User talk:Stco23/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Your "My Uploads" page

If you want to create a page to link your own images from just so you know where to find them, you should do so here: User:Stco23/My Uploads. This is known as the "User Space" and is a good place to do any experimenting, or saving images like this. Nobody will complain about what you do within your own user space, because most of us won't even notice. The article My Uploads that you'd created is in the "Mainspace" however, which is reserved for Encyclopedic information only, so this page is completely out of place and will end up getting deleted. --Maelwys 20:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I see you've already been bugged about this issue, but actually you're not allowed to use Fair use images in user space, and you're not allowed to use them just anywhere in article space either. You can link to your images without showing them by putting [[:Image:nameofimage.ext]] (note the first colon). Images such as screenshots and covers of books and videos are fair use in the articles which are about them, but not just anywhere. Sorry. Mak (talk) 23:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This issue has already been resolved a long time ago, So I want no request about this issue in the near future. Thank You.--Stco23 23:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This issue clearly has not been resolved since [1] still contains copyrighted images. The images are not entirely yours to release, since they contain artwork done by living people, and either they or the people they work for own the rights to those images. Who took the photo is to a certain extent irrelevant. Some of these photos would be allowed in an article if they are used in order to illustrate the subject of the photo, and are used for educational purposes. Fair use images may not be used in userspace. Mak (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

In addition, you have been warned about adding copyrighted material before and have repeatedly disrespected Wikipedia's policies on them. This edit [2] makes me think you have some idea of what you are doing, as the first tag was accurate, and the tag you changed it to is a misrepresentation of reality. If you continue to flout wikipedia's policies, I will be forced to block you. I don't like messing with others' userspace, but I am changing the tags back to the appropriate tags, and will link to the images on your subpage, rather than having them transcluded as they are currently. Mak (talk) 04:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that you should keep the right over the photograph of you as a child. The problem with the Garfield picture you took is that it cannot be in the public domain because the artwork on the DVD case itself is copyrighted, and changing the format of it from the actual DVD to a digital picture of the DVD does not change that. Mak (talk) 03:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Are you asking whether you may change the licensing on your school photo? I think you can, although it's a little complicated with the licensing on Wikipedia, but I do think you should at least try. What I was talking about before with the licensing was that it looked to me like you had the correct license at first, and then you changed it to a false one so that you could do what you wanted with it. If I were you, I would feel free to change the license on your own photo to say you don't want other people using it. Mak (talk) 03:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The tag on the Garfield and Friends image needs to stay as it is, since it's accurate. Mak (talk) 03:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

This sucks. I can't edit because someone else got blocked and the admin think the IP address 64.80.222.26 Wikipedia thinks it's mine. Some jerk put in vandalism and got me blocked. I hope I get unblocked so I can edit again. By the way, I did not use 64.80.222.26 while I was away and I should not be blocked because some idiot used and abused that IP address. I hope i find out who this idiot is someday. Thank You.--Stco23 05:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

You have to admit it's odd that their first edit was to your talk page [3]. Mak (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I know It's sad isn't it. I hope I get Unblocked.--Stco23 05:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hm, I can't find you in the autoblocker. Mak (talk) 05:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I heard User:RX StrangeLove blocked 64.80.222.26. He didn't know he was blocking me as well.--Stco23 05:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can e-mail him, or put up Template:Unblock to get unblocked. I'm going to sleep. Mak (talk) 05:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The WhoIs on User:64.80.222.26 ([4]) seems quite strange to me. Is this an open proxy? It appears to be a static IP, but its allocation cannot be traced specifically. The IP's first edit also makes this user's claim that he is not editing from that IP rather suspect. I'll let a sysop make the final call, but I don't think there's sufficient reason to believe that you are not the same editor as User:64.80.222.26. It is, I might note, only a twenty-four hour block for vandalism currently. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Removing unblock request per this edit. It seems quite clear that these are the same people. I'll keep this talk page on my watchlist, so feel free to respond here. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

That was my message not the Vandal. I'am trying to get unblocked. Thank You.--Stco23 06:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Please! Please! Unblock Me. Anyone Please Unblock Me. Thank You.--Stco23 06:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

As I noted above, the only block effecting you was the block of User:64.80.222.26, which was blocked about two hours ago with an expiry time of 24hrs. You have not been autoblocked; thus, you must be editing from that IP. The IP address does not appear to be dynamic (shared by multiple users), and many of its recent edits were to this account's talk page and refering to this account, which suggests to me that you are one in the same. The unblock request seems to be in bad-faith, and an illegitimate use of alternate accounts to evade a block. I'll leave the message for now, but an unblock is quite unlikely. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a new message in 64.80.222.26 talk page. I hope you look at it because it looks like it is a I'm Sorry message. Thank You.--Stco23 06:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Quite a coincidence that this vandals first edit is to correct a spelling mistake on your page, just prior to the vandalism which caused the block? As for the I'm sorry, most vandals are once they got blocked and there "fun" is spoilt. No unblock. --pgk^(talk) 07:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I'am still going to leave the unblock on intill i get a reply to be unblocked. I did not put the recorrection in my talk page. Thank You.--Stco23 07:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] protection

I have removed the protection now. The fact that you were on dial up and just happened to get the same IP address as a vandal who's only non-vandalism edit was a correction to your user page just before vandalising and just before you turn up requesting an unnlock only further confirms that you were responsible for the vandalism. I could block you to serve out the remaineder of the 24 hour block, but I hope you've learnt not to vandalise wikipedia, so won't be doing that. --pgk^(talk) 16:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove comments and warnings from your talk pages. I understand that these discussions reflect badly upon your reputation, but they are necessary for historical significance should a similar situation occur. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)