User talk:SG/Archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia
Normally, after making some edits, some admin will give you a welcome message with links that you won't care about and some other mailmerged friendliness. I just wanted to say thanks for expanding the Quantic Dream stub to an actual article and saving it from deletion. - Hahnchen 02:04, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't even notice my lack of a welcome message. I've toyed around with Wikipedia for some time now, but never bothered to register. Thanks for the welcome! — SG 17:33, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] SCC justices
- Yeah, well, PUYS and I reverted them back, he agrees it's a copyvio. Besides, why do you support copying and pasting? Do you enjoy hurting Wikipedia? CanadianCaesar 00:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- How can it be a copyright violation when the SCC states that it isn't? Wikipedia is about quality, yes, but when there is no quality to fill an area, quantity must substitute. How can more information be hurting Wikipedia? Please review the copyright terms of the SCC carefully. ♠ SG →Talk 01:31, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a mirror. Copying and pasting is not information, it's a violation of that rule, IMO even when it's in public domain. I did review the copyvio info on the SCC website, and I believe the references on the Wikipedia article were not specific enough. At any rate, I want people who know about this in full to review it. That's what copyvio notices are for- it's not speedy deletion nor even AfD, it's a review. You can dispute whatever you want, but if you're right, the articles will not be deleted. PUYS, who is a law student, also says that the GFDL does not accomodate this. Besides, PUYS actually rewrote the articles as Temp pages. At the end of the day we will not end up with red links. CanadianCaesar 01:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't give any proof of a copyvio? I provided a link to a website with identical content- a very reputable website- that's all I need to do, and I've done it before. Marking things as copyvios are a drain on those who have to clean up after cut and pasters, I don't think they should be required to do anything more. CanadianCaesar 01:40, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a mirror. Copying and pasting is not information, it's a violation of that rule, IMO even when it's in public domain. I did review the copyvio info on the SCC website, and I believe the references on the Wikipedia article were not specific enough. At any rate, I want people who know about this in full to review it. That's what copyvio notices are for- it's not speedy deletion nor even AfD, it's a review. You can dispute whatever you want, but if you're right, the articles will not be deleted. PUYS, who is a law student, also says that the GFDL does not accomodate this. Besides, PUYS actually rewrote the articles as Temp pages. At the end of the day we will not end up with red links. CanadianCaesar 01:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- How can it be a copyright violation when the SCC states that it isn't? Wikipedia is about quality, yes, but when there is no quality to fill an area, quantity must substitute. How can more information be hurting Wikipedia? Please review the copyright terms of the SCC carefully. ♠ SG →Talk 01:31, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikimedia Canada
Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there! -- user:zanimum
[edit] Section regarding Canada's largest cities
Hello! I'm sorry, but the edit summary for the removal of this information is quite explicit: this level of detail is unnecessary for a main overview article; for more detail, see that article's talk page. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 11:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
