User talk:MilesD.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Welcome
2 Response
3 WP:RfAR
4 Checkuser results
5 Inappropriate response
6 Why are you using the Home of the Underdogs logo in your signature?
7 Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh
8 Image Tagging Image:Space buddy2.gif
9 Do not reinstate the disputed Shiloh image
10 Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh

[edit] Welcome

|||Miles.D.||| ^{02-5-2006 18:49 (UTC)}

[edit] Response

[edit] WP:RfAR

A Request for arbitration has been filed on the dispute at Shiloh Shepherd Dog. Please visit WP:RfAR to learn more. Thank you. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 19:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser results

Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser#Tina_M._Barber_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29.2C_Trillhill_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29.2C_70.35.67.56_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29_and_207.200.116.133_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29 has been completed Fred Bauder 22:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate response

Well lets see, I think that's about everything you guys can accuse me of now. Apparently you're still upset at being part of an RfAR, but you are an involved party like it or not. For the record, I did not resign anything, simply stated that I would no longer being taking suggestions via email for the proposal since I've been accused of taking ownership of the article and stirring up trouble. Since I agreed to keep those emails private, I'd have a hard time defending myself from the accusations that are flying around. For the record, you're accusing my husband and I of being sockpuppets -- if you'd like, I can provide my phone number so you can personally verify.

It would have been more appropriate for you to have removed any personal attacks and personal information instead of removing the entire post -- you can replace problem sections with <name removed> or <personal attack removed> instead of blanking an entire discussion. As far as I can see, the post didn't give any information on any editors or private parties, the names mentioned were in reference to the kennels/registries being questioned and are available on the kennel/registry websites -- when we say don't reveal personal information, this is in regards to outing editors or other private figures and doesn't include information that is already public record. Also, not a single editor was attacked in the entire post -- just because the poster is questioning that validity of the information in the article in reference to the registries and the breed itself does not make it a personal attack. You may wish to read the rules you're quoting -- see WP:NPA.

The way to respond to posters like this that are esentially just trolls would be to request that they cite their source for information. If they cannot provide one, their comments about the validity of the breed, DNA testing etc would have no weight -- essentially, if they're the source of their information/opinion, its original research and wouldn't be admissable. Try a few deep breaths :) .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 23:54, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Jareth's resignation post (edit summary entitled "bye")

"I'm afraid that I'm no longer going to be able to condense everyone's suggestions and continue assisting in developing a history for the article. To everyone that has sent in suggestions or corrections since I posted these drafts, I apologize; please still make the changes, especially those that fixed my errors. I know many of you preferred using private email and other avenues for discussion because of the tense environment here, but it leaves me little room to defend myself since I agreed to keep those private. I have recently been accused of taking ownership of the article, plotting in private forums and intentionally causing problems; since I don't want to cause any further issues, I will be removing myself from the situation. I really enjoyed working with you and I couldn't tell you how impressed I am with the many of you who took the time to learn about things here and help work on the article despite the problems. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 15:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)"

Draw your own conclusions. |||Miles.D.

||| ^{02-12-2006 17:42 (UTC)} 17:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I worded that poorly then and in any case, mediation is effectively suspended while the case is at RfAR. I meant to say that I would no longer be proposing things myself, editors will need to state their own proposals on the talk page from now on. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 17:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why are you using the Home of the Underdogs logo in your signature?

This is a violation of copyrights. You should stop before I list it for deletion. Lapinmies 16:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, you posted I am using an image that belongs to "Underdogs". This image has been around on the internet for at least 6 years on many free clip art pages, websites, etc. as both a jpg and an animated gif. If you can show me where it is "copyrighted" by Underdogs, I will be happy to request it be deleted myself. Please let me know if you have this information. Thanx much. |||Miles.D.

||| ^{02-12-2006 16:14 (UTC)} 16:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Addendum: Here is one free clip art website which lists it: [Space Dog]

The page http://www.the-underdogs.org/credits.php says this:

"Site designers - without whom the site would never look this spiffy: DJ - see his site if you are interested in HTML design services, Exodus3D - who designed cute dog graphics in our previous design - visit her site for more awesome artwork and a ton of MAME related stuff :) Also, TTGGuy helped us fix the earlier site design, Datazoid created the wonderful default HOTU template for our forum, and the nice set of default smileys were made by Reverendo and Teesh."

The bottom of the page says that "Portions are copyrighted by their respective owners. All rights reserved." I am not really sure if that applies to the dog picture and it is possible that the creator has released it to free use or something, so I don't think it needs to be deleted afterall. Lapinmies 16:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Shiloh/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 16:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Space buddy2.gif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Space buddy2.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -SCEhard T 04:45, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Response on my talk page and at WP:PUI -SCEhard T 18:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do not reinstate the disputed Shiloh image

Only the creator of the image can furnish the license which you posted to the image page. You are not the creator of the image, and you are not the legal representative of the creator. Monicasdude 00:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

You may wish to have the photographer email permissions at wikimedia dot org confirming the release of the photo under the GFDL to avoid any concerns with the licensing as stated. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 02:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)