Archive 1

Hi. See IfD for details about deletion policy. --JW1805 (Talk) 23:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Why did you schedule my personal photo for deletion?! --Torourkeus 02:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.........

Hi. Yeah, I wanted to delete Maria2.jpg, but didn't know how. So it's cool with me that it's been nominated for deletion. Do I have to do anything else to have it deleted, or the process is now automatic? Thanks! Raystorm 10:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Not sure why it wasn't showing the CC license, because I thought I selected it when I posted it. Anyway, it's been corrected. Acarvin 15:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sreed1234. I'm SuggestBot, a Wikipedia bot that helps new members contribute to Wikipedia. You might like to edit these articles I picked for you based on things you've edited in the past. Check it out -- I hope you find it useful. -- SuggestBot 21:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know that you have a view on this matter. Please see discussion at: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#spaces_before_unit_symbols. Regards bobblewik 13:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sue!

Hope I'm not intruding, but I noticed that you were changing the order of the medals, and undoing my changes (probably without even knowing it!) Anyway, this subject came up in Chronological record item order? on the MedalTop template talk, and some of us figured that, because the medals are easily distinguishable, but the years are not, that we would sort by year first, and then medal type. Any thoughts on this? Thanks! tiZom_(2¢) 00:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sue Anne. I replied to your objection to my speedy renaming of Category:Cross country skiers at the 2006 Winter Olympics to Category:Cross-country skiers at the 2006 Winter Olympics right under your objection: [1]. I don't know if that is a correct use of the speedy page, but I did not know any better. In any case, I included a number of links in my rebuttal, including the Torino Olympics official results page and various Wikipedia pages and indices, as well as links to the Merriam-Webster Online dictionary for "cross-country" and "cross country". Please reply here or on my talk page so that we may come to an agreement on this issue. Thank you, and best regards. -- Mareklug ^talk 07:05, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was delisted from Speedy as contested, so I moved my nomination (and all the conversation that followed it) to the regular categories for renaming page: [2] -- Mareklug ^talk 04:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sue Anne. Could you please not be a ninny and try to delete my images. They provide a useful service to Wikipedia, and the second would stand up in court if it's challenged by the sledder herself. Having an image of the person improves the article, please don't go out of your way to delete perfectly good images. --Nick Dillinger 20:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your help with the unfree-copyrighted image issue. In case there is any confusion, keep in mind that Fair use is a defense one can claim when one infringes upon copyright. All of the material we use under Wikipedia:Fair use is infringing on copyright; we are claiming that our use of it can be legally justified. That said, professional photography taken from news agencies is actually a bad idea per Wikipedia:Fair use criteria #2. Let me know if you have any more questions, and consider checking out Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use if you are interested. Thanks. Jkelly 22:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note of support for you in regards to the above. You are following Wikipedia image policy correctly. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By "you", who are you refering too in your support? --Nick Dillinger 20:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the entire summary, you would've known the author released rights to use it on Wikipedia. So there is no reason to delete it. Tag it with the appropriate tag using the information I provided if you feel more needs to be done. Thanks. Эйрон Кинни (t) 00:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Sue, I got the image of Twenty Foreplay from www.eil.com and search "twenty foreplay". How do I get copyright information if it is needed?

Those maps were created by me. So I hold the copyright. Who is complaining? Anwar saadat 07:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for swapping the photo format. I wasn't aware of that. Incidentally, http://www.usocpressbox.org has USOC portraits of all 2004 and 2006 team members, which would help illustrate at least 100 or 200 US athelte bios. I've been going through them and chopping off the tag on the bottom before adding them as promo pics, as stated on the licensing. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 06:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find the cross-server links are improperly marked up in many articles like missing opening colons. Is this a typo-epidemic? Or am I meddling with some kinda protocol here? I bothered to change some dozen links in Tamil_Nadu and United_Arab_Emirates Anwar saadat 19:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can delete those, they were accidently uploaded. Psychomel@di_(s)cussion 19:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do delete it. The involved parties decided not to use this image.--Zereshk 02:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sreed1234! You've tagged a number of images for speedy deletion under criterion G1 - Patent nonsense, i.e. no meaningful content, unsalvageably incoherent page. None of the images were patent nonsense; it's hard to judge whether a photograph has meaningful content, and impossible for a photo to be incoherant (although, as my holiday snaps attest, I try my best!). I'm afraid we don't have a speedy criterion that covers deleting an image that is useless and they need to go to IfD instead.

I've removed the speedy tags as the tag isn't justified. However, the images were all source-less, so I've put them into NLD for today. Cheers! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 11:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sue! Thanks for your understanding. Criteria for Speedy Delete are hellish things. They're always too tight in one direction and too loose in another and everybody ties themselves in knots over them at some point (indeed, I'm currently engaged in a painful debate about CSD-R3 (pointless redirects), having shamefacedly undeleted 30 things today that I deleted yesterday - and, to prove the point, of the 3 editors who joined me, one won't undelete, one has undeleted and one has asked for advice... so these things are clearly, er, not very clear sometimes!). :o) ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 22:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower ^háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll not help wikipedia anymore if you still doubting on my picture, how can i proove it, i was trying to help and you destroy my work without arguments, isn't this a enciclopedya where evryone can edit??? That was my picture and you destroyed my work, what would you feel about that? I'm very upset and dissapointed about all of this! I do not who deleted, but i think is your deed.

The image is a released Air Force photo and I tagged it as such. --Ian 19:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi there Sue Anne. I'm wondering if there is a bug in the AWB that you are using to change the medal format, because your semi-automatic fixed changed Callus' gold medal in the table to a bronze medal. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 00:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Haeckel Actiniae edit.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. . . .

It now has the PD-old tag. --Janke | Talk 06:44, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I have done a review for you. I've also put myself up, by the way. Regards,ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 08:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify ...

I should have used this instead of this?

Thanks. Sue Anne 02:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly :) Stifle (talk) 11:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just telling you that you don't need to worry about the picture called "Trueinheritancesuspenders.jpg" because it's from my camera. So don't worry, because I have the copyright. It's just my userpage picture, that's all. David G Brault 19:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words - I am going to avoid that page for a few more days - I started reading it after I got your note and between the (paraphrasing) "I am going to ask these questions to Troedel in good faith" followed by the very first question which I feel I have answered more than once on the same page, I was convinced I needed to stay away for a little while longer. 02:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sue Anne! Checking your recent work, I was thinking of nominating you for an admin. What do you think? --Tone 09:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad you are interested. Please confirm you acceptance here: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sreed1234 and then post it to the RfA page. Good luck with the nomination! --Tone 19:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done Abeo Paliurus 02:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added two questions to your RfA. When you have a minute, I'd appreciate if you would take a look at them. Thanks. JoshuaZ 22:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have determined not to get in an edit war again - but Gellerson reverts contrary to the views expressed on the talk page - can you help??? Trödel 21:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I misunderstood what Trödel was doing - and have left his edit as-is, except for removing a duplicative heading and fixing spelling. I read your comment on Trödel's page - you write that I "[keep] changing other people's edits back to '[my]' version", but aren't the other people doing just the same? Denvoran 21:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "everyone else" wants to keep things one way -- otherwise why did you put up the poll? Please note that I am trying to compromise -- does that deserve any respect? Denvoran 22:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw your name pop up on my watchlist, and now it's been bugging me because your name sounds super familiar. I just can't figure out where we've crossed paths before. Sue Anne 21:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. I don't see enough information to be able to tell who you are. I've lived in Brigham City, Bolivia, Provo, and Salt Lake City. Online, I've been posting for several years with my real name on Eric D. Snider's message board. Hope that helps. Let me know.--Ryan Reeder 04:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, you are an admin now. Keep on with the good work! --Tone 20:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Also, if you create any articles with interesting facts, you can submit for inclusion on the main page at Template talk:Did you know. As an admin, you can noe update this template, which normal users like me cannot. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 03:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to congratulate you on your recent RfA. I am happy for you and good luck for the future! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, sorry others beat me to it. :) I had something important come up when I was in the middle of leaving a congratulatory message for you. I recommend being conservative with the admin tools especially at first. Re-read the relevant policy before you take any actions, and for anything you're particularly unsure of, put it up on the administrator's noticeboard. Also it wouldn't be a bad idea to redirect your old user and talk pages to the new location to avoid confusion. - Taxman ^Talk 11:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking at the recently promoted admins and I saw your name. I guess I messed this before when I posted another message below. Anyway, congrats on your victory. I look forward to seeing you helping out Wikipedia as an admin. → J@red  21:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sue, could you please look at User:68.229.152.169 and User:130.70.148.189, as they have been vandalizing the 2008 Summer Olympics page repetedly. Thanks. → J@red  11:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop calling me a vandal. For some reason I kept thinking that everyone is equally allowed to edit Wikipedia. Maybe I got it wrong..., are there authoritative editors? And instead of complaining about me blanking (in the discussions), how about addressing some of the points I made regarding the article if you feel equally strongly about it? 130.70.148.189 18:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your help. It was just getting kind of frustrating. → J@red  22:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I copy and pasted the copyright, author and all other information in to the summary box provided when uploading an image.

Hello Sue Anne! I noticed that you have edited figure skating-related articles. I have created WikiProject Figure Skating, with the goal of improving Wikipedia's coverage of figure skating articles. We could use your help! Please consider joining. Thanks! --Fang Aili ^說嗎? 19:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you out there doing a lot of good work, especially with images, and wanted you to know it's been noticed and appreciated. Keep up the good work, and if I can be of any help, let me know. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 08:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sue Anne, I agree that it meets the criteria for speedy deletion, so please delete the image – it was uploaded in error anyway. Cheers. -Techelf 11:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you're trying to say. If you're suggesting that I got the picture from the Olympic.org page (which I did, so you're good!), I thought that everything on that page was free use. I guess I don't know where I got that though, but I thought I remembered reading it somewhere, so I pulled the image from: http://www.olympic.org/uk/games/torino/open_torch_uk.asp

So now, what are you suggesting that I do? → JARED ^(t)  20:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Wikipedia:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, —Celestianpower ^háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is a problem editor. Look at his contributions. CoolKatt number 99999 05:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. The reason I put Michael Gruber with one medal in the Team Nordic Combined event is if you look at the IW link Nordic combined at the Winter Olympics, specifically it shows that in the team event at the 2002 Winter Olympics, it shows a Christoph Gruber with a bronze and Michael Gruber winning the Gold at the 2006 Winter Olympics. If they are the same person, then I understand what you had done, I appreciate what you did, and I will change Christoph's name to Michael's. If they are not, then we need to change that back to how I had set it up.

2. In regards to medals, I have always believed in putting Gold Medals first regardless if it were in later Olympics compared from other medals earned in earlier Olympics. This was why I moved Nykänen's silver medal from the 1984 Winter Olympics down to the bottom on his medal table. I have seen this done on many other athletes as well. For example, Athlete X competed in four Olympics from Seoul (1988) to Sydney (2000), earning 8 medals, including 4 Golds (2 in 1992, 1 in 1996, and 1 in 2000), 3 Silvers (2 in 1988, 1 in 1996), and 1 Bronze (2000). I would put the table shown below:

Olympic medal record
Women's X
	1992 Barcelona	Event X
	1992 Barcelona	Event Y
	1996 Atlanta	Event Y
	2000 Sydney	Event X
	1988 Seoul	Event X
	1988 Seoul	Event Y
	1996 Atlanta	Event X
	2000 Sydney	Event Y

Your thoughts on this. Chris 12:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Adjusted Michael Gruber in the Nordic combined at the Winter Olympics and at Nordic combined at the 2002 Winter Olympics. Will put Christoph Gruber up for deletion since they are one and the same. Chris 13:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusted Andreas Wildhözl per you request yesterday. Chris 13:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The images you put up for deletion I agree with. Delete all of them. Help me on what is valid on getting all images in the future. I am at your mercy. Chris 13:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Also let Jonel that I will also want the issues in question as well on Images. Chris 13:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. Just wanted to let you know I put up new images on V-style and the Kongsberger technique. The former I got from the Ski jumping at the 2006 Winter Olympics while the latter I got from Wikipedia:Commons from the 1928 Winter Olympics. Thanks for your advice and help on this. Chris 14:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you restored a picture that was recently removed from the Heinen's Fine Foods article. Thank you. Bluebul1989 23:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for using the new template!! I'm glad to see it catch on. I made an important change tonight - you can now specify an alternate flag to over-ride the default, so we can use this for all the early Games too. I have tried it out on some of the 1900 Games pages and it works great. Thanks again, Andrwsc 05:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sue Anne — just a heads-up on the edits you made to 2010 Winter Olympics. The recent editor of much of that section is User:Roitr/sockpuppeter, who has also been causing a lot of grief on the Olympic sports and Demonstration sport pages. You might want to be prepared to revisit that page to look for reverts to your edits (which, by the way, are excellent references). This user will often revert to her/his version without regard for superior references. Andrwsc 23:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really hate to talk about a controversy again and again, but after thinking it over and over regarding about the outcome of The Apprentice 4, I have some takes that I have to declare:

• Being fiercely loyal to someone may be good but sometimes in business that is not always the case. Remember that Rebecca defended Toral since Rebecca believed what Toral did was right? Jennifer W. believed that Toral should've been fired, but Rebecca believed in Toral's abilities. Apparently, I felt that the women didn't get along at all. However, I think that's somewhat a firing flaw, one of the reasons why I believe that "Fired" fitted better on Rebecca's application profile than "Not Hired" (The Apprentice Rules also believes that). Impartiability and not being fiercely loyal to someone is what I think Mr. Trump wants as his Apprentice.
• Not winning a task even with super hard-to-work-with people is also a problem. Randal can manage and ensure that hard-to-work-with people contribute to the wins, and he even showed that he can also win a task even with hard-to-work-with people like Clay for example. Rebecca, though, I felt that the only way she can win is that she has very easy-to-work-with people, strong contributors (ala Randal), whatever I can think of. While Mr. Trump felt that he wanted to also hire Rebecca, I felt that Mr. Trump nearly made a fatal mistale by doing so, because the key in hiring an apprentice is the ability to lead hard-to-work with people, give lots of directions, and pull the team together. That's another reason why I felt that "Fired" fit better on Rebecca's app status.
• I think that the Audience doesn't get the real reasons why Randal didn't recommend a double-hiring, and I felt that Mr. Trump shouldn't have proceeded in hiring Rebecca under any circumstances. I don't know why the audience booed at Randal's recommendation for Mr. Trump not to hire Rebecca. After looking at the proven results of Rebecca and Randal, I think that another reason yet Rebecca should've been labeled as "Fired" is because Rebecca, as I really hate to state this after the edit war, lacks substance, and substance is something of a serious matter I take.
  • I also only permitted the South African decision to go on the general Apprentice page a while ago, but I felt that Tokyo Sexwale made a HUGE MISTAKE in hiring two people, as I really have to be harsh on this as a double-hiring would equate to a really bad decision not because of jealousy purposes, but also CEOs have to really set up a budget for its workforce as well, and I felt that Mr. Sexwale didn't consider his company's budget during the hiring of the finale.

Just my 2 cents. No further major edits done as of this time, with the exception of my closing thoughts of The Apprentice 4. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 01:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings via my new account!

Thanks for the encouragement.

Newbie,learning 18:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the message he left on my talk page? He could barely get through a sentence without insulting Vesther in some manner. His block wasn't for the tralala stuff, it was for his response when asked to play nice. Not to mention the intense hostility being directed at the blocking admin now.--Crossmr 03:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there is no excuse for incivility on wikipedia, and no place for "He started it". This user is showing extreme hostility in every talk message he leaves regardless of who its towards. As for not leaving a civlity tag on vesther's page, I only came across his comment. I didn't investigate into the whole exchange (which I'll now do). But as I said, regardless of what was said to him, its no excuse for his retaliatory behaviour. I've been dealing with a user who refues to take responsibility for his behaviour for some time now. We don't need to add to that problem by having more users all to willing to do the same.--Crossmr 03:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've had a look at the edits and edits summaries over at Apprentice 4 and a look at the talk dialogue between them. While Vesther did refer to his chat as tralala and useless as well, I can see the IP being uncivil long before it got to that, with this edit summary [3]. It doesn't excuse Vester's commment and I'll mention the same thing to him about choosing better words, but the users edit summaries and aggressiveness here just isn't appropriate.--Crossmr 03:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, look to what all you are admitting Crossmr. Firstly you admit to giving me a warning without even understanding the issue, without even reading vesther's message and reading mine and without giving him a warning.

Next message you just write that dont use tralala.

so, till ur second message u did not even read or understand the issue and you gave 1 warning and 1 reply?

wow, amazing, thats how u admins operate on wiki these days.

next thing, i am blocked.

and then u accuse me of hostility after blocking me?

this is ridiculous.

Sue, thanks for ur support.

I agree that statement was civil, thats why i did not say that to vesther, saying, now that would be uncivil. also, when people complain about u to admins and admins give u an unfair warning, a little hostility and exasperation is to be expected.

this is an equal playing field not an admin fiefdom.

looking at this display of admins on wiki, any person on wiki will indeed understand now what wiki has come too!! lol.

this is a classic case of abuse of admin priveleges.

these power-mad admins issue warnings and blocks without any rhyme or reason.

just imagine till 2 messages, crossmr did not even read the messages behind the issue, SO HOW MUCH DO U THINK roy AA KNEW ABOUT THE ISSUE AT ALL as he is the one who blocked me even as i was talking to crossmr?

and now after blocking they are analyzing the issue. ridiculous.

any regular person will tell you that THERE IS NO WAY A CASE FOR BLOCKING THAT TOO WITHOUT ANY WARNING OF BEING BLOCKED!!!!

THEY JUST SAID, BE NICE and BLOCKED.

no second warning, no warning of blocking. just blocked.

and now they are justifying it by digging up old issues which were NEVER EVER issues to being with. ridiculous. it reflected extremely badly on these admins. very poor. they know how poor and incompetent they are as admins. shame on them.

really, its because of such admins that wiki is going down the drain.

I am sure such admins have a pattern of abuse in the past. This should be investigated and action taken. This has gone on too far in wiki and it cant be god for wiki.

These admins should be blocked for atleast a week or a month for them to reflect upon how many people they have blocked unfairly and wrongly with gross abuse of admin PRIVELEGES and wiki should take away all their admin rights, they do not deserve them at all.

once again i thank u sue, and upon my above statements, i think it would be fair for u to unblock me.

in any case, even if u dont unblock me, i think i have successfully exposed the intentions and actions of certain admins who thought they could get away with gross abuse of admin priveleges. and i certainly will be complaining about them.

- u know who.

ps. sorry for the non-formatting, i tried. Please re-arrange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.203.97 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't block you. Continued block evasion is only going to lead to an extended block though. As I said, regardless of the behaviour on Vesther's part, your incivility is not excused by it. --Crossmr 04:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crud, I was worried about something like that. Could they fall under Fair Use? (I have a hard time with image policy.) --Fang Aili ^talk 18:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed some of the image policies.. looks like Fair Use does not work here, but maybe Creative Commons would. (Looking at "Hoo"'s usage requirements on her webpage, perhaps one of the CC licenses would be compatible. We could get permission from her, possibly.) If you could hold off on proposing them for deletion at least until Vesperholly gets back online, I'd appreciate it. She may have gotten GFDL permission through an email or something.

I also noticed that when uploading an image, one of the licensing options is "The copyright holder gave me permission to use this work in Wikipedia articles." If Vesperholly got permission directly from Hoo, does this mean the pictures can stay? Thanks for your help. --Fang Aili ^talk 20:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted Andrea Chempinski directly via email and she gave me permission to use her photos on Wikipedia: "I do allow Wikipedia to use my photos but they must include "(c) Andrea "Hoo" Chempinski" in the caption of the photo with a link to www.scratchspin.com. So long as this is done you can put photos on whichever skater pages you'd like." Vesperholly 20:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought of this: Should I need to go back to Chempinski and specify which license she will release the images under? CC, GFDL, etc? Please do not delete the images until I've gotten further responses from Chempinski - she seems amenable to it. BTW I'm a she. Vesperholly 20:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I'm going to e-mail Chempinski right now and see what she wants to do re: licensing. Could you hold off on deleting the images until I receive a response? Much appreciated. Vesperholly 20:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sue Anne, how are you?

Hope you are as fine as always.

Looks like the admin cabal has been upto something on my IP userpage. LOL.

Some of the cabal must have jumped in, looking at the edit history, maybe because they were smarting when I had earlier pointed out their ways. LOL. I feel bad for them, they must have been nursing their grudges for long. LOL.

Your message in my support and other messages have been deviously deleted by the cabal. LOL. Would you be bothered enough to put it in place again? The cabal obviously want to paint the issue their way. HAHAHAHAHA.

I did not read a single message on my usertalk page after your nice supportive message because I already knew it must be full of the cabal's unmentionable things. LOL. I only noted the names of the cabal and had a big laugh.

A few things did come out of the incident.

Crossmr submitted that he had not blocked me, indirectly meaning that he too did not support the block. He further admitted in so many of his own words that he had not even read the message Vesther had sent me to which I had replied, and that he had no idea about the issue, but he still sent me 1 warning and 1 message, LOL. He did not even warn Vesther, but he warned me for using those words, Vesthers words, which I only used to reply to him in his own medicine.!!! LOL. And never in those communications with him was there talk of warning or blocking.

So, the result is that Crossmr has succeeded in showing himself to be incompetent and unfair.

As for Mr. Royboy. The less said about him the better.

Did you even hear a word out of him about his reasons for the ban?

Who makes these guys admins??

Some people do get obsessed and have control issues in wiki I guess, Vesther being a case in point. Is it possible that this Robroy guy is a friend of an earlier aggrieved cabal member? LOL.

Anyway, the above two examples are on record, and you are the witness!!! And I hope next time you act correctively on such issues, I mean un-blocking.

I guess the admin cabal must have been going about this, just block, without any warning to block, and without understanding or reading anything about it, with other people too. They must be quite experienced in trying to obfuscate the SPECIFIC ISSUE IN QUESTION later on.

I actually read a message on Robroy's page where he is telling a guy who was protesting against his unfair blocking, that fine, he may have been wrong in blocking him but that it was ok as the guy had learnt from it!!! LOL.

WOW. If that is not being power-mad, what is? LOL.

I sincerely think that you should have exercised your right to unblock, seeing how u understood the issue, and the concerned admin or admins had no explanation for the block.

No reading, no understanding of the specific issue, no warning to the original guilty party, no warning to block, just block!!!! LOL.

A few words about my messages I had sent.

With regard to Vesther, we both know what I feel about him. But to be fair, its not his fault really. Its the power-mad admin's fault who probably hit buttons from a list before even warning to block!LOL.

Vesther just couldnt take it I guess after I repied back giving him some of his own medicine, he just started crying. LOL. I guess he's not used to it. Maybe till now people just got bored of his obsessive ways and ignored him. LOL. Too bad. I see he has been receiving some much needed counselling from his best friend Crossmr who Did Not give him a warning for the very same words. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

And he has further archived the discussions. Hmmmmm. Not a bad idea, when do u think I should archive that now-useless page, as it is I dont use it after I created an account. Anyway.

As to my own ways,

You dont know how much I was chuckling continuously after I inadvertently read some (parts of) messages while posting from proxies (to only legitimately protest and not to damage wiki's articles), after getting blocked, saying something about drama. I really did not want to crack the whip, but ...!!!! LOL. (even this terminology is borrowed). LOL. I hope those were connected to this incident, even if not, they did cause a great deal of chuckling. LOL.

Someone was desperately trying to block me to prevent the truth about their actions from coming out. LOL. The cabal must have been trying to rustle up support. LOL.

I still smile and chuckle because of it all. Drama! HAHAHAHAHAHA.

I was not even aware of smashing the block at that time, I was just busy posting my messages!!!!! which some people were trying hard to prevent me from, for obvious reasons. LOL. And I left only after I had made my point and I had nothing more to say. Also, I got bored running circles around these guys. LOL. Obviously, nothing malicious was ever intended or done using proxies, it was just a method of registering legitimate protest. Wiki has a noble intention, and I support it, inspite of the cabal. LOL.

In fact, I also wrote a meaningful(I think, LOL) line in the Dalai Lama article, to symbolically break and defy the utterly wrong block, Gandhi style. Dont know if it was saved though, as I said I was quite bored by then.

As it is, the block had no meaning, and I was always in cruise mode, surfing and free to edit if I felt like it.

As for my messages which some ppl found uncivil. LOL.

All I can say is that it was never pre-emptive. I was only replying to them in their own tone and medicine. Too bad they couldnt take it. LOL.

And it seems that one has to watch the language even while talking to third parties, because big brother is always watching. lol. DUCK. lol.

I think newbies learn all these hundreds of rules and stupid legalese only by trial and error, that is warnings and blocks in wiki!!! LOL.

Some admins do seem to thrive on the stupid legalese. LOL.

As a newbie, people should first of all post an extensive list informing them about so many rules!!!!

These ppl probably expect all newbies to be aware of what wiki is about and all its rules right from the start, even though some people just surf into it from google while searching stuff etc. and think its all about just putting and editing in their views etc. and expecting others to do the same!!!!! And thats what they keep doing, until suddenly they get some weird vandal warning, warning them and stuff, and expecting them to know all the rules. LOL. Amazing. LOL. And even in the first warning they dont post a nice message saying, hey, here are all the rules, please follow them and help make wiki a better encyclopedia. LOL. And they dont even say that u cannot edit or delete the stupid warnings!!! LOL. Its all quite ridiculous. LOL.

How many newbies do these ppl think know about what words they are allowed to use and not use in non-article third party conversations!!!!?

Then they block without even warning to BLOCK!!!!

PATHETIC.

They should be trained to be nice to newbies, as policy, because they are admins! LOL.

I doubt if any newbie knows about user talk and rules and warnings and warnings about warnings, or whatever. LOL.

But knowing the cabal I dont blame them. LOL. They must need newbies to have something to do. Block and stuff. LOL.

I guess newbies must be given powers to block such admins too and strip them of their adminship. Two newbies should have the vote to unblock, and also to block such admins after arguing their case.

The admin(s) involved in the above incident would surely have serious action taken against them if I thought of complaining against them. Maybe even stripped of their adminship. I could do that anytime I wanted.

All such admins should be banned from blocking. They should not have any special powers, other than reverting articles etc and even simple warnings based on examples.

Any blocking should only be handled by 3-5 general unrelated neutral users that too after two or three SPECIFIC warnings.

So that the corrupt cabal cannot collude and continue their corruption of admin priveleges and powers and ultimately that of wiki.

Do you think I should waste anymore of my time on these admins?

I too can rustle up quite a cabal if I get to it. LOL. Its quite easy to rustle up support from the areas I am interested in.

But I have sympathy for those guys and think I probably have set them on the path of being good admins with appropriate warnings. LOL. They will now think twice before blocking people. So, I wont waste anymore time on them. LOL. I am not into all this stupid bureaucratic unmentionable anyway which looks like has become quite central to some people's existence. Do admins get paid? Or is it all a labour of UNBIASED CONSIDERATE ALTRUISTIC love? LOL. All these stupid serious rules. LOL. But seeing these admins, maybe there should be some rules to control them. Someone should admin the admins. LOL.

Or maybe I WILL complain, to put the fear of Jimbo into them. LOL. Maybe I should complain about these admins directly to him. LOL.

And yeah, Im not being egotistic or anything about defying the block, you know the facts, even you know that wasnt right. How can they just block without any warning to block when someone is even talking to the concerned admin!

Anyway Sue, knowing how you supported me after knowing the facts and the issue, I really appreciate it.

You are kind and generous.

As for the admin cabal, they have only confirmed my views of them which the concerned parties already know. HAHAHAHAHA.

I guess Wiki needs me all the more to balance it. LOL. But it all depends how long before one gets bored with it. LOL.

Wiki belongs to me, you and everyone equally. Does anyone own it? HAHAHAHA.

Cheers. Have fun. Thank you for your time.

I guess I have to thank wiki for making me chuckle so hard for so long. Drama! LOL. Some ppl were wondering where the messages were coming from if I was blocked. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

And, will look you up time to time, via my new spanking clean (for now, lol) account, which is Artistotle,laughing. Ssshhh, the cabal is listening. LOL.

Can one delete earlier accounts?

Thanks again Sue, ur lovely.

Cheers.

Bye. 219.91.203.71 04:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]