User talk:Chmod007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

David: I am new to Wikipedia and an having a hell of a time trying to put some pictures (JPEG) into an article. This copyright thing is unreal...... The pic in questions is Tests 001. It is a personal photo and I don't really care about copyright or anything........ I just wanna put it in an article and am totally lost...........are you able to help me please. Thanks themaj

Of course, I would be delighted if you would go away again. --Jscott 07:26, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jason. Of course I know that. Why ever, btw, do you keep spending time on the lost cause that is Wikipedia? — David Remahl 08:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

People e-mail me and go "Hey, that dumbfuck who couldn't see past the end of his own nose just posted again." When I have time, I drop by.--Jscott 08:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Hey, have you read Wikipedia:No personal attacks lately? David is a good guy who means well. —babyman.jpg (talk) 08:25, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, but No personal attacks doesn't apply to my talk page. As you know, Jason's got something against me, because of what was arguably a mistake on my part not too long ago. Everyone, please leave Jasons edits intact.. — David Remahl 08:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "horrible"

Hello. I was wondering why you did not like the edit I made, adding the sumamry of what OSes are trying to do. It gave true facts, and was not tipped in any favor. Please respond to this ASAP. (From the computer virus article)

Chris K.

[edit] Computer virus edits

Hi Chris.

First I'd like to apologize for the rude language I used in the edit summary. Sorry.

However, the edits you made were incorrect, bordering on incomprehensible. There was literally _no_ information that I was able to salvage from it. Lets pick it apart:

• "More than often, Windows users have atleast a few viruses throughout their lives."
  • "More than often"? That isn't even an expression. It might be true that most Windows users experience viruses, but in that case you should back it up with some sort of statistics.
• "Many operating systems are attempting to try to become completely worm and virus free. This is, and will always be, impossible. Programmers can make the world's most advanced operating system, but the hackers will always have a way to break into it."
  • This is speculation. It is theoretically possible to make a perfect operating system that operates completely to spec.
• "The Mac OS X operating system was built by Macintosh"
  • The Mac OS X operating system was developed by Apple Computer, but built on the efforts of many other companies, organizations and individuals.
• "in order to try to get back on top of the security line, since all other operating systems by Macintosh have had many viruses."
  • Mac OS X was developed for a variety of reasons. Mac OS 9 did not have significant security problems, even though there were a couple of dozens of viruses for various versions of the classic OS. The DOS platform had a couple of magnitudes more viruses.
• "Macintosh OS X uses a much different programming style, making it hard to be hacked. Mac OS X is one step nearer, but it won't be perfect for long."
  • First, it's Mac OS X, not "Macintosh OS X". Also, what does the following mean? "A much different programming style"? Does it really? Different from what? What is "perfect"? Is it perfect now? If so, why would that fact change?
• Windows Vista is supposed to come out soon, and that is supposed to use a whole new laungage
  • "Soon"? End of 2007 is the best estimate we have. WHat "whole new language" will it be using and what in the world does that have to do with viruses?
• giving users a better experience and entertainment level using computers.
  • This is the Computer virus article, you know. "Entertainment level" has nothing to do with it.
• "However, if the viurs is programed to loop then it may have some effect in processor."
  • This, finally...What does it mean that a virus "is programmed to loop"? What does "some effect in processor" mean? Every program has "some effect on the processor". That's the whole point of being a program.

Please do continue to contribute to Wikipedia, but you need to work more on your prose and facts. — David Remahl 07:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why?

why did you reert my edit to the steve jobs article? what i wrote is true. Gabrielsimon 11:57, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it is true, but it is not interesting in the grand scheme of things. We should avoid self-references in Wikipedia, and in articles we should regard Wikipedia just as any other website (however difficult it is to maintain that neutrality). Also, making references to "his latest meeting" in an encyclopedia that is likely to exist for hundreds of years is not useful. The question we have to ask ourselves in this case is whether we would have included "Steve Jobs said at WWDC 2005 that britannica.com is one of his favorite websites.". I'm sorry for reverting without a comment. — David Remahl 12:02, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

sorry about the reverting the revert, i didnt think you were gonna respond... Gabrielsimon 12:06, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

No prob. — David Remahl 12:11, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello there David, I didn't realize that you'd returned. It's great to see you back! Mackensen (talk) 14:24, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BRSM

Ok, I have some answers to your questions:

• You must pay to be a member, which is granted to ages 14-31
• It is HQ'ed in Minsk, then there are regional chapters. Minsk is the only local chapter that I know of
• I have a membership count from 2003, but nothing recent
• I got some of the structure down, but mainly at the national level
• There are similar organizations, but none enjoy state spornsorship.

I still got many to answer, but to make it easier, you can strike out the objections that I havr fixed, please. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:56, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Religion and schizotypy VfD interference

Please do not redirect the article while it is currently up for VfD... Doing so removes the VfD tag. If you look at the vote page you should note that redirecting is the smallest minority position on the page. Please do not try to overrule the votes of other editors by taking these actions befoe the vote is closed. DreamGuy 02:05, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

It is not necessary to have a vote to redirect a page and I don't accept VfD's authority. Especially not when you yourself are removing discussion (i.e. consensus building) from the "vote" page. "Edit this page now" allows me to remove the VfD tag. You are free to put it back. — David Remahl 02:28, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

You "don't accept VfD's authority" ???!?! Hello, it's a fundamentally policy here. DreamGuy 02:54, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Not really. Policy on Wikipedia is goverened by consensus. There is nothing like consensus on VfD at this point. — David Remahl 02:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

For a sample of the divergence of attitudes, see Wikipedia:Deletion reform. — David Remahl 03:02, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the discussion! That was very nice of you. You'll be glad to know that I don't intend to go past one revert :-). — David Remahl 03:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

DreamGuy: I wonder if you can tell me something...Can you give me one single example of a hypothetical future situation where it would matter _at_all_ whether the outcome of the vote is redirect or delete? If it goes to delete, as it probably will, I will recreate the page as a redirect immediately. It is a reasonably useful redirect, so it would never be deleted at RFD. It is quite different from the current contents, that was up on VfD, so this VfD decision will not affect the recreated version. VfD does not deal with redirects (that's what RFD is for). Thus, it will remain as a redirect until someone replaces its contents. The only difference between the two outcomes is what is in the history. Now, I can understand that there are reasons to remove history completely, but I cannot see one in this case. — David Remahl 04:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

And if you recreate the page after a delete, making iut a redirect or whatever, I will mark it as a speedy delete under the recreation of a previously deleted article rule and it will get deleted again. You have basically admitted to a bad faith desire to ignore consensus on this issue. You need to change that attitude and accept what people as a group decide instead of forcing your opinion down other people's throats. DreamGuy 04:57, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Nope, the CSD guidelines for an article that has previously been deleted does not cover this case. If an article is deleted at one point in time and is later recreated by a different editor with different contents, then it must be VFD'd again. I believe there is _much_ stronger consensus in favor of that, than for VfD in general. And you did not answer my question. — David Remahl 05:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

No, actually, I did answer your question, but apparently you do not (or are unwilling to) understand. The VfD also clearly covers the possibility of a redirect and the votes are clearly in favor of a full delete and not a redirect. If you think you can prevail against consensus by playing games you have another thing coming. DreamGuy 05:08, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Hi. While you can obviously remove the tag from the article, that dosen't stop the VfD. It does, however, stop anyone who reads the article from knowing about the VfD.Hipocrite 13:42, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that is accurate. — David Remahl 13:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Ok - just wanted to make sure that everyone was on the same page here. What bits of the article do you think we should maintain? Hipocrite 14:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Nothing in particular. Which is why I redirected it to the psychology/religion page. I want the history of the page to remain, though. — David Remahl 14:22, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revert

Any reason you reverted me? The anon is a blocked disruptive editor. Jayjg ^(talk) 06:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for reverting you, but the comment was on a talk page, and in direct response to a comment by you. I don't think it is appropriate to make it look as though there was no opposition. You should just ignore it. (Then I don't know precisely what this editor has done in the past. Your action might have been warranted. I won't interfere if you revert me.) — David Remahl 06:22, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Comments are one thing, but personal attacks from Disruptive banned editors are another... Jayjg ^(talk) 06:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Sure. However, I want to note that that message was not a personal attack. diff. — David Remahl 06:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image use on MainPage

Hello. I've started a discussion at Talk:Main Page#Image use on MainPage. Just saw your comments on User talk:Pharos on this issue. Wanna share your thoughts ? -- PFHLai 13:12, 2005 August 8 (UTC)

[edit] thank you

for the kind words. if you enjoyed the writing i have done, perhapos you would enjoy this short piece http://www.gabrielsimon.com/content/view/30/1 Gavin the Chosen 08:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] erggg...

not really to sure how or why, but i thought me gettingto be an admin, and then helping others who have simmilar difficulties as myself ( being stubborn at hte most inopportune momnets) might be good, otherwise, i would liketo apologize for any wrongoing i might have done.Gavin the Chosen 10:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Maybe in the future. Long into the future. I can tell you for sure that even if you stay on your best behavior from now on there is no chance that you will become an admin within 3 months. That is impossible. After that, yeah, it is certainly possible if you make an effort. But announcing your intentions on the talk page is not going to serve your cause. There are some people who will consider it a provocation. Peace. — David Remahl 10:41, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

maybe they will consider it how i do, a reason to behave.Gavin the Chosen 10:42, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tempest Smith

its uopsetting, but pleae go to that article ,and help me make it better. Its upsettting to me, and frankly i cant make it NPOV, becasue its upsettingGavin the Chosen 11:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Sure. I'll try to find some information about it. Thanks for coming to me asking for help. — David Remahl 11:39, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

certainly. also, there are four links i posted, i was going to write the article based on them, but , well, i cant stand suicide... (persponal loss reminer) but its kinda importnat... sorry if i ramble(.Gavin the Chosen 11:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

you can probly se why its upsretting to me...Gavin the Chosen 11:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I am truly beyond words. Thank you for your support! I promise that I won't let you down. - Lucky 6.9 02:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I will absolutely treat this carefully. In fact, I just deleted two vandal bot stubs. What a rush! Mano e mano! One more thing: I plan on picking everyone's brain because I don't want to screw this up. - Lucky 6.9 02:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tagline update discussion

Hi! Got your comment and responded here. Don't worry, free stays. Thank you for your help! -- Sitearm | Talk 06:14, 2005 August 13 (UTC)

[edit] Second tagline poll - please follow this link

(This is already announced on Pump and Rfc but I'm adding it here because you contributed to the proposal talk page discussion.) Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 05:32, 2005 August 16 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

Thanks for reverting the vandal for me. I'm gonna go see if I can't get him blocked or something; he's been given enough rope to hang himself a couple times over. --Maru 05:15, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Haukur's RFA

Thank you for supporting my nomination till the end. But, more importantly, thank you for having the courage to speak up for an unpopular opinion. You took a lot of flak for it. You were told that your opinion was "chilling" and that if more people felt like you, Wikipedia would not be worthwhile. You were told this because you stood up for "assume good faith", one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. And I like your username - chmod007 is a pretty solid political opinion in my book, and a good description of Wikipedia :) - Haukur Þorgeirsson 15:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Phishing image request

hey,

Can you look at the request for an image made on this page. It would be great to get an image for the article so the that the article may appear on the main page. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 15:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Care to take a look at Ivan Gundulic now, please? HolyRomanEmperor 20:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I looked. Unfortunately, I can't remember ever editing that article or discussing it in any other forum. Please remind me :-) — David Remahl 20:30, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

At Jimbo Wales' talk page... ehether he is Serb or Croat... HolyRomanEmperor 20:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Please read the talk page, and draw a conclusion. I want to consider him both, but user:Elephantus appears to disagree. HolyRomanEmperor 21:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Please read the talk page, and draw a conclusion. I want to consider him both, but user:Elephantus appears to disagree. HolyRomanEmperor 21:18, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FPC revert

Sorry for taking so long to get back tou you (my life has a been a bit hectic). Where did I put an explanation of my revert? In the revert comment I wrote "I'd rather discuss changes like these". I was hoping your response would have been to leave a comment on the talk page about why you feel it should be changed (and I would have responded to it). Please excuse if it had been discusssed before but somehow I missed. The point seems moot now since another discussion has already begun here. Broken S 20:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I did explain my changes on FPC Talk. But it was under a somewhat dated heading, so it's understandable that you missed it! — David Remahl 22:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Palace of Westminster image

A user has requested that I obtain an original version of Image:PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg, the current version of which I moved to Commons in February. I have had no luck getting it from User:Solipsist, who changed the sky. This is a long shot but in November 2004 this image was on WP:FPC ([1]), you said you'd touch up the sky if you got the original copy - did you ever get it? --Oldak Quill 18:28, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately I didn't get it. — David Remahl 04:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Awolf002 RfA

Thank you very much for your support for my RfA. I will do everything I can to justify your trust in me. Awolf002 03:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Macintosh

Thanks for joining! We're currently focusing on the Apple Mac article; it's currently a FA candidate and you can vote here. We’re all honored that you want to join our WikiProject. --HereToHelp (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image galleries

You recently commented at Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Proposal_to_modify_WP:NOT_an_image_gallery. In a related development, another, in my mind, valuable Image gallery is up for deletion (AfD. Please comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 15:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Million pool

This is just so strange. =) You created the Wikipedia:Million pool, and are going to have the second-closest guess yourself. Are you psychic or something? If the growth rate slows down just a tiny amount then you'll be able to win your own pool. JIP | Talk 17:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Software to create charts

I would like to know what software you used to create the pie and bar charts. Thanks. Bromskloss 13:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current Mac project collaboration

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 13:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Typo body diagram

Hi David, I'm a typographer working on WP type-related articles, and I noticed a small inacurracy in your otherwise excellent illustration [Image:Vertical typographic terms.png] used in Typeface, X-height and Baseline. The "body size" is labelled as from the top of ascenders to the bottom of descenders. Technically type designers call this "letter body height". The true "typo body height" or "em height" extends some distance above and below the extender limits.

Halfway down this page at Microsoft typography a diagram shows total typo body height as "em height". Would it be possible to update your image to show the full typo body height? Thanks :-)
Best regards, Arbo talk 04:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GNAA

Why would one want to re-create GNAA?? Georgia guy 19:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. I do know that dozens of people have spent hundreds of hours on the article in the past, for altruistic reasons, and believe that they deserve another try. The people who felt that it did not belong in Wikipedia had 18 tries before the article was deleted. The fact that it was allowed to be listed 18 times proves that consensus changes over time and that no decision is final on Wikipedia. — David Remahl 19:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sources would need to be presented first... on the talk page, wherever. The page existed for years without sources... it's unreasonable to expect a new one would suddenly be sourced correctly, let's find the sources first before letting people reintroduce unreliable information into articles. --W.marsh 19:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Only you have protected the talk page and all the track record for the page (history) has been removed from the eyes of non-admins. The only reason I can think of for taking these actions is to quash all attempts to work productively to find encyclopedic information about the subject matter. It scares me that this is now the prevailing attitude on Wikipedia. :-(. Here is an email response I sent to Tawker that explains some more of why this trivial issue has eroded my faith in Wikipedia to the point where I don't mind risking my admin status. — David Remahl 12:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It's good to see you again David, and I confess agreeing with you. I'm knocking down the talk page to semi-protection. If the discussion runs off the rails it can always be protected again. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 06:16, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:AltaVista-1996.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:AltaVista-1996.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Egg_carton.jpg

03:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)