, such as NVIDIA's 7300 GT and ATI's X800 will perform respectably at relatively low resolutions (ie. 1024x768), even with all other visual options maximized.

Please explain how the original is correct, and how my edits constitute vandalism. You are clearly out of your (very shallow) depth on this matter. In the future it may be best for wikipedia if you stick to editing subjects with which you are familiar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.54.135 (talk) 17:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Bipasha again

Hello!

User:Riaeagan is here again and acts as before. I've warned him. I think he won't stop in any case, so please have a watch on the page, because I'm not sure that I'll be here tomorrow. Sorry for bothering you all the time with this. Thanks and best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 23:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked again. --Yamla (talk) 23:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Classification of admins

Hi Yamla. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 23:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Images

Hey,

Thanks for all your help in helping me understand copyrights. Here are some images I have found that have something wrong with their license. Please check them. Thanks

• Image:Mausoleum123.jpg

• Image:KarachiFinancial.jpg

• Image:Khinight.jpg - wrong license..actual license on flickr is attrib-noncom

• Image:PNSC1.jpg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:56635.jpg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Karachi_Golf_Club.jpg

• Image:DHA Marina Club.jpg

• Image:Tooba mosque.jpeg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:EmpressMarket1995.jpg

• Image:Karachi Briidge.jpg

• Image:Aga Khan University.jpg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Karachi_downtown.jpeg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Karachibeach_with_new_fountain_jet.jpeg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ParliamentHouse.jpg

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Faisal_Mosque.Islamabad2.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Faisal_masjid_isla_galleryfull.jpeg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Supreme_court_of_pakistan.jpeg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:National_Monument_Islamabad.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Islamabad_from_Pir_Sohawa.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Blue_area_islamaba_galleryfull.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Damn-e_Koh_Park_in_Islamabad.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MVC-163F.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ParliamentHouse.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Faizabad_Interchange.jpeg

ALL THESE IMAGES ARE FROM: http://www.creativemarketing.pk/islamabad.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bird_eye_view_of_Islamabad.jpeg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Minar_e_Pakistan_%28Lahore%29.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Badshahi_Mosque_July_1_2005_pic32_by_Ali_Imran.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Prime_Minister_Secretariat_Building.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BUSHPERVEZ.jpg no specific source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Supreme_court_of_pakistan.jpeg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:K2_8611.jpg no source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Karachi_at_night.JPEG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gaddafi.jpg

Hope you take the appropriate action. I am sure some of the images that are under gdlf are not taken by the user. Nikkul (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

hello, I was just wondering if you got to read the above and if you are going to act on it. Please let me know. Thanks Nikkul (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

THANKS!!!!! :)

Thanks for the unblock help! Rackabello (talk) 02:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

MSoldi needs a little visit from the bunko squad

The same user that uploaded the photoshopped cover for Headstrong (album) put up an image of a fake boxset (claims to be from Warner Bros, but no sign of it in on the Warner Bros site, even when you go to the special page of their Disney holiday releases ... looks like an old WalMart special with a few extra trinkets), and edited in a fake tracklist.Kww 19:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

There actually is a source for this now, at www.ashleymusic.com.Kww 20:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI

After looking at this user's block log, Daniel Brandt (talk · contribs) is apparently using his site to harass other Wikipedians.Including yourself.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 06:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Not much we can do. He's already been blocked indefinitely. --Yamla 20:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Life From The Inside

Hey, Ahrohbeebee here, you flagged my page Life From The Inside as violating copyright, but I own the copyright to the text that you took issue with. How do I get back into my page to make changes that won't set off your "thief alarm?" I don't want to change the external site to appease you, I would rather edit the text on the Wiki page. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia so any help would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahrohbeebee (talk • contribs) 18:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Life From The Inside explains the two options you have for explaining that you have licensed the text under the GFDL. Thanks. --Yamla 20:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm just going to reword the one and only description that could be considered a violation. Will I be able to edit the page or is it being held for administrator approval? Also, I thought that I had cleared the images used on the page but it appears that they have been deleted. Is there anything I can do about the images that I haven't already done?

Bollywood blog

Theres absolutely no proof to state that the website doesn't own the images it claims to. Even the promotional pictures etc are owned by the disclosed media company which Devendra privately cited that distributes the images to many of the Bollywood related websites and of which the Bollywood blog is formally attatched to. It is clear to me the Bollywood blog has a legal license to distribute these images together with that media corporation and wikipedia is entitled to continue to use the images - but we should stay away from screenshots and posters. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 13:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Moulton Request for Arbitration

There is a current Request for Arbitration, to which you are a listed party, regarding Moulton (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The Request can be found at this section of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

Kind regards,
Anthøny 17:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

pls

pls unblock User: DOm58! cos he wants to enter wiki world. He has reformed over the past year. pls, you can't hold grudges forever, people change, you no?? Pls... lots of love, darling, Dom58 the Second 18:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I can find no account by that name. I'll warn you, though, that setting up an abusive sockpuppet account is not a great approach. --Yamla 18:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

At my wit's end with the mouseketeers

Is there anything at all we can do to educate these folks aside from constant vigilance and reversion? Now that there is really a deluxe version of the Ashley Tisdale Headstrong (album), the hoax version of the cover is back [50], too. Articles now include references to a CD single of her version of Last Christmas, and include a CD cover, too. Only problem is, I can find no substantiation of the existence of the CD single, and the image seems to be taken from the Itunes digital download. So far as I know, I can't call that image a "cover", and there is no fair use policy that would permit it to be included. If I didn't wear a buzz-cut, I'd be tearing my hair out.Kww 18:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I hear meditation can help. Also, possibly, tea. Short of that, nothing else seems to do anything, sorry.  :( --Yamla 18:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

James Spader

The fact that James Spader is the voice-over for the Acura commercials is certainly notable. Forsooth, one other Wikipedian had already inquired about it, and a Google search indicates wide interest in knowing whether he is the voice-over. IMDB must be a reliable source, because if it is not, we should delete most of the article, since references 1-5 and 10 are already IMDB. Why didn't you delete all of that content, as well?

At any rate, Spader's involvement in the Acura commercials deserves to be noted, even if it's not in a trivia section. Magnetic Rag (talk) 21:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

imdb is not a reliable source, see WP:RS. You already claimed that the Acura commercial information was trivia rather than notable information by placing it in a trivia section. See WP:TRIVIA. --Yamla (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but what are we to do with the other information which relies on IMDB? I looked at WP:TRIVIA and WP:HTRIVIA. Very informative. Thank you! Magnetic Rag (talk) 21:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

Why do you think it's not a reliable source? Jhn* 23:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The journalistic integrity of the source website fails WP:RS. There's absolutely no indication that they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. For example, they attribute the story to a single supposed witness without bothering to back this up at all, failing even basic fact-checking requirements. --Yamla 00:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. :D — Jhn* 16:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Responded there. This is Iamandrewrice (talk · contribs), an abusive sockpuppeteer and vandal. --Yamla (talk) 21:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Open proxy

Hi Yamla, sorry to bug You but we got a question on meta about User:78.145.3.223 who claims not to be on an open proxy. I checked that IP and could also not find evidence that it is so. You might have had also other blocking reasons though, so please feel free to respond to this, thanks in advance, best regards, --birdy _{(:> )=|} 21:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Administrator Userbox

Are you allowed to display the Administrator Userbox like this user (User:Michael.buskin) or is it just not advised to do so unless you are an Admin? PookeyMaster (talk) 07:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You have to be an admin. --Yamla (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

SockPuppets

I am the last of the Iamandrerice sockpuppets... I am here to turn the rest of my accounts in, They are this one, andyman499 and fishyghost. These are my last 3 aaccounts, you win! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fettes (talk • contribs) 09:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for informing me about my school being blocked im doing the best that i can to keep all vandalisms off of wiki is there any way that a can keep track of my schools specific ip adresse to monitor the post,edit and articles that are made on wiki thank you for your time

-Staffwaterboy 17:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Your contributions are at Special:Contributions/Staffwaterboy. If you replace your account name with the IP address of your school, you'll track anonymous contributions from that address. --Yamla (talk) 17:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fellowship of friends

A number of editors are frustrated with the Fellowship of Friends stub being a mini-ad for the FOF. Could we add a critical external link or include a single sentence to balance the promotioanl tone? Waspidistra (talk) 18:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Gah! Yes, sorry. I've been very busy recently and this has fallen off my radar. Has a consensus been reached as to an appropriate link to be added? --Yamla (talk) 18:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

No consensus was reached - a bunch of editors presented their suggestions. I don't know about the others, but it seemed like we were presenting the ideas to you, and you were going to make the decision. Will you be choosing?

To reiterate, my vote is to remove the link to the FOF newsletter and add the Steve Hassan (Freedom of Mind) website. This would be one pro and one con link. Freedom of Mind is, in my opinion, the only "negative" site that is not deliberately inflammatory. The blog and Rick Ross sites, in my opinion, are "out to get" the FOF. The Hassan site is informative without sensationalism. Here is a list of the 3 proposed negative sites:

• Rick Ross page on the Fellowship of Friends: http://www.rickross.com/groups/fof.html
• Wordpress blog on the Fellowship of Friends: ::http://animamrecro.wordpress.com/2006/04/16/fellowship-of-friends-a-cult-for-intellectuals/
• Freedom of Mind:http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/f/fellowship/

Yamla - will you choose?--Moon Rising (talk) 19:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

Would you have time to have a look at User talk:Metsguy234#Blocked? I should have left a note on the talk page earlier for the benefit of any admins reviewing an unblock request. I'm not asking for a review of the declining of the unblock request, but I am effectively pointing out a different reason for an unblock. Probably best to let Neil respond when he logs back on, but I thought you should be made aware of all this. Do you think you could leave a note saying you are (or were) aware of the other discussion or not? It's up to you whether to get more involved and offer an opinion, but I'd like some reassurance that you investigated further rather than declining on a technicality. Carcharoth (talk) 20:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Pardon the possible use of profanity, but hell's bells!

Thanks for blocking User talk:Benniguy. I was hoping that once confronted with a coherent list of why the block and subsequent mayhem occurred the person behind this might actually start behaving rationally. I was wrong. I must get some shorter-acting AGF pills. Do you know of any way of getting this stopped, or at least reduced in volume, by some (as it were, this being Wikipedia) "higher authority"? WP:RBI is all very well, but the "I" part of that is, as I'm sure you'll understand, not that easy. It's also getting to the point where paranoia is setting in - I'm starting to think perfectly reasonable requests for assistance from editors are yet another elephant trap from this unpleasant vandal, and I don't like that happening. Do you know of any way of passing complaints to abuse@whoever, for example ("whoever" being an ISP or whatever other organisation is hosting them? I realise that, this being the Internet and this being Wikipedia a level of vandalism is to be expected, but this surely is getting to the stage, and is burning enough effort on here, that something needs to be done to try to stop it more permanently than just a block on a sock account will. Tonywalton ^Talk 22:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:203.220.105.153

I can't seem to find the rangeblock for that guy, do you know what it is? Kwsn (Ni!) 15:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Friends images

Maybe I'm misunderstanding policy, but I don't believe so. Fair use images are used throughout the project, including on featured articles, to identify fictional characters. The Friends images do just that. Also, the fair use policy does not require critical commentary on the image itself, but the subject it is identifying. This is no different from a company logo. A Character's bio is the critical commentary, and one image to identify the subject of an article is acceptable. A list of characters would be different. - auburnpilot talk 15:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The issue here is the license itself, which states: "for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents". Without critical commentary, our use of the image is in violation of the license. Now, you can possibly use the image to provide critical commentary on the character, but you cannot use it solely for illustration, as is often the case (and was certainly the case with these images). --Yamla 15:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, the critical commentary is not required to be of the image itself. The commentary is on the character which is being identified, and is the article. The "and critical commentary" is meant to curtail decorative images. - auburnpilot talk 15:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The image must be used to provide critical commentary. You are correct that the critical commentary does not have to be of the image itself. But in my opinion, and you may disagree, these images were being used solely for illustration. If you disagree, please feel free to add a brief explanation on the image pages and remove the dfu tag. I respect your opinion and while I may not agree in this particular case, you seem to feel strongly about it. --Yamla 15:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I feel strongly that our fair use policy is often taken to extreme cases that results in harm rather than benefit of the encyclopedia. I apologize if I came off rude, as I didn't intent to, and don't believe you were attempting to harm anything. I've simply seen too many images deleted that could have been fixed with a moments time. I'll do as you say and add a brief explanation, but I'll also bring this up on the fair use discussion page when I get a chance. I think this needs to be clarified. - auburnpilot talk 15:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I thought you were very polite. No worries. --Yamla 15:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Blacklist

I see you have added an entry to the blacklist. However can I ask you to please log any entries that you make with a permanent link to wherever the request came from. This may seem a little irritating but in 6 or 12 months time the rationale may be impossible to find and the listing will then be removed by someone. I've just had to do exactly that on a Meta listing than no one logged! Let me know if I can help - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, will do! --Yamla 17:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

*snicker* :) Regarding this, I was testing recent changes that I'd made to {{unblock-auto}}, to make it easier to unblock autoblocked users. I guess I forgot to re-blank the page :) You're fast! SQL^{Query me!} 20:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha. Well, I'm still not going to unblock you.  ;-) --Yamla 20:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Heh, FINE. <random racial slur that has nothing to do with your specific ethnicity and / or random legal threat> :) SQL^{Query me!} 20:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Katherine Heigl

HI. What are you talking about? Why was there a violation? --Charleenmerced ^Talk 01:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:IUP and WP:FURG. --Yamla (talk) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Anonymizer proxies

FYI, someone listed several Anonymizer proxies on WP:OP. Since we've had to deal with them in the past, I thought you might want to know. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 15:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Fixthepedia

You said: "Account is unambiguously a violation of WP:SOCK." Do you have any reasons for saying that? Contribs don't look similar to those of FixtheBorder (who calls people racists and such), and there is a plausable explanation for the positive checkuser result - he says he's in a dorm with 6000 other people, and I'm guessing they don't have 6000 separate IPs. Since he's now editing from a different location, there's a way to check his claims. Or do you know something I don't? Zocky | picture popups 16:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Both have been editing Johnny Sutton and had made similar edits. See this and this compared to this and this. We know both accounts have edited from the same IP address. There's no doubt they are at least meatpuppets and thus, a violation of WP:SOCK. And it's hardly the first FixtheBorder sock that we've seen. --Yamla (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

And of course, it's quite a coincidence that two unrelated users living in the same dorm would choose such similar usernames. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Andaz apna apna

Hello Yamla, how've you been?

Could you please move the above mentioned title to Andaz Apna Apna? Some bot initially moved the page and since long time has passed, I can't move it.

Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 00:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Done! --Yamla (talk) 01:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks friend, much appreciated:) Regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 02:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

You've got a fan

User:Yamla is a complete douchebag for blocking Soprani. Blocked by User:Animum. Lovely. bibliomaniac15 01:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hardly surprising, we found another one of his abusive socks just the other day. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 01:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI

[51] Jeffpw (talk) 13:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Why the block?

Referring to ImGladICanCreateNamesWithMichaelJordonInThem,MyFavoritePlayer!:

Is the username block really justified? Yes, it's long, but that's all. WP:U provides the following criteria for a username becoming inappropriate:

1. Confusing usernames make it unduly difficult to identify users by their username. I don't think anyone's going to be confused as to who this is. A problem would only arise with a similarly spelt username, which would then be blocked.
2. Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the user. Presuming the user means what the username says, it isn't misleading.
3. Promotional usernames appear promote a group or company on Wikipedia, if the user promotes it. No groups or companies here. Yeah, a basketball player, but that's not commercial (particularly).
4. Offensive usernames can be expected to make harmonious editing difficult or impossible. Surely only a rival would find that username offensive.

Is username length a reason for the block? It will only cause trouble if you bother trying to type it in, and as I've said, if anyone were to imitate it (i.e. mispell something, but in a way that you wouldn't notice), they'd be blocked instead. Of course, I accept your PoV, and you are an admin, but I'm just questioning whether this is something I should bring up on WP:U. I Enjoy Commenting (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't issue this block. I did, however, decline the unblock request because I believe the username is excessively long. Also, the same person has been repeatedly creating usernames with "MichaelJordon" in the title, apparently in an attempt to disrupt Wikipedia. Check out the user creation log over the past hour. --Yamla (talk) 18:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing this up. I didn't know the user was creating multiple accounts. In that case, I totally agree with you. I'm going to put in a question on WP:U about long user names... not so much whether they are acceptable as how long they have to get before they come unacceptable. Thanks for your help. I Enjoy Commenting (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppetry

Yamla. I suspect 213.140.22.64 is a sock puppet for Lizard Andrea. You had blocked her indefinitely previously and she has resurrected as this IP IMHO. Compare the contribs of Liz and the contribs of the IP and you'll see they're eerily similar. τßōиЄ2001 (ǂ ) 22:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Back?

Yeah, I'm still around; wrapping up loose ends before sodding off for good (my OCD can't let go just yet). I could be leaping to conclusions here, but it seems a bit too obvious to me:

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tweety21

Precious Roy (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me informed. --Yamla (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

She keeps going... Precious Roy (talk) 16:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll block. --Yamla (talk) 16:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

...and going... Precious Roy (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

...and going... Precious Roy (talk) 17:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

She'll eventually give up, may take months though. --Yamla (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Request for unblock

Hello, Yamla. It has been over a year since I was blocked on wikipedia. My user name is Zarbon You said you would give me another chance after another year passed. Now I am growing irritated because of this. I do not want to create another account because that's technically a sockpuppet. Please look at my user talk page for the original request for an unblock about 6 months ago. Is it possible, after this extensive period of time, to unblock me finally so that I can continue to contribute with my user name? Please respond because I have waited a long time as you had initially instructed me to do. I am sorry for whatever mistake I made originally but I want to be able to continue working with my original name, Zarbon. I am bringing this up because I mean it and I want to continue contributing but I'd feel more comfortable doing it with my original user name. Please help. - 72.229.48.178 (talk) 00:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I can find no account by that name. Please sign on with your original account and make an unblock request there. State for the record if you have edited any Wikipedia articles in the past six months. --Yamla (talk) 00:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't sign on because I will be automatically blocked. You know that if I sign on, it will block my ip address automatically. I want to log in but I can't for this reason. And what do you mean...my user page is Zarbon. I will login right when you unblock me. I will thank you personally right afterwards right here under my user name. - 72.229.48.178 (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm just awaiting your response. It's been such a long time since I was allowed to log in again with my user name Zarbon. I just want to be able to be unbanned after this extensively long period as you promised to reconsider prior. Please respond. I am awaiting your response. - 72.229.48.178 (talk) 05:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I was not the person who blocked you. I will note, though, that rather than abiding by your block, you have continued to edit in violation of WP:BLOCK. I am not willing to consider unblocking you at this time but you may wish to contact unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org. --Yamla (talk) 06:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

But you told me not to mention anything about being unblocked until a full year passed and I listened to you. I don't know how to do that, so can you add me to the unblock-en list. I want to be unblocked but I don't think any of them would consider it. Since you were the one who responded to my request to be unblocked half a year ago, I came back to you instead of anywhere else. - 72.229.48.178 (talk) 04:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but the whole point was that you refrain from editing while blocked. Still, I do suggest that you email unblock-en-l. You should admit that you have continued editing while blocked but note that you refrained for however many months you refrained for, and that your edits have been good since then. Honesty and demonstrated good intentions go a long way and I would follow up on your message with that statement, for other admins to consider (if I catch the message, I don't read all unblock-en-l messages at the moment). --Yamla (talk) 16:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Life from the Inside Deletion

Hi there. I understand you have pulled the entry for Life from the Inside for copyright violations, and I wanted to step in, as someone else involved with the show, and see how we can fix this error. The page has no copyright violations, and, as far as I have been able to tell, is no different from any number of other sitcom entries on Wikipedia. I'd like to know how we can get our entry back up without it being pulled down immediately. What are you looking for that I am unable to see? Maybe I can help with making sure our page stays up. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lekowicz (talk • contribs) 22:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Does this program meet the notability criteria? There's nothing in the deleted article that indicates notability. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, though that was not the reason given for the article being pulled. Lekowicz (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I have also found out that we can no longer even access our deleted items. Yamla has pulled them all, so I'd like to make sure we can resolve this whole affair. Lekowicz (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused by 'we' and 'our.' If this article was created by one of the creators of the show, then that's a conflict of interest- we don't create articles about ourselves or our work. If this program really is notable, then you don't need to worry about it, because one of its many viewers will inevitably create an article about it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, as was indicated to one of "your" editors (though I'm not sure which), if the content on your website is available under the terms of the GFDL, please update the website to reflect that. If not, we have to continue treating it as a copyright violation. But as FisherQueen indicated, you shouldn't be creating articles about this if you are involved with the show. --Yamla (talk) 23:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me butt in... you know I can't stop typing sometimes. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

This is all helpful info, so thanks for clarifying. I think I now see what happened. Yes, I am involved with the show. I agree that no one involved with our show should have posted anything in the first place. One of our fans or subscribers can do that at some point. However, when that happens, I'm now afraid you'll pull the article regardless of its pedigree. I hope that will not be the case. It appears to me that the issue was an improper use of speedy deletion. Our entry did not fall under the speedy deletion criteria at all and was deleted without debate of these matters in the first place--the content was not at all "blatant copyright infringement," and even "notability" is under non-criteria for speedy deletion. The proper action would have been to call out the article for deletion review, where this debate could have happened. The matter was handled poorly is all, which is why we have gotten confused over the entire article being deleted without warning. I want to clear this all up so that when an entry for our show goes up legitimately, from a viewer or subscriber, it will be allowed to stand and not deleted improperly. Lekowicz (talk) 00:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Almost all of the content was taken from the website without any evidence that the website content was released under the GFDL. The article was tagged for approximately two weeks and deleted as per CSD G12. The best way for someone to recreate the article would be to do so in user space and then to follow WP:UNDEL, but this is certainly not the only way. I would not tag a recreation of the article if it was completely free of copied text and if it asserted notability under WP:NOTE (which is not necessarily trivial, by the way). --Yamla (talk) 17:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use images

Not an April Fool; merely my mistaken reading of this. I really should not edit late at night! Apologies. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 13:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Tweety21

Hello.

I've noticed that you have restored a page I deleted via an OTRS ticket. What motivated the restoration? Thanks, Mercury 19:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

A checkuser confirmed that the user had returned to editing in violation of the ban. The right to vanish does not apply if the user has demonstrated over and over again that he or she is unwilling to actually vanish. As an aside, note that I have contacted the Wikimedia Foundation office about this, several hours ago. --Yamla (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you link to the checkuser results please? Mercury 20:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tweety21. She's subsequently used 216.191.208.99 (talk · contribs), Halloween12 (talk · contribs), and 99.249.172.137 (talk · contribs). These were obvious and passed WP:DUCK. She has resumed her old behaviour including but not at all limited to legal threats[52]. --Yamla (talk) 20:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I have your ticket assigned to the right person that will be able to help. Also, let the agent know when you undo their OTRS action. They might have more information. Thanks, Mercury 20:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Or... you might have more information. 12 tickets?  :) Regards, Mercury 00:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been contacting the Wikimedia Office and some people from unblock-en-l about this. Obviously, there's a significant limit on what they can tell me due to privacy concerns, but the number of tickets is not secret.  :) --Yamla (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Amrita Rao

Hello again,

User:60.243.98.209 has crossed the line on the above mentioned page. He keeps on adding real fangush, the infobox is destroyed etc. See, this is the diff. He has reverted the article several times, has been warned several times, and above all, even had a sock puppet, which I tagged on his page. In his last revert he wrote, "Requests the users Bollywood_Dreamz and ssshhhhhh, not to Tamper with The Changes we are making...Pls contact us at fanmail@amrita-rao.com for furthur Enquiry. Regards, Rahul Gupta ( P.R. Manager) Amrita Rao 91-9897357966"

If it bothers you that I awlays turn to you with these problems, please tell me that. I also feel a little uncomfortable turning to you all the time. Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Please do something. He (and his sock puppets) doesn't stop vandalizing the page. It is the 8th time he reverts the article to his version. Page protection won't help. Thanks, Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I'll take a look now. I'm generally happy to look into these things but you can often get faster response at WP:AIV. --Yamla (talk) 20:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Fellowship of Friends emphasises "other schools and religions"

Hi Yamla, could you please check this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fellowship_of_Friends#FoF_emphasises_other_schools_and_religions Thanks Wine-in-ark (talk) 23:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Tasveer

Hi Yamla, I was wondering if you could move the page Eight By Ten to the film's original title Tasveer. The film's title on the page was officially the latter but a user changed it to the former according to IMDb, which is an unreliable website. The film's official poster has come out with the title Tasveer.[53] I tried moving it but it won't let me. Could you please move it for me? Thanks. Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 02:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Never mind Yamla, I fixed it. Thanks anyways. Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 02:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Lindsay Lohan

I've don't want to waste on my reverts on this guy. Pirated image (see IFD page) and he won't stop reverting it back in. Claim that it's a private camera shot is patently ridiculous ... can't we just lifetime block these people and be done with it?Kww (talk) 03:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Edits

Congratulations! Acalamari 17:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.  :) --Yamla (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gyorgy Orth. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Chanheigeorge (talk) 19:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added my comments there. --Yamla (talk) 19:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

You got a Christmas card! → → →

Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one! Jeffpw (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow! What a great card. Best wishes for holidays and the years to come. --Moon Rising (talk) 22:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Unblocked

Yamla, please see User talk:Kafka Liz's talk page. I have unblocked as the case has been explained sufficiently. Please feel free to ask any questions. -JodyB _talk 01:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem. We were discussing this on unblock-en-l and the consensus seemed to be to unblock as well. --Yamla (talk) 16:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)