User talk:Grendel's mother
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] World
Just a courtesy heads up. Requested assistance at the village pump to get more editors to look at the changes being made to the article to get some more input/ideas. exolon 12:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Trolling
You have been leaving little droppings on several pages now throwing slings and arrows at Dragons Flight because you don't like what you seem to think he or she has done. You should consider my reversions a warning that you are speaking in an incivil fashion. If you want to query Dragon's Flight (or anyone else) about something you feel strongly about, feel free, but I strongly suggest that you leave every shred of sarcasm at the door. Nandesuka 13:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, and if I don't like what someone is doing, and more importantly I think what they're doing constitutes an assualt on Wikipedia, then I am to go... where? When I confront the person about it on their talk page you erase it, so... Otherwise, what I said was not uncivil in any sense, was not name-calling, I asked that he-she be desysopped for what is in policy as inappropriate blocking. If you thought my tone on the user's page was sarcastic, I will try to steer away from sarcasim, but in any case since it was neither directed at you nor on your page please let them be the judge of that. Thank you. grendel's mother 13:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you engage in calm, civil discussion, without hysterics, then I will certainly "let it go." If you engage in personal attacks and trolling, then I will remove your comments, and possibly block you. Hope that helps. Nandesuka 13:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well as for blocking I've noticed that you have made more indefinite blocks than almost anyone here, so I have no doubt of that. As for personal attacks and trolling I have no idea of anything I've said that could be applied to either, so I suggest you either cite me here and start a discussion on it or leave me be and let the "aggreived" answer for themselves. grendel's mother 14:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you engage in calm, civil discussion, without hysterics, then I will certainly "let it go." If you engage in personal attacks and trolling, then I will remove your comments, and possibly block you. Hope that helps. Nandesuka 13:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nandesuka, you have clearly been far more incivil in this case than the user you are threatening to block for such. Removal of harsh personal attacks is sometimes considered justified (though there is disagreement even on that) but removal of talk comments that you just don't like with no personal attacks evident ([1]) isn't even contemplated... indeed, it is usually classified as vandalism. To cite your own advice, "engage in calm, civil discussion"... rather than immediately saying "trolling", "droppings", "hysterics", et cetera, blanking comments, and issuing threats.
- Grendel's mother, on the Publicgirluk issue... the user declared that they were leaving the project when the pictures were disputed. Many people questioned the validity of placing an indefinite block when no policy had been clearly broken (there were allegations of 'copyright infringement' and/or 'intentional disruption', but no real proof of either), but the user didn't want to be here anyway. What point then in reversing a block issued after the user had already left for good? If she wanted to be here it could merit discussion, but absent that is it not moot? --CBD 12:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, with regards to that user the point is moot, and rather than leaving it alone Nandesuka spawned an entirely new issue from it by deciding that he didn't feel like hearing something anymore and deleting it, systematically, wherever he found trace of it rearing around again, blocking the page, deleting other comments, issuing threats, all within seconds with very worrying determination. This kind of behaviour is meant to be intimidating, it isn't what WP is about, and it should be prevented at all cost. grendelsmother 12:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I largely agree, and try to make that case to beleagured admins who often have reached the point where they just want to stomp and block rather than hearing any more dissent. Understand that people mess up, and by all means say so when they do, but calling for 'desysoping' (as with Dragon's flight) rather than just questioning the actions / suggesting that they be changed also tends to inflame situations. --CBD 12:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I see your point. I understood he had bent or broke the blocking rules before I understood there are other avenues of opposition than desysopping. I think he is unrepentant anyway but I'm off that case, I wan't involved when it was going on anyway. Thanks for stepping in and saying and doing the right things, I'd begun to think no one cared or was listening. Still, some insidious points of wiki-governace have come up that I think have to be dealt with; for example "stomping and blocking" - I think a means of notification for review when an admin has made a certain number of indef blocks would be in order or when his or her blocks are frequently contested. Best grendelsmother 13:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I largely agree, and try to make that case to beleagured admins who often have reached the point where they just want to stomp and block rather than hearing any more dissent. Understand that people mess up, and by all means say so when they do, but calling for 'desysoping' (as with Dragon's flight) rather than just questioning the actions / suggesting that they be changed also tends to inflame situations. --CBD 12:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, with regards to that user the point is moot, and rather than leaving it alone Nandesuka spawned an entirely new issue from it by deciding that he didn't feel like hearing something anymore and deleting it, systematically, wherever he found trace of it rearing around again, blocking the page, deleting other comments, issuing threats, all within seconds with very worrying determination. This kind of behaviour is meant to be intimidating, it isn't what WP is about, and it should be prevented at all cost. grendelsmother 12:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
Thank you! :). I am glad that my humble contributions are appreciated.--Berig 15:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Martin Velíšek
The lisence you uploaded it under cannot be used on wikipedia. Secondly unless you own the copyright (which I doubt) you cannot not upload it under any free lisence.Geni 10:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks, but there are lots of book covers on Wikipedia, so what is the procedure for getting them there?grendelsmother 10:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- normaly they are uploaded and some form of fair use is claimed through the use of {{Bookcover}} —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geni (talk • contribs) .
- Ah, would you believe I hadn't noticed the copyright menu was scroll-down :( Sorry, and cheers grendelsmother 13:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- normaly they are uploaded and some form of fair use is claimed through the use of {{Bookcover}} —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geni (talk • contribs) .
[edit] re Image:farma_zvirat.jpg
I deleted the image because it was unfree (see WP:IUP, and wasn't in fair use (see WP:FU. You can certainy use the image as "fair use" to illustrate material on the book (or on the cover painting). We have an automated robot program that sorts through images, and at the moment when it found this image, it wasn't in any article. Therefore at that time it couldn't have been fair use, since fair use exists only in the context of an article. And we don't leave images that might be used for fair use later hanging around, as they are subject to possible misuse. The robot may have caught you at a wrong time, though, and if you have a fair use for the image in an article, you can re-upload it or I'll undelete it for you. Herostratus 05:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- It's okay I finally figured it out, thanks grendelsmother 11:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Nandesuka
Please continue your conversation with Nandesuka on his talk page or WP:AN, as it has now gone beyond the Publicgirluk debate, and to continue it on her talk page will only result in the page being protected (if it continues there, I will protect it myself). If the talk page is left open, then any new evidence directly related to her can be placed there. Thanks. Please don't reply on my talk page, as I'm trying to start a wikibreak!!!! This post doesn't need a reply, as actions speak louder than words. Tyrenius 17:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- FYI, see also WP:DR. Tyrenius 00:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have no intention of continuing this debate with him though, he'll shoot himself in the foot with his behaviour on his own. Thanks for always being a reasonable contributor to the discussion though and enjoy your holiday, if you ever manage to start it hehehe grendelsmother 00:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- We have to try to find meeting points. And also "If you sit by the river long enough...". Holiday imminent (honest). Tyrenius 02:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- ;) If you're an art buff Tyrenius have a look at my Martin Velíšek article (I could use some input on it) and the link to his paintings at the bottom, let me know what you think.
- Sorry, break time. Try art projects (link from my user page) or User:Stumps. Tyrenius 04:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have no intention of continuing this debate with him though, he'll shoot himself in the foot with his behaviour on his own. Thanks for always being a reasonable contributor to the discussion though and enjoy your holiday, if you ever manage to start it hehehe grendelsmother 00:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] {{Village pump}} image (Image:Wikipump.JPG)
Hi Grendel's mother,
- (Isn't that a nice pump now?)
Do you have a lighter/brighter/gamma-enhanced version of this picture...? It seems a little dark and gloomy here... Regards, David Kernow (talk) 22:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
