User talk:Roint
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Regarding your edit "05:44, 13 May 2006 Roint (Took out the "Many users" part. Pretty much the opposite was true.)" of Super Dimension Fortress, I have a question: Are you saying that most users of the SDF consider the editing of the complaining user's web page by SMJ was acceptable-- or that most users do not think it happened. I am curious on what basis you removed the sentence. The edits definitely did occur to Stonefly's page and SMJ did talk about doing it on com, so I'm just curious on what basis you removed the paragraph. (Hopefully the edits will show up on archive.org soon so they can be linked from the article). Thanks for your help! --71.80.228.4 08:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- What I meant was that most users were unperterbed by the sysadmin's removal of stonefly's account. It would've been innaccurate to say that most users considered it to be an abuse of sysadmin privliges. Stephen Jones owns and runs the SDF, so most people consent to his right to remove any user that he wants to. And most users are fully aware of the situation. --Roint 16:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I am not so concerned with the removal of the account (though that does seem like an extreme action in itself for a complaint on a webpage)-- but the fact that the user's webpage was altered before the account removal to contain derogatory comments. Are you familiar with this incident? Perhaps there is some wording that can capture this appropriately. (Also, it's difficult to come up with consensus for 'most users' not minding the action, as we've established that criticism of SDF on SDF facilities, like bboard or a webpage, can result in account removal or worse). --71.80.228.4 20:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- The 'derogatory' comment thing is being taken into consideration a little too much, considering that we don't even know what was written, at least I don't. But knowing stephen jones, it was most likely nothing very offensive. Also, I don't know much about the removal of users, or critical comments on sdf. I've been using it for about 2 years now and I always see critical, even angry comments against jones written on the bulletein board there and none of them are deleted. --Roint 20:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I am not so concerned with the removal of the account (though that does seem like an extreme action in itself for a complaint on a webpage)-- but the fact that the user's webpage was altered before the account removal to contain derogatory comments. Are you familiar with this incident? Perhaps there is some wording that can capture this appropriately. (Also, it's difficult to come up with consensus for 'most users' not minding the action, as we've established that criticism of SDF on SDF facilities, like bboard or a webpage, can result in account removal or worse). --71.80.228.4 20:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Red-martian.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Red-martian.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
- On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok 23:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
