Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:57, 26 February 2008

Wiki Edit

I only corrected it!! What's the problem?!! What is a sandbox??? Look at yourself before you start to nag... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.209.195.148 (talk) 16:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. --Yamla (talk) 16:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Archive

• Archive 1 (from Dec 16, 2004 to April 17, 2006)
• Archive 2 (from April 17, 2006 to May 31, 2006)
• Archive 3 (from June 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006)
• Archive 4 (from July 1, 2006 to August 14, 2006)
• Archive 5 (from August 14, 2006 to September 2, 2006)
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8
• Archive 9
• Archive 10
• Archive 11
• Archive 12
• Archive 13
• Archive 14
• Archive 15

Dido

Hi! This is Edgy88, I would to let you know that Dido's real name is Dido (Florian Cloud De Bounevialle O'Mallery Armstrong), I don't really know why you always change it, just watch this video from the Sharon Osbourne Show, October 16th in 2003, Dido talking about her real name

Spore

Why did you change the release back to TBA i just finished listening to the EA conference call and they said that it would be out in 2008 Before the holidays Stu212 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:RS. You have to cite such information. --Yamla (talk) 23:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Peaches Music & Video (Record Store)

I know it's been a while, but I feel that this article should not have been deleted. It was a well-known chain of record stores in the southeastern US--not just a single store.

16:52, 11 January 2007 Yamla (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Peaches Music & Video (Record Store)" ‎ (content was: 'Why are we considering deleting an article about a major chain of music stores.' (and the only contributor was 'Cylonhunter'))

--Mister Tog (talk) 05:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

This article failed CSD#A7. If you believe it can be recreated in such a way as to assert notability (multiple independent sources, etc.), please feel free to create an article in your userspace and then ask someone to move it over once they have verified your claims (in article) of notability and checked your sources are reliable. --Yamla (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jade Raymond

An editor has nominated Jade Raymond, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jade Raymond and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 14:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Fellowship of Friends

Hello Yamla

Excuse me, but pt:Fellowship of Friends has been eliminated in pt.wiki.

Thank you for help Adailton (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, removed. --Yamla (talk) 14:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Can admins view pages that have been deleted? I think I heard they can but I'm not sure. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 04:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, unless they have been oversighted. --Yamla (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you take a look at . It says for the deletion reason that I requested it, when I couldn't have requested it since I was in a car on my way to New Jersey when it was deleted. The page should've been 2 LOE that i had been working on at the time. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

It's back

See her contribs. Precious Roy (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked. --Yamla (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

This might be her edit also. WHOIS=Toronto. Ward3001 (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeap, we know she uses other addresses in that /16 range. Unfortunately, it's a huge range considering how frequently she vandalises. --Yamla (talk) 03:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Are we approaching critical mass yet? Precious Roy (talk) 20:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Waw!

I've never known of any user with that much contributions!!!--Damifb (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Image question

I checked this image when it was added. The licensing template as written says that *any* image on the .net domain is licensed. Only those images on one of the .com domains are restricted to 2001 or earlier. I have reverted the edit on commons, but I thought I would draw this to your attention. If the commons template is misphrased and does not represent the OTRS ticket, that's a different issue. Gimmetrow 17:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry for my mistake. --Yamla (talk) 17:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingham McCutchen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi there, I saw you speedy deleted Bingham McCutchen yesterday because of the edits somebody from the company kept making, but I'd like to ask if you could take another look at this article and the history. I seem to remember (although not with certainty) that there was already a perfectly okay start-class article further back in the history, fairly neutral and that, long before the employee(s) came along last week and started meddling with it to get it how they wanted; perhaps it would be better to just revert to the old version. Otherwise, the way I see it, the edits that person kept making have led directly to the complete erasure of an article. If any new editor could come along and edit an article straight into the garbage bin Misplaced Pages would be in all sorts of trouble! I can't remember exactly what was there but could you take another look, and possibly undelete it at a stable point in the history? • Anakin 15:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You are right, done. --Yamla (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, the article isn't as good as I'd thought it was. Thanks though! :) • Anakin 15:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Englandbridge

Perhaps I misinterpret, but it appears that User:Englandbridge is a sock of User:Tweety21, and IP sock of whose you just blocked. --Pleasantville (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, yes. This is a banned vandal who has caused substantial problems for the Misplaced Pages. --Yamla (talk) 16:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget Englandrules! Ta, Precious Roy (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Alzano Virescit F.C.

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alzano Virescit F.C.. 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. CapPixel (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Tweety21

Hi Yamla, hope you enjoyed your snowboarding/skiing. The closest one I get is in Runcorn!

It must be damn annoying dealing with Tweety21 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), and I'm willing to make a Misplaced Pages:Abuse reports/Tweety21 page to deal with this vandal. Hope this helps. --Solumeiras (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

She's back on her sock 142.205.212.203 (talk · contribs) here. Ward3001 (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, blocked. --Yamla (talk) 04:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Possibly another one as Burke and Hare (talk · contribs) here. Ward3001 (talk) 13:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Good lookin' out but I think that's some unrelated vandalism. Precious Roy (talk) 20:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, there's not enough there to establish a link. It's very possible but without checkuser access, nothing I can do. --Yamla (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I've been considering filing a WP:LTA report. Do you think it would be worthwhile? If so, do you think it should go on the main page or as its own page (if you have any experience with LTA—I don't)? Precious Roy (talk) 17:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I must admit, I thought there already was one. I'm not sure why I thought this as several people have suggested that creating such a page might be a good idea. In my opinion, I'd go with a report on its own page in this case but my experience with LTA pretty much only extends to Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse/Daddy Kindsoul and Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse/Verdict. In any case, much of the content of your sockwatch page could end up being copied into the LTA page. --Yamla (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

After re-reading the guidelines for creating a sub-page, I'm not sure that this qualifies so I put it on the main page. It can always be moved to a sub-page if someone else thinks it warrants one. Thanks again for all your help. Precious Roy (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, is the long-term soft-block on User talk:142.205.212.203 still working? If so, I hope that existing accounts under that, such as mine, are not affected. GoldDragon (talk) 01:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Why did

you revert my "vandalism" is this seriously what you do on vacation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.174.152 (talk) 19:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Pleaseee

Reverting to my edits for Miley Cyrus on the account Piazzajordan2. My sister found out my account password. And used this. Can i please have another chance. Please unblock me. I will assure you, this will never happen again. thank you. message back. -PiazzaJordan2Replacement —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiazzaJordan2Replacement (talk • contribs) 19:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

This is hardly the first time you've been caught vandalising. And then to set up a sockpuppet account with the expressed intention of avoiding blocks. Your block timer has been reset for one week. Any further vandalism may result in an indefinite block. --Yamla (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin bullying

Please explain how "Foz, not sure why you decided to stick your nose in here - but I'd rather an explanation why you ignored Waggers sneering attack on me than some whining rationale for blocking me." is construed as a personal attack meriting sealing my page. Thanks Sarah777 (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have waited a reasonable amount of time for a reply. Do you not feel there is any obligation on an Admin to explain the reasons why they issue unusually punitive blocks? Even the "offended" Admin has distanced himself from your decision. Refer to my question above; how does that constitute "incivility" that would merit a talkpage block? Sarah777 (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I did not see this message until just now. Please see WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. I simply do not believe that characterising someone's comments as a "sneering attack" and someone else's actions as "whining rationale" is at all appropriate. I am sorry you feel otherwise. --Yamla (talk) 22:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

And I only spotted this now. But the Waggers comment unarguably was a sneering attack. So that means you imposed a punitive block for me calling a fellow Admin's excuses a "whining rationale"? Is that the sort of proportionate behaviour we should expect from those entrusted with Admin powers? (Btw, I think this is somewhat more clear-cut than what I feel) Sarah777 (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You are confused. I have never blocked you. However, I do expect and require that you abide by WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. If you believe you are not going to be able to be civil in the future, please let me know. --Yamla (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

If I feel any incivility coming on I'll rush right over here. If you never blocked me why do I think you did? (I see you have linked a list of some of my all-time favourite Admins!)Sarah777 (talk) 04:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Dyslexicbudgie being fully blocked

I can see that User:Dyslexicbudgie has not learnt his lesson. Can you actually block them for like forever and take there user off or sometihng as it is becomeing an issue. Please reply Pattav2 (talk) 06:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I show no contributions from that user for a month. Could you please let me know what actions you are talking about? Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Bollywoodblog

Hey, can you please weigh in on that page? I think it is high time we got rid of those images. Atleast I dont see any new evidence that they're not cpvios. Have you seen any? Please let me know. Thanks. Sarvagnya 17:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Luke2509

This user whom you blocked for disruptive sockpuppetry for three months on October 26, 2007 is back active again. Not saying he's done anything disruptive as of yet, but you may wish to review. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

User immediately resumed violating WP:IUP and has been blocked for one year. --Yamla (talk) 15:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Be aware; it's highly likely that User:86.140.29.24 is him as well. No violations as yet, but just so you know. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

I noticed you had the same format errors as I had on my userpage. I've fixed it for you. Acalamari 17:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Much appreciated! --Yamla (talk) 18:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Acalamari 18:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Banana United

Is that a nonsense article? Zenlax 20:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks that way, someone deleted it already. --Yamla (talk) 21:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AN discussion

As someone who had commented on the issue before, would you please weigh in on this discussion. Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalize?

You sent me a message saying I was vandalizing the Scarlet Johansson page. All I did was correct the release date of her new album. Someone put it was being released on the 6th- she has publically said it's being released the 20'th. I make this correction and I get a message that I've been vandalizing. - January 31 2008, Samantha555

Please see WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:CITE. --Yamla (talk) 03:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

On the exact reference link used to quote that statement I changed, "Update: Her label has pushed her album back until May 20." You can actually refer to it and see for yourself. So I plead, I was not doing anything wrong, just making the correction that the source itself has recently stated. -February 2 2008, Samantha555 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.207.252 (talk) 09:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Tweety

Cancergirl (talk · contribs) may be her latest sock. Ward3001 (talk) 02:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Already blocked, I see. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 03:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Grawp

Why don't admins just block the IP address? I thought they did, but they're are still socks of him popping up. Why? --Alisyn 04:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

He's an IP-hopping vandal with access to a huge range. I've blocked three /16 blocks already and it isn't slowing him down. --Yamla (talk) 04:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Post new accounts at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Grawp; Alison is making that CU priority one and is blocking any IPs used for a few months apiece. -Jéské 04:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm on my way to bed now, but I will keep that in mind. I had never seen this troll before, kind of annoying. --Yamla (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been dealing with him for the past fortnight or so. -Jéské 04:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

You deserve some sort of medal. --Yamla (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you intend to hard block these ranges? That's going to have some huge collateral damage. See unblock request from User talk:Apokryltaros. --B (talk) 05:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to vouch for User:Apokryltaros. This is an extremely valuable contributor whose artwork has been used to illustrate three of the featured articles on which I've worked. I understand there's a problematic vandal on the loose and that these are difficult situations, but I believe that unblocking Apokryltaros needs to become an urgent priority, lest we alienate a truly irreplaceable editor who is most certainly unrelated to whatever vandalism is at hand. --JayHenry (t) 06:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't question that Apokryltaros is a good user ... the issue is whether there is a checkuser reason for hardblocking these ranges that we don't know about. --B (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I do understand that. I just want to make sure this isn't something that gets left until tomorrow and then forgotten for too long (it happens because we're humans, I'm not assigning any blame at all). Apokryltaros is one of only two or three editors on all of Misplaced Pages who is really proficient with Mammalian Paleontology, it wouldn't be acceptable collateral damage to lose him. And Yamla has already said he's going to bed for the night. --JayHenry (t) 06:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Null persp, chummers, I fixed the block to anon only. -Jéské 06:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it.  :( --Yamla (talk) 14:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed: Thank you for fixing it.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Natalee Holloway edit

Fine, if you want incorrect sources..then it's your call... Nytemyre (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:V, and WP:NOR. We have a source, you have been changing cited information so that it no longer matches the citation. This is not permitted. --Yamla (talk) 23:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Question?

Regarding a bit of the lingo regarding sock puppets. When you say that a log is stale, what does that mean? Figured I would ask that way if I am reading through a thing about a user being a sockpuppet or something, I know whats being talked about. Thanks :) Whammies Were Here 23:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm speculating here as I do not have checkuser access. Misplaced Pages does not keep access logs around forever. Once they are purged, a checkuser performed on an old account and a new account will not be able to show a conclusive match between the two. The logs are stale and have been purged. That is, they have been deleted so we no longer know what IP address the old account was operating from. --Yamla (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if thats close, then thanks :) Whammies Were Here 11:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Images

Hello Yamla, User:Popatali is uploading so many images that don't follow Misplaced Pages guidelines. Look at his/her contributions history. I keep reverting his/her edits but he/she doesn't seem to listen. Furthemore, can you please delete these images: Image:PriyankaChopra.jpg and Image:Kareena Kapoor.jpg since both these images were uploaded from the BollywoodBlog licence. Although they are considered as Wikimedia Commons images, other images from the Bollywood Blog site were Wikimedia Commons images too but they were eventually deleted. --Bollywood Dreamz 02:59, 5 February 2008

I cannot delete those two images as they are on wikimedia commons instead of wikipedia-en. You'll have to track someone down on commons.  :( --Yamla (talk) 05:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Sock Puppet

Hello. A user by the name of Ianjones1900 had been indef blocked from Misplaced Pages for repeatedly adding false info and copyright violations. It looks like he's back, this time with the usernames Ianjones600 and Ianjones457. Will you look into it? I also have suspicions about Ianjones, although he/she has only 5 edits and has been inactive for 18 months. Admc2006 (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Will do. --Yamla (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of sock puppets...I put a "bug" in Daniel Case's ear about Grant and what I believe is another sock of Grant Chuggle's. If you aren't too busy and get a sec, could you check it out too. I swear, that boy is just too easy to spot but I could be wrong. Thanks. IrishLass (talk) 18:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Clearly was, thanks. Blocked. --Yamla (talk) 19:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. IrishLass (talk) 19:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

omar epps

I don't understand why you're accusing me of vandalism. All I did was add an image of omar epps to a page on omar epps. I assumed it was an ok image to use since it was already being used on another wikipedia page, I didn't upload it. If I was wrong in doing so, fine, but it was an honest mistake and I don't appreciate you accusing me of intentional wrongdoing. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 21:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you not read the warning that you removed? The image was in blatant violation of WP:IUP and the warning specifically told you that such an image was inappropriate. --Yamla (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

unblockabuse template

Hi Yamla - thanks for stepping on on that anon-IP page with the unblockabuse template. I didn't know about that and am very happy to find it! I can't believe it's a very-much-used template though -- surely there aren't that many editors that are quite that desperately bored? --Lquilter (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha, new around here?  ;-) Good faith editors sometimes don't bother to read the policies they have been violating, and so continue to post unblock requests. Griefers just want to waste our time and can't think of anything more entertaining to do. --Yamla (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a newly-minted admin. First vandal-blocks today and it was really interesting to see that editor spinning their wheels with dozens of edits to their own userpage! Thanks! --Lquilter (talk) 22:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Good luck! It's a fun place most of the time but you'll get the occasional death threat. Heck, I got one earlier today targeted at me personally and I see the unblock-en-l mailing list just got a generalised "go kill yourselves" message a few minutes ago. Woo. --Yamla (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

not right?

I was about to decline the request for unblock for User:Whoisthisagain. However, this user has only used the unblock template once, which is hardly abuse of the template. Is your use of the page protection of the user talk page acceptable? If so, let me know for my own administrative education. Archtransit (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Death threats such as the one by Whoisthisagain are sufficient grounds to protect a page. Generally, a user gets up to two unblock reviews per block but given that a blocked user has already shown himself or herself unwilling to behave, unblock abuse may result in an immediate protection of the page. They are still free to contect unblock-en-l .at. lists.wikimedia.org or a member of WP:ARBCOM for further unblock consideration. --Yamla (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

OK with me.Archtransit (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Not Something and Not Someone is a sock of Tgannon? I don't dispute the finding but you don't explain why on the user's talk page. Archtransit (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It's obvious from the contribution log. See for example the identical edits and . --Yamla (talk) 23:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I was working on Ari Publican before you denied the unblock request. Please leave at least a one sentence explanation on why you believe the person is a sockpuppet. This would be very helpful. Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Even when I am not the blocking admin? --Yamla (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You did determine that the person was an "obvious sockpuppet.". Unblock requests are done as an independent review, as cited by ArbCom. Therefore, it seems permissible for you to decide without consulting the blocking administrator. Since you have presumably done an independent review, if you explain your reasoning, others could use that information to catch future socks. Archtransit (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

omar epps

yes I read it, but as I said, it was an image that was already being used in another wikipedia article. If the image is a violation, shouldn't it have been removed from the other article? Maybe I misinterpreted the message, I'm not saying you were wrong for changing it back, but making a mistake about an image certainly isn't malicious. It just seems like giving me a "final warning" for vandalism over a mistake is kind of severe, considering I've never been warned about it before. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 23:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No. Please read WP:IUP. Fair-use images may not be used to depict living people. The warning message, which you removed, made this plain. --Yamla (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess we're just not going to see eye to eye here, I didn't understand the warning message or the picture policy I guess. I really wasn't trying to do anything wrong, but I'll just have to be more careful in the future. I do not now, nor have I ever tried to vandalize a wikipedia page, but it seems your mind is already made up about what my intentions were. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the warning message from your talk page. --Yamla (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it and will be more careful about edits in the future.On Thermonuclear War (talk) 18:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no doubt that you will continue to be a productive editor.  :) --Yamla (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The lovely and talented Paulinho28

This guy just doesn't give up. He's still blanking talk pages both here and on his IP. Just left word at the intervention page, but I thought you ought to know as well. Thanks for blocking this guy. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocking anonymous users

Why bother? A simple IP address change, and we can go on, saying whatever we want. 76.182.32.227 (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

We also have range-blocks and can report you to your ISP if you continue attacking the Misplaced Pages. --Yamla (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Yamla, User:91.108.254.97 reports that he/she is collateral damage. Who is the user whose actions caused the range block on 91.108.192.0/18 and what articles did they edit? Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Please review the block log for that range; the information there seems quite specific, Archtransit. Kuru 01:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The diff you presented showed this block http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:91.108.230.171&oldid=189526699 of User:91.108.230.171. 91.108.230.171 is different from 91.108.254.97. Please explain. It doesn't make sense to me. Archtransit (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. Many internet service providers assign IP addresses dynamically; that is, every time you reboot your modem, you will have a new IP. The IP addresses stay within a given range that are 'owned' by that service provider. This means that a very persistent vandal with a dynamic IP is unblockable, since he can simply grab another IP. A 'last resort' effort is to block the entire range, which is represented by the 91.108.192.0/18 number above (see here for how that nomenclature works). The addresses above are both in that range, and looking at the history of blocks in that range, the problem is severe and associated with checkuser problems; an unblock would be a very poor idea. Since range blocks are almost always 'soft' (i.e. they can still edit when they use an account), the user can contact the unblock mailing list to request an account be created for them. If you have any other questions about how this all works, please let me know! Kuru 01:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Kuru. Couldn't have said it better myself. It's worth noting that this particular address range has had 14 blocks, including mine and not considering the unblocks since August of last year. It's clearly a big problem, one made worse by a promise to continue vandalising, otherwise I would not have blocked for six months. --Yamla (talk) 15:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

User:2fruition

This might confuse the user even more as he had nothing to do with the I.P. and the original blocking admin reverted the block saying it was an accident. --NeilN 17:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

That's the standard unblock-auto template. It's what generally gets used in these situations. You are free to follow up with the user and explain in more detail, or to suggest changes to the unblock-auto template itself. Thanks for your work already with this user.  :) --Yamla (talk) 17:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Re : Monica Belucci

Calm down, dude. I just added her year of birth which can be checked in the italian (and other) version of the article. There's no need to make such big a deal out of it you knowMitch1981 (talk) 20:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source. Please see WP:RS. --Yamla (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

If you understand italian, just check this documentary out . It was made by italian channel TG5 and you can see a guy who was her teacher in kindergarten ... in 1968 (so she was definitely not born in 1968), besides the doc clearly states that she was born on the 30th of september 1964.Mitch1981 (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I do not speak Italian, unfortunately. However, if the documentary does indeed state she was born in 1964 and if you believe this meets WP:RS, as seems likely, please feel free to readd the information, citing it as per WP:CITE. Thanks! --Yamla (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Magazine covers on Vogue (magazine) article

What do you have against the magazine covers on the Vogue's article? I can't uderstand your behavior! There's a lot of time that these pictures with Kate Moss and Gisele Bündchen were there! Now are you wanting to take off? What's your objective? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mywikipedista (talk • contribs) 02:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

See WP:IUP and the image's license. We cannot use them to depict the people generally or the magazine generally. --Yamla (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

inquiry

Blocked as a sockpuppet. We had additional information not available to the checkusers which ties this to Chadbryant. --Yamla (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Paul Harald Kaspar

I'm curious what type of additional information? I'm interested in improving my detective skills. My e-mail is enabled as is most admins. Archtransit (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Rafaelsilba blocked - question

I didn't see any images uploaded in his log and his deleted contributions were on images uploaded by others. The only contributions I saw were adding category tags to some of the existing images. Was this the person you meant to block? --NrDg 05:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind - I see that the uploads were to commons, not here. Is it verified this is the same person? --NrDg 05:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Same account name and he added the stolen image to the article on Misplaced Pages, so it is definitely the same. --Yamla (talk) 15:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Block

Hi Yamla. Last week you blocked me for 72 hours for inappropriate edits of mine, which I'll accept were perhaps a little extreme. This time round, I would like to avoid a block, so I would like to know to what extent I am, allowed to point out that I dislike people. If I were to leave a message here now saying "I don't like you", would that be enough to warrant a further block? If so I shall refrain as I wish to be a legitimate editor. 194.189.32.65 (talk) 11:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You are to remain civil at all times. See WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Given your history of abuse, a comment like "I don't like you" may be sufficient to result in a block. --Yamla (talk) 15:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

What...?

Were you not aware that user:Endlessdan had already been blocked for the comments he made?? What's up with the obvious lack of communication between admins....?? -ElisaEXPLOSiONtalk. 14:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? --Yamla (talk) 15:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Btline

Sorry, I thought that as they are now redundant pages (misunderstandings) I could redirect them to my page to prevent any more confusions- believe me, there have been plenty! Can I revert? Thanks, Btline (talk) 17:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

They are not redundant. They show that you have abused sockpuppet accounts in the past. --Yamla (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

As I said above, they were confusions. I even admitted to one of them and gave a full explanation. This should be done to prevent any more unnecessary duplication etc.

Btline (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are saying here. You previously falsely claimed you were unrelated to Rgsao. This was shown to be false and the account was blocked. The sockpuppet investigation and checkuser results need to stay. So long as you refrain from any further violations in the future, as you seem to be doing, this will not be an issue. --Yamla (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmmmmm, that was a misunderstanding- but I won't go there now! Anyway, what I am saying is that, there is no point in having several pages on a mass of stuff when it can be redirected to my fresh start/ refreshed user page. If necessary, it can be moved to an archive of my talk page. I thought Wiki servers were full. Here is an opportunity to have a spring clearout, as such! i thought I was doing you a favour! Btline (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it is inappropriate to blank or redirect logs of prior abuse. The Wiki servers are not full. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 18:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. But are they still needed?

Yes. --Yamla (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

:::You may also want to add {{User Alternate Acc|Dewarw}} to your userpage. --~~~~

No need. Btline (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

As you wish. Make sure you are aware of WP:SOCK and WP:BLOCK, as I'm sure you are. The easiest way to abide by these policies is to refrain from using your other account, Dewarw, again. This is certainly not your only option, but it is the safest. --Yamla (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The Dewarw account is no longer in operation, as the user/user talk pages have gone. Btline (talk) 18:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bairro de São José in Recife-PE (...)

I'm the author, I did the picture all by myself! This is my name! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FireOcean (talk • contribs) 02:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Olinda - First capital of Pernambuco - Brazil.jpg

A French friend called Cyrril Perrin did the pic on my own camera! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FireOcean (talk • contribs) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

In that case, you have chosen a false license for the image. --Yamla (talk) 03:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for unblocking me

What can I say? Sometimes I can be an impatient man. Thanks a lot.

Do I get to move that auto-block removal notice to a sub-page of my own (for archival purposes) or just outright remove it? I've always wondered about stuff like that. Casull (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Generally, we like people to archive stuff. You are permitted to delete warnings and the like, though, so long as you have read and understood them. As an autoblock has nothing to do with you directly, though, there's absolutely no reason why you should keep it around, or even archive it. So feel free to just blank it.  :) --Yamla (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Kollywoodtoday images

I'm rather confused.

• I've secured the permission of them.
• And I've sourced them.
• What else am I supposed to do?

Universal Hero (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem is, it doesn't look like the images actually belong to Kollywoodtoday in the first place. Just to be clear, this is not your fault at all. The problem is simply that Kollywoodtoday is passing off images as their own when in fact they are screenshots or promotional images. --Yamla (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll re-write to them and embark you upon their response. Universal Hero (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

C++

Response on my talk. --Elliskev 15:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikone

Can you block Wikone (talk · contribs) for 5 minutes? So he will learn about the BC -BCE thing. --helics (talk · contribs) 17:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I have issued another warning to this user. If he or she continues, I will block. --Yamla (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of Helics

Yamla, you blocked Helics (talk · contribs) as an abusive sockpuppet of Iamandrewrice (talk · contribs) and he is now requesting to be unblocked. Unless I'm overlooking the account, Helics doesn't appear to be listed on Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iamandrewrice and they don't appear to have edited any of the same pages. Am I missing something obvious (it is awfully early in the morning)? - auburnpilot talk 13:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok....so it was obvious. Coffee time. - auburnpilot talk 14:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It also was listed on the Iamandrewrice checkuser request (though by me, not by a checkuser), but I think it was reported as Iamandrewrice 5, so it didn't show up on the regular report. --Yamla (talk) 15:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's

Zenlax is wishing you a Happy Valentine's Day, {{subst:kdBASEPAGENAME}}! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the love by adding {{subst:User:Flaminglawyer/HapValDay!}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Zenlax 19:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

88.108.0.0/17 block

The block that you added to 88.108.0.0/17 also includes my IP, 88.108.83.0. I would add further comment to that but since it expires in less than 10 hours, which I intend on spending either logged in or in bed, I don't see a point any further than pointing out that that particular IP isn't Iamandrewrice. Have a nice day =). — Balthazar 01:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The block was anon-only so should not have affected you. Please let me know if it did stop you from editing, though! --Yamla (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Meera jasmine.jpg

To make a quality encyclopedia article, I think this image is necessary. The earlier version was not good. (you may compare both). I’ve mentioned in the image talk page also. Hope this ok. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose  T  05:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

with respect to your comments "Blatantly false" I wish to inform you that it is a screen shot, croped it in adobe photoshop. --Avinesh Jose  T  07:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It is blatantly not a screenshot of a webpage. It may be an image used on a webpage but if so, the license you used was specifically inappropriate. Additionally, it is clearly a fair-use image used to depict a living person, in violation of WP:IUP. --Yamla (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Robin48gx

I don't know if you're aware of the situation or not, but this is a long-standing and overall positive contributor. I (the blocking admin) and a number of other admins have considered an apology and/or promise not to vandalize anymore to be a sufficient but necessary condition for unblock. - Revolving Bugbear 20:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I would fully support that. At the moment, he appears not to have made that promise. --Yamla (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni De Prà

Could you please unlock the Giovanni De Prà page, so I could create an article about him? Thanks! Gh (talk) 16:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. --Yamla (talk) 16:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Can a cool admin help a guy out? I want to add one sentence to the world of Misplaced Pages. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, reliable (I chose the New York Times version.)

Circumcision may decrease a man's risk of getting HIV but it may also INCREASE a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia. (and some doctors even say other STD's too but I won't get into that and I wouldn't put caps on INCREASE.)

The article on circumcision mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once. Click on the article. You tell me if it's an article on the procedure or a pro-circumcision propaganda pamphlet.

Can a cool admin stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew (the site's dictators) from deleting my one sentence I want to add? Or possibly get new Admins to take over this article, which has fallen way below Misplaced Pages standards.

here's the New York Times piece... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E4D91F3AF931A35757C0A961958260&fta=y

I used to love Misplaced Pages until I went to add a sentence, you know? Well, thanks. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried politely asking why your addition was inappropriate by posting your proposed addition and the citation for it on that article's discussion page? --Yamla (talk) 22:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Randy Jaiyan

Randy Jaiyan (talk · contribs) is moving multiple pages, adding more illegal images, and being a general pain. He was blocked by Daniel Case for the pictures earlier but you blocked him last weekend for incivility. Could you help again. He's created a bunch of pages and then redirected them. He's even moved actress pages, not just fictional characters. Any help is appreciated. KellyAna (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it would be best for you to post this to WP:AIV. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject matter.  :( --Yamla (talk) 22:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

delete, but no notification

Instead of keep on adding copyvio of my images in my talk page, could you please see the contribution of my images & keep on delete it. Please don’t add the notification in my talk page as it looks awkward to me. I already put it in my watch list of all image uploading details & every change would be notified immediately to me. So go ahead & delete all my images. No problem at all. Wish you all the best. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose  T  05:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Let me ask one question, to specify an accurate source and license, Why don’t you add/change the proper tag/corrections on behalf of the up-loader/public, instead of deleting it? you deleted all images in which the source is properly mentioned. You deleted it only because of a minor problem i.e pd-screenshot. you should change that to pd-fair use rationale & keep.Thanks. (pls leave message here, its in my watchlist). --Avinesh Jose  T  06:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

We are not permitted to use fair-use images solely to depict living people. Additionally, it is your responsibility as the uploader to provide correct information, not mine to correct it. In most cases, I could not determine the source, nor could I find an accurate license that would allow us to use the images. Finally, you asked for the images to be deleted. --Yamla (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, FUR living people policy page is no more active and I think the policy may have changed. In my case, except secretariat building image, I’ve properly provided the sources. You tagged my images only because of a minor issue i.e {pd-screenshot} which you should change, instead of commenting it as ‘blatant false’ and nominating for deletion. I said you should change it to {fair-use} as there is nothing prevents us from doing so (editing it). Listen, we all are contributing to this project to make quality encyclopedia articles. Please do not simply target established editor’s work and delete all images as you did it to me though I’d given proper sources. (It is true that I told you to delete as I was unhappy of your approach towards me). --Avinesh Jose  T  04:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

By dictat of the Wikimedia Foundation, fair-use images may not be used solely to depict living people. This is not open to debate. It is not acceptable to use a fair-use image to depict a living person solely because the image looks good or because it pretties up the article. And I deleted your images because you asked me to. "could you please see the contribution of my images & keep on delete it". Had you not said that, I would not have deleted the images, only marked them for deletion as inappropriate-fair-use or as having false licenses (e.g. web page screenshots). --Yamla (talk) 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, please see WP:FUC which clearly states, "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." This means no fair-use images to depict living people. This is what it means. --Yamla (talk) 04:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Hudgons

Hi Yamla, thanks for verifying this person's image uploads. When I see a new user upload pics with metadata and whose name is connected to a site, I usually email the site for confirmation, but I see you've already done so. One of his pics, Image:Plies.jpg, doesn't have a license tag. Should we just presume it's GDFL-granted like his other pics or does he have to explicitly add a license tag himself? Spellcast (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

He really does need to explicitly add the license himself. If it is his image, it'd be reasonable to assume it's under the GFDL as all editor contributions are. However, it is possible that he doesn't actually own the copyright on that particular image. Also, of course, it's best to explicitly check.  :) --Yamla (talk) 15:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Aw come on

aw come on fool 70.53.147.250 (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Jodhaa Akbar

Hello! I need your help Yamla.

124.125.208.23 (talk · contribs) keeps on reverting the above-mentioned article to his very version. His version means -- some unreferenced claims, reviews from unreliable sites and above all -- the full history of the name "Jodhaa Bai" (and what historians think about it) which he thinks belongs to this article, while it is irrelevant here because it is an article about a recently released film, and the history of this name belongs to another article called Akbar. In this article it's irrelevant. I was reverting his edits, warning him, discussed the issue on the talk page, and even another editor told him that this info was more relevant to the page of Akbar, but he keep reverting. That's how the page looked in his version. Total violations of WP:LEAD, WP:N and WP:UNDUE

Not only that, he also reverted all the edits by all editors, while there were numerous constructive edits in between, like formats etc. I turned to User:Riana yesterday but she seems to be busy. During the night, he took my request to stop adding it and moved the so called info (which is referenced, but irrelevant) to the synopsis section... Imagine to yourself, the history of the name Jodhaa Bai and what historians have to say about it in a synopsis section! See the version after his night edits -

Today I requested for page protection because of heavy vandalism, and was sure that he would stop with that, but now I see another editor, Itihaaskar (talk · contribs) who is a clear sock puppet of this IP, reverting the page to this IP's version! Again, reverting altogether, with no consideration of the in-between edits, even the protection template was removed -- see that comparison.

Please do something, I'm losing my temper. This info clearly belongs to the Akbar aticle, and he still keeps doing the same. My best regards, Shahid • 16:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Your best bet is WP:RFPP and/or WP:AIV. --Yamla (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm sorry if I bother you, I know you're busy, but what about him being a sockpuppet? And if he reverts the page once again, he will be violating the 3RR rule. Shahid • 17:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

sceeuk1 unblock request

I understand your rationales against self-promotion in that editor's talk page. I don't want to meddle in the issue, but I doubt if he really understands what WP is all about. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. However, he also refused to read the policies and guidelines I pointed him to. --Yamla (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

In that case, that guy has no place here in this community AT ALL. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Kollywood Today

Yes, sorry for the late reply, they claimed that there images are all theirs and they once again readily accepted to let Misplaced Pages use their images. Universal Hero (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, just to be clear, they are claiming that all images on Kollywoodtoday belong to them? If so, I will quickly grab a counterexample to prove that this is not the case. --Yamla (talk) 17:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Please note, that photogrpahers work for several companies. A friend of my father's has sold images to more than three sites previously, giving them total rights. But here, I'm not totally sure. Universal Hero (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

This, this, this, and this are either screenshots or promotional material from Mistress of Spices, and clearly not owned by Kollywoodtoday. See here for evidence. I believe this is more than sufficient to show that Kollywoodtoday is pulling our leg when it comes to their ownership. --Yamla (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. However despite these links, I don't think these are the greatest of sources. Film production works differently. For publicity purposes (to advertise) film companies release stills of the film for usage. That's whats been done here. The images, as they ares tills, are free. Maybe another photo of maybe an actor or etc could have been forged. I'll write again to them. Universal Hero (talk) 20:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, free, but not freely licensed, an absolutely critical difference. Unless Kollywoodtoday owns the copyrights to all the images on their site, as you are claiming, they cannot release them to us under the CC license. And they clearly do not own the copyrights to at least a number of the images, being that these are film screenshots. --Yamla (talk) 20:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Not yet, they usually respond within a week. Universal Hero (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Hammerandclaw

Hi, I was engaged in discussion with Hammerandclaw, with a view to his acculturation, when he was blocked. I would like you to unblock him on the understanding that I stand surety for him on my belief that he does not intend to offend our community. You don't have to do anything right now but I just want to start a dialog. --TS 17:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

If he unconditionally withdraws any legal threat and if you believe it would be appropriate to unblock him, I would absolutely not consider it wheel-warring for you to lift the block. I see there's been extensive discussions on WP:ANI and so I would expect any unblock would be done after a consensus has been reached there, but once again, if you believe it appropriate, I would not consider it wheel-warring for you to unblock Hammerandclaw. I don't personally believe the user's claim that there's some problem with his broadband connection but perhaps he will withdraw that. Regardless, if you are free to unblock if you are satisfied. --Yamla (talk) 17:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Meanie

Yamla is mean! You cant threaten to never let me edit again just because I messed up on Miranda Cosgrove page when I was trying to add a picture of her! Meanie (Jonapello22 (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC))

Not only did you mess it up but you apparently still have not read and understood our image use policy, as you have already been asked to do. --Yamla (talk) 22:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Well i am sorry but youre the one who is supposed to help me, im the noob! Help is not threatening to ban me from editing wikipedia Jonapello22 (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Hammerandclaw

I've responded to your comment there. See the diff immediately before yours for the comment in question. - Revolving Bugbear 22:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems from comments (including yours) that consensus is to replace Hammerandclaw's indef block with the shorter block originally applied by Black Kite. Would you have any objection if I went ahead and removed your indef and went back to the 48 hour BK applied, less "time served"? Naturally I'll keep an eye on H&C's contributions , as will quite a few people following his outburst on AN/I! Tonywalton  21:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

While I still absolutely do not buy his claim that his router was broken and therefore somehow causing vandalism, I will absolutely not object if you unblock him immediately, as I think we are outside the 48 hour original block window now. Enough people will watch his contributions that I think this is probably the right course of action at this point. --Yamla (talk) 21:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I don't buy that explanation either. Router broken, possible. Poor/slow broadband, possible. I've used this ^%*^%% thing over dialup and it's not obliged me to blank things. The time it took for him to come up with the "explanation" was IMV rather odd as well. However, a new consignment of AGF pills just arrived...

BK's original block was for 48 hours, which expires at about 2:35PM UK time tomorrow - I've set a block expiry of 16 hours 40 minutes, whch is about the same time (give or take a few minutes). Anal retentive? Possibly! Tonywalton  22:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Serisously you can,t block someone if they stop what there doing

Read subject/headline this is on behalf of boblo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.219.75 (talk) 18:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't block Boblo. But as I mentioned, Boblo didn't stop what he was doing. And I see he has now resorted to violating WP:SOCK. --Yamla (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hammerandclaw

Hi Yamla,

Just a quick note that I appreciate you, and several other admins, stepping in on this. It kind of resolved itself more messily than perhaps necessary, and might have been a little less so if I had known exactly what I was doing from the very beginning. But I did learn alot about how this kind of thing works, and feel much more confident in being able to handle the next one more smoothly. --barneca (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

LA.Direct Magazine

Just wanted to let you know that I failed the prod, as I think the "distribution" section establishes minimal notability. AfD may be in order, however, as there are no references (WP:V/WP:RS) and I agree that WP:COI may be in play. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 23:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for letting me know. --Yamla (talk) 23:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See Ladirectmag, too. Several image uploads that met CSD and most certainly COI. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 23:33, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That one's blatantly promotional and, it seems, already blocked. I removed the images. --Yamla (talk) 23:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Specific versus general uses of magazine covers

Following on from the earlier discussion at WP:MCQ, please seee Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content#Wording of Template:Non-free magazine cover for a discussion of specific versus general uses of magazine covers. Carcharoth (talk) 01:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Jessy Moss

I've contested the prod on this article. Feel free, obviously, to open an AFD discussion. Best, Dppowell (talk) 01:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Walice111

Hey, I see you around reviewing a lot of unblock requests, and you recently reviewed my block of the above. I'm a fairly new admin here, but it really is heartwarming and confidence-building when your decline reason is to refer the editor to my reasons for blocking, without any qualification. This makes me think I'm getting it right so far, and I appreciate it greatly. Regards. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No worries. It certainly happens that some blocks are invalid but most of the time, it's fairly straight forward. Autoblocks are another story, of course. Most of those that I see, I lift. --Yamla (talk) 02:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:LaSylphide and User talk:Overjoyed

I wonder if you noticed the entered-and-quickly-erased defense of his presumed other self which is typical sockpuppet behavior. Baseball Bugs 15:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see that. I did, however, raise with Overjoyed's blocking admin the strong possibility that these were sockpuppet accounts. --Yamla (talk) 15:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think there are 3 or 4 admins watching this guy now, and I think I've said all I need to say to or about him. Thank you for your help. P.S. I have to give him some credit for the old folks' home story. It's usually a brother or a roommate. Baseball Bugs 15:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on Chiranjeevi page

I've been warding off vandals as and when I notice them. But, I was wondering if the article can be locked for unregistered users? Thoughts? Mspraveen (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. it does seem to be a problem. --Yamla (talk) 16:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Mspraveen (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

C0wb0yz

Please, you cowboy, calm down, and think with your head. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.80.239.162 (talk • contribs)

What? --Yamla (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

account

I am really confused as to why my account has been blocked. I am now unable to log in so have to do all my edits without logging in. If I register another account then this is a sockpuppet or what ever you call it. This seems crazy just because a couple of times I edited and didn't log in. Also my wife has now registered an account- she has some similar interests and some different- is she going to get accussed of being a sockpuppet- this is all very, very wierd.

88.108.51.97 (talk) 19:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)alpinist

You are well aware that the use of alternate accounts or IP addresses to continue editing is not permitted. --Yamla (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

I was about to give you a barnstar, but I'll just second Bibliomaniac's above. I don't want to sound like i am gushing, but you have got to SERIOUSLY be my favorite fellow admin, if only because you take absolutely no bullshit. Your unblock denials are straight, to the point, at leave no room for arguement. You do a great job, and I ALWAYS enjoy when I come across your work. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I must agree. Your work here is very much appreciated, and your unblock handling is superb. Rudget. 17:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Signature copyrights

I saw your deletion of the signature image from the Miley Cyrus article, and couldn't find the answer to the question it raised: if a celebrity signs something for you, and you scan the signature, does the celebrity own the copyright, or do you? That's how I assume that signature image was made.Kww (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer. However, I'll note that I don't see this as being any different from promotional photographs of a celeb. A celeb may give you a photograph of themselves and you would own the photograph itself (or the signed piece of paper) while the celeb (or their agency) would own the copyrights to the photograph (or signature). It's also possible for two or more people to own copyright at the same time. If a friend takes a photograph and I substantially alter that, both my friend and I would own copyright to the resulting work and, in most cases, neither of us could republish that derived work without the consent of the other party. It all gets a bit tricky (and believe me, I've been in a similar situation before). --Yamla (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Drive-by response: I am a copyright lawyer, but this is not legal advice. What is the copyright that you imagine to be on the signature? A copyright is "original expression" fixed in a tangible means of expression. The expression is usually taken to be the information content; the name itself is clearly not copyrightable. So we're talking about whatever unique attributes the person has in writing the English language. This is a very, very, thin copyright in my view. Have you heard somewhere that there is a copyright on a signature? --Lquilter (talk) 21:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I certainly haven't. On a "better safe than sorry" basis, I think Yamla did the right thing by removing the image from the article, but I would like to know what the best place to discuss it is. Is there an appropriate noticeboard?Kww (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions might be the right place; I'm not that familiar with WP's copyright discussions. There are a lot, it seems to me. I'd be more concerned with other issues than copyright: I can see potential BLP issues from living people's signatures, since it could assist identity theft. (Although less likely in case of celebrity, I imagine.) --Lquilter (talk) 21:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Question from a sophomore on the subject of WP:RFP

I see a minor edit you made very recently to this timestamp (reverting to last version by Rudget) at WP:RFP. I've been watching admins at their tasks in the last few weeks and Page Protection is up very soon in my self-selected study; watching and participating in AfD process this week. Is the edit you reverted the kind of thing which needs WP:OVERSIGHT? Is this more of a Right to Vanish thing? I'm aware that in the latter case, usually application must be made directly, but does oversight require direct application from the (perhaps) at-risk party? BusterD (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

This user has already been told to contact WP:OTRS. He has also had his edit request declined on RFP. That's why I reverted. --Yamla (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! BusterD (talk) 16:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Michelle Trachtenberg

Please do not give me nonsense warnings in the future. First of all it is not "potentially controversial" to call someone German-American. Secondly most of the article is unsourced, there is no reason to target this specific fact. Thirdly - give a guy some time to find a good enough source, will ya! There's no need to kick in open doors. -Duribald (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

This information was disputed. As per WP:V, it requires a citation before you can add it to the article. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Would you please READ WP:V before you refer to it:

"Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider moving it to the talk page. Alternatively, you may tag a sentence by adding the //fact// template, a section with //unreferencedsection//, or the article with //refimprove// or //unreferenced//. Use the edit summary to give an explanation of your edit. You may also leave a note on the talk page or an invisible HTML comment on the article page."

You should have ASKED for for a source to be provided, in the manner prescribed by WP:V, if your removal was contested. Instead you revert the info and slap me with a nuisance warning. -Duribald (talk) 19:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't a nuisance warning, it was the bog-standard warning given to people adding unsourced information to articles. --Yamla (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Read the quote from WP:V above. You referred to WP:V yourself. You don't use warning templates when there is a prescribed procedure in WP policy. -Duribald (talk) 20:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

"The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material". WP:V. --Yamla (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Which is why you have a right to ask for a citation - not a right to throw warnings around like wet trout. You should watch out. There is such a thing as trout slapping, and I'm not afraid to stoop to that level, you know. -Duribald (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you just put a smile on my face.  :) --Yamla (talk) 20:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

More Demi Moore

Thanks for being a hawk on the FU guidelines. I forgot to properly tag all the images for this new article. I would have appreciated a heads up though.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi

How long have you been on wikipedia for? Why do you enjoy editing here so much? I'm considering doing it myself, but all my friends have told me I'm really sad for doing so and shouldn't waste my time. I live in England btw. Are you an american? If so do people have the same attitude over there? I'd really love to know that I'm not alone and I'd love to start editing constructively. If you convince me I might make an account and join. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.78.23.174 (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

When you get a sec

Thegoodgirl01 needs her edits reverted. I put the sock tag on her user page but would rather an admin did the reverts. I hope the winter's been treating you well. Precious Roy (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Winter is good now that it isn't so darn cold outside.  :) --Yamla (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Spore Edit War on Again

You may need to look at Spore again. There seems to be a minor edit war going on, again. JAF1970 removed all references talking about the Wii version, trimming it down to a single unsourced line where he forgot to remove the "Wiiwii" reference. Sillygostly then merged the Spore Creatures and Spore Mobile articles into the Spore article, which will no doubt be a controversial edit.

There has been no consensus and really no discussion about what direction to take the article in. I'm not sure if it needs outright protection again, but it may need watching by someone wiser than I. KiTA (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, let me change my request. There is an active edit war going on on Spore (video game) now. I believe it may need dispute protection again. KiTA (talk) 14:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Protected. --Yamla (talk) 14:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I am sorry to have to waste your time asking for help with this. KiTA (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Images

Hello Yamla!

This one was recently added by Shashankmittal (talk · contribs), and I don't know if it is free. Regards, Shahid • 22:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

This image is all over the Internet and without evidence to back up this extraordinary claim, no. We have no reason to believe it is free; the claimed source does not appear to be correct. --Yamla (talk) 22:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed from the page. Doesn't it have to be tagged? Shahid • 22:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeap, tagged. --Yamla (talk) 22:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Spore Creatures

I did not blank the article. I merged it with the main Spore article. The separate articles are unnecessary as the subject matter is lack the notability to warrant their own separate articles (as dozens of video games are redesigned in order to tailor to the limitations of other platforms). Sillygostly (talk) 22:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please discuss this first, and reach a consensus. --Yamla (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I have tried. Really, I have, but JAF1970 absolutely refuses to reach a consensus (or better yet a compromise) and disregards every edit that I make. Sillygostly (talk) 22:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, then, see WP:DISPUTE. Please refrain from any further edit warring. --Yamla (talk) 22:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Jaiyan Randy Roberts

Jaiyan Randy Roberts (talk · contribs) violating his block. KellyAna (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that was pretty blatant. --Yamla (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he should be a sneaky as Grant Chuggle. He's (Grant) got a new one: Beaverlac (talk · contribs). Took me a while but all his times are the same as Grant's always were, the articles the same, and we've found a few new Grant ID's lately too making the same edits. Grant just has patterns, Days of our Lives, the Brady Family, John Black, and Tony DiMera plus Bold and the Beautiful characters on occasion. His problem is he removes the same things as Grant does which is how he's so easily caught. KellyAna (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocked. --Yamla (talk) 17:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Kollywood today images.

Hey, I'm quite upset to see that the images have been deleted, considering I think I've got fair reply. The letter.

Dear Universal Hero,

Thank you for your reply.

Once again we assure you that our photographers have taken the images supplied from our website, which you have been using on your Misplaced Pages site.

In your request for confirmation, we have attached photos of our photographer at the events, to show that we are not using "second hand" images. Furthermore, pictures of stills as you had enquired, are given free to us from the various free companies. As you suggested your displeasure at those images, we recommend you not to use them for your copyright purposes.

Finally, please can you quote that Kollywoodtoday.com have provided the images you have taken.

Thanking you,

editor Kollywoodtoday.com 2008

Do we need futher information?

Universal Hero (talk) 17:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)