User talk:Staecker
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] Wax Tailor
If you don't mind my asking, what's going on between you and Tawkerbot at Wax Tailor? [1] o.o Luna Santin 12:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Tawkerbot is a bot which thought I was vandalizing the page when I deleted most of it. I deleted most of it because it was a copyvio. See Talk:Wax Tailor for a link to the source of the complete text of the original article. Staecker 12:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Thanks. :) Tawkerbot is famous in the CVU, but now and then it messes up -- it's actually surprisingly accurate, most times. For what it's worth, sorry about that. I'll watch the page. Luna Santin 12:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for your help- Staecker 14:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Thanks. :) Tawkerbot is famous in the CVU, but now and then it messes up -- it's actually surprisingly accurate, most times. For what it's worth, sorry about that. I'll watch the page. Luna Santin 12:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Twice married
Are you ashamed of the fact that Joyce Meyer is "twice-married"? I suppose at least YOU realize that disqualifies her for most of her ministry, so its natural that you would want to hide such information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Miguel Angelo (talk • contribs).
- I'm not ashamed- I'm not affiliated with JM's ministry machine. And I don't really know what you mean by "twice-married". Does that just mean that she's been married twice? The information about her marriage(s) can surely go in there. I removed your text because of the comment that this contradicts "biblical Apostolic directives." This comment is based on a particular interpretation of scripture, and this isn't appropriate for the article (see WP:NPOV). Could you just say that she's twice-married (and explain what that means), and leave it at that? Staecker 18:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Baseball images
Sorry about that, wasn't sure what license to give them and I suppose it's too difficult to use copyrighted images. I'll delete them myself and use the team photos--it seems that those are recognized as free use. Once again, sorry about the trouble. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cardinalwraith (talk • contribs).
- Thanks- Staecker 10:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Andrei Tarkovsky + Stalker (film)
I have searched in vain for the sources needed for those pages for a while. Perhaps the text requiring citations should be deleted? Anyway, i apologise. I am planning on expanding the pages soon anyway and will hopefully find the souces then.Itafroma 12:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- OK- It's helpful to know that you couldn't find the sources. That means the statements should be taken out, like you say. thanks- Staecker 13:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:StrugatskyBros.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:StrugatskyBros.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Biy
Please source the content you added to Biy. I kept the picture, but removed the sentence. Thanks, KazakhPol 16:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I saw the Biys all over the place when I was there myself. I remember in particular 4 parallel streets in Almaty named after the guys. That's as good as I can do for a source. Staecker 17:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Colbert vandalism
and are semi-protected because of another spate of Colbert-induced vandalism. The first vandals hit within second after Colbert discussed the movie on his show and stated that he was deliberately spreading rumors which he wanted to see "appear on the internet". We're still seeing the effects of a similar incitement he made this summer (the elephant incident). No need to make it easy for the tools and vandals. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 21:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK, but isn't a pre-emptive semiprotect against WP:SPP? Staecker 21:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? Use common sense. We know from prior experience what will happen. I'll unprotect after a couple of days. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 01:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- I guess we'll disagree on this one. I think that a lot of people care about WP official policies. And many care about semi-protection in particular. Remember when it first came to WP, and several folks got upset that this would be the end of true openness- that pages would be sprotected willy-nilly, whenever somebody felt like it was a good idea. The fears were allayed by strong statements by sprotect proponents that it would be used very sparingly. Things like "Semi-protection should be considered if it is the only reasonable option left to deal with vandalism on a page or to stop a banned or blocked user from editing it."
- Suffice it to say that there's a lot of back-and-forth on this at WT:SPP, and lots of people care about it. The issue is too complicated to be solved by a simple appeal to common sense. Staecker 02:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lsw2gba_characters.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lsw2gba_characters.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Kazakh
Sorry for not responding earlier. This issue is somewhat tricky; you would have to make a good explanation in the category header, to prevent people from (1) getting confused, and (2) once again proposing a cat merge. If you can make the difference clear to the average reader, you are most welcome to recreate the relevant categories. Perhaps you could enquire at a Wikiproject for help, if you aren't already a member. >Radiant< 14:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding edits made to Play of the Month
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Staecker! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 12:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Please refrain from your falsifications ragarding photographs of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn suppsedly being searched at a checkpoint in Ekibastuz, particularly in this photograph[2]. It is well known that this picture was not taken at Ekibastuz, and that the man searching Solzhenitsyn is his companion, in fact it says so in the caption of the book this was taken from. I know false photographs, lies and propaganda are a popular method for attacking the Soviet Union on Wikipedia, but am not going to allow you to spread your lies and distortions, especially with evasive edit summaries such as "grammar" to make this seem like a real photograph other than a re-enactment. Ruy Lopez 10:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Ruy- I changed the caption because it looked like a piece of Runglish which is typical of USSR related articles (I frequent articles about Kazakhstan in particular). "Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn depicting being searched at a checkpoint in Ekibastuz Special Camp" is a poorly constructed sentence. Now that you've filled me in, of course I understand what that is supposed to mean. But to me it looked like a word-order error trying to say something like: "Photograph depicting Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn being searched at a checkpoint in Ekibastuz Special Camp", which is what I tried to clarify in my edit. My edit summary was entirely appropriate for this (admittedly misguided) edit. Sorry for my mistake, and thanks for fixing it with a much clearer caption.
- Now that that's clear, might you take some time to review WP:AGF? Staecker 13:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion bot
Hi Staecker. I was wondering if that bot was new or not, I guess I have my answer. From the deletions I looked it, the bot was 100% correct in matching the images. In most cases, I deleted the other image because there was a longer description (one guy said he used this model camera on one image and this model camera and then gave a description of where it was taken on the other image). Maybe your bot could check for the longer summary and keep that one instead, although I am not sure how well that would work. Sometimes there was a source on one and not the other, etc. Anyway, keep up the good work and let me know if there is anything else. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 23:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image
Hey I've been cleaning up Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy and I would like to know where the image Image:Lsw2gba characters.jpg came from, as you were the uploader. If it came from a website I need the specific url, and I you captued it yourself I need to know that. If you can remember that would be very useful. Thanks. Gran2 20:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- It was an emulator screenshot that I made myself. By the way- does it matter? If I got it from a website, it wouldn't be theirs, right? They would have to claim fair use, in which case we could take it as fair use too, without attributing them. Is that right? Staecker 22:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bot issue
Thanks for running this bot, it looks like it's doing a great job. I have have one issue, sometimes the dupe has a tag on it that's bad, like [3] an untagged tag, then the bot includes this in the other maybe correct description page. Instead if it didn't actually subst the foreign templates, but showed them that might be helpful. - cohesion 05:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- You're right- thanks for the suggestion. I keep forgetting that those templates put them in all sorts of categories. I'll get on this sometime today- a bit busy at the moment. Staecker 12:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's not the end of the world, since they're hidden, at worst it just confuses people as to why it qualified for the list. I doubt anyone would delete a good image if they didn't actually see the tag :) (hopefully!) - cohesion 16:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
![[3]](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Feeff.JPG&oldid=119142449){kind=link}