User talk:Wandering Star

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] King of the Autoblocks

As you can see from the section below, I am more often blocked than not blocked. That would be something to brag about, I suppose, if it weren't for the fact that I have never been autoblocked intentionally; it always seems to be because the autoblocking program blocks me by accident. I can't even claim notoriety, I guess. Ah, well, there are worse things. If nothing else it gives me a regular reminder to take Wikibreaks. And who knows? With all the mistaken identity going on, maybe at some point the system will mistake me for Jimbo Wales himself. Or maybe somebody (else who's) famous. I could become a celebrity and charge money to fake autographs. In the meantime, I will content myself with my usual boring little edits and the regular requests to be unblocked. Wandering Star 19:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --pgk(talk) 18:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Done again. --pgk(talk) 17:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
And again. --pgk(talk) 16:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
And again. --pgk(talk) 09:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Sceptre for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Nathanrdotcom". The reason given for Nathanrdotcom's block is: "particularly spiteful email attacking Sergeant Snopake and I, twisting my words,

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Alkivar for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Ferick". The reason given for Ferick's block is: "3RR violation on Kosovo Liberation Army".

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Kilo-Lima for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "SqueakBox". The reason given for SqueakBox's block is: "After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Z

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Kilo-Lima for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "SqueakBox". The reason given for SqueakBox's block is: "After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Z

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Kilo-Lima for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "SqueakBox". The reason given for SqueakBox's block is: "After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Z

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Kilo-Lima for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "SqueakBox". The reason given for SqueakBox's block is: "After reading your arbitration case more closely, it states that if any user, either you or Z

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by RadioKirk for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Ferick". The reason given for Ferick's block is: "self-admitted sock of User:Nookdog and User:216.164.203.90".

Your IP address is

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by RadioKirk for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Ferick". The reason given for Ferick's block is: "self-admitted sock of User:Nookdog and User:216.164.203.90".

Your IP address is

That's the second time in as many days I have been autoblocked. And on neither occasion was it due to anything I ahve done. Looking at the long list of times I have been autoblocked, and the fact that on no occasion have I been aublocked for anything I have done, always for what someone else has done, I would have to say that the current autoblocking policy is deeply flawed. Currently, the autoblocking policy throws the baby out with the bathwater. I would like to suggest that this policy be revised.

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by RadioKirk for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Ferick". The reason given for Ferick's block is: "self-admitted sock of User:Nookdog and User:216.164.203.90".

You were blocked by InShaneee for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "GorillazFanAdam". The reason given for GorillazFanAdam's block is: "further block evasion, vandalism and trolling through socks".

Your IP address is .

Wow. that's the second time in one day InShanee has autoblocked me. Why?


Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Curps for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "IanManka". The reason given for IanManka's block is: "vandalism".

Your IP address is .

Done -- Tawker 00:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Your IP address is

This is getting very annoying. I wouldn't mind it if I were blocked because of something I did. But it seems to be the case that the only blocks I ever recieve are because of someone else. Perhaps there needs to be some revision of the blocking policy, to ensure that only the user who is intended to be blocked will be blocked.

Autoblocks very deliberately work the way they do, it prevents someone attacking/vandalising the site simply logging out and continuing using a different account. Please read about autoblocks. I've removed the current ones. --pgk(talk) 07:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] autoblocked

Hey, I've been autoblocked by you. Why?

What did the block message say? I can't help you much without this information. My guess is that your internet provider shares ip addresses among its customers, and a block handed out to another user affected you because of these shared ip addresses (this happens to me sometimes too).
If it happens again just email me and I can unblock the ip address. --Duk 05:23, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding images

Hey, Wandering Star. Uploading images is kinda complex — even though I'm an admin, I only just uploaded my first images a few days back myself. But here are some pointers to help you get started:

  • First of all, you need to make sure that the image you want to use is legal to use on Wikipedia. If you took the photo yourself, there's no problem. But if you've taken it from another source, it gets more complicated. See the Image use policy for an outline of the major issues, especially the sections on rules of thumb and adding images. The most important thing is to try to choose an image with as few legal and copyright restrictions on it as possible, for the purposes of Wikipedia's licenses. The Finding images tutorial can be helpful in finding free images.
  • Once you've found an image that you like, you need to upload it to the Wikipedia servers. If you're confident with image editing (I'm not) you can look at Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload for tips, but I don't think it's essential. The important info is at Wikipedia:Uploading images. Read the instructions there carefully, especially the ones about image copyright tags. If an image doesn't have a copyright tag, or if the copyright tag on it is incorrect, it will probably be deleted within a week.
  • If you've figured all that out, you're ready to upload an image. On any article page, look at the toolbox below the "search" window. You should see a link labeled "Upload file." Click on it, and you'll be taken to Special:Upload. Follow the instructions there, and you'll be all set. The difficult part is over!
  • The easiest part of putting an image in an article is the syntax of placing it on the page. There are instructions about this at Wikipedia:Images and a tutorial at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial, but it's pretty intuitive. Basically, in order to put an image on a page, just type its name in the following format:
[[Image:example.jpg|thumb|Example caption]]

So, if you want to add Image:Ring_tailed_lemur_and_twins.jpg to an article, you can just type:

[[Image:Ring_tailed_lemur_and_twins.jpg|thumb|A ring-tailed lemur with babies.  Aren't they cute?]]
A ring-tailed lemur with babies. Aren't they cute?
Enlarge
A ring-tailed lemur with babies. Aren't they cute?

And you'll get this:

You can also adjust variables like the size of the image or its position; all those details are at the picture tutorial. But as I said, the syntax is very intuitive. The difficult part is the legal stuff you have to wade through in order to make sure your image can stay on Wikipedia.

I hope all this is helpful to you, and that even if I haven't answered your questions I've pointed you in the direction of somewhere you'll be able to find answers. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The images you want to add are all copyrighted by the AFP, so (unless you get permission to use them) they can only be included in Wikipedia under fair use. The relevant policy in that case is Wikipedia:Fair use. The guidelines can be rather complex sometimes, but, to cut a long story short, I don't think those images are suitable for use on Wikipedia under fair use: the Counterexamples section specifically states that a "photo from a press agency . . . not so famous as to be iconic, to illustrate an article on the subject of the photo" is not considered acceptable fair use. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Ilmari!!!!Wandering Star 20:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, what Ilmari said. Any photographs from a news service are generally copyright to that news service, so they're unfortunately usually not kosher for use here. Perhaps the Finding images tutorial might help you find some suitable pictures of your subject. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
P.S. You can sign your posts on talk pages automatically by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~. That'll automatically create a link to your user page and a timestamp, like so: —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... that is odd. It might have something to do with a setting in your preferences. Click on the "my preferences" link at the top of the page and see what it says under "Nickname" and whether the "raw signature" box is checked. That's for making custom signatures — perhaps yours got ticked accidentally and the system thinks you don't want your name linked? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
That seems to have sussed it! :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome! Bienvenue! Willkommen!

Greetings Wandering Star, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

  • RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.
  • Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.
  • Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.
  • Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.
  • Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Please don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =) Gryffindor 13:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] image question

hello Wandering Star, a warm welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, thank you for approaching me with your questions. Image policy has to be adhered to as Wikipedia needs to avoid any legal complications. The images you have pointed out to me are probably 99% copyrighted. I am going to give you a couple of links to help you familiarise yourself with the image policy. The policies might seem quite strict, to be fair though I have to say that the image policy on the English Wikipedia is way more relaxed than on the Wikimedia Commons or some of the European Wikipedia's, where copyright is handled even more restrictively. Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Image copyright tags give a good introduction on how to handle images. The images you have pointed out on websites does not mean that they are free of copyright. No indication does not automatically translate into "it's ok to use them on Wikipedia". On this website [1] it actually clearly states that the image is from Agence France Press (AFP). If you really want to use that image, you would have to contact AFP first in order to ask them for permission and for what you want to use the image for. Sometimes the copyright owners are nice and give permission, often they ignore such requests, but you can give it a try. Good luck, if you have further questions, feel free. Gryffindor 20:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC) ps: cheers about my username :-)


[edit] Your VandalProof Application

Dear Wandering Star,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that for security reasons, VandalProof's creator requires it's users to have made 250 edits to articles, which you have not. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.

Prodego talk 16:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your comments on my userpage.Thanks for supporting me.I needed them .Infact I wonder where did we cross each other can u plz tell?Holywarrior 15:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Historical rankings of United States Presidents

It looks like you deleted much of Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents. Was that deliberate? If so, could you explain your reasoning on the talk page for that article? Thanks. Crust 17:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Regarding the matter you have raised, would you mind discussing on my talk page? Haiduc 00:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please refrain from adding useless and invalid warnings to Wikipedia, as you did to my Talk Page. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.Jasper23 21:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Grow the fuck up, Jasper. Everything I've done follows Wikipedia guidelines. I used one of the official warnings from the vandalism warning toolkit. This warning you've posted isn't even an official Wikipedia warning. It's one you had to make up because your ego was so bruised from someone telling you that you made a mistake. It's a pity you have to whine about it instead of taking it as constructive criticism and moving on. Wandering Star 22:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


Jeez, calm down. Take a vacation or something. It was just a little bit of lightheartedness. This was my way of telling you not to post vandalism warnings on peoples user pages when its obvious that they are not vandals and have not vandalized anything. There is really no need to fly off the handle and be all uncivil.Jasper23 22:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, allow me to (lightheartedly) suggest that what you did was in fact vandalism, and that I warned you approriately. I would also lightheartedly like to remind you that I will do so again if you delete content without any justifiable basis. Now please lightheartedly refrain from doing so in the future. Ha ha ha ha ha. Wandering Star 22:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it wasnt vandalism. I just removed a poorly written and completely unsourced diatribe that you had just put into the article. Actually, I wasnt even the first one to remove it. I reverted your revision of a good faith edit by another user. Your actions could be considered blah blah blah...You did not warn me appropriately because no vandalism occured. You have made it quite clear that you dont understand and thats fine. Here is where I leave you on your own.Jasper23 23:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Bullshit. The sources were cited in the paragraph. Poorly written? Then revise it. And does it make you any less of a vandal if others join in? My revision? No, I replaced the content that was deleted by someone else. I understand that alot of people become disturbed when they are reminded of the misdeeds of their ancestors. But trying to avoid the subject or prevent anyone else from even mentioning it doesn't solve anything. You can't change the past, and no-one expects you to. But don't try to cover it all up in hopes that people will simply forget it. Were your forefathers flawed? Guess what? So were everyone else's, too. Do they have to be perfect for you to take pride in who you are today? Or can you just let it all go and get on with your life without having to plug your ears and scream "BLA BLAH BLAH I CAN"T HEAR YOU!!!" like a juvenile everytime someone brings it up? Hey, it's not like northerners were any better, you know. There were slaves up here in New York once. The lynchings that took place during the Draft Riots were a part of our past that nobody is proud of. So don't freak out if someone mentions in an article about the south that people used to do fucked up shit to slaves before the war, and even more fucked up shit to African Americans after the war. Come down off the cross, Jared. Someone else needs the wood. Wandering Star 23:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Violation

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

This is for the initial round of edits on the Cracker page. You have made at least 4 full section reverts. Please stop making personal attacks against me and please leave my user talk page alone. I consider what you are doing harrasment. Please, leave me alone.Jasper23 00:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It's clear to me that we need to find an admin to mediate this problem. Neither you nor I seem to be able to reach a satisfying conclusion for the both os us. I've requested that such a mediator intervene, and hopefully one will soon enough to patch up this matter. Wandering Star 00:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Just leave me alone and we can both be happy.Jasper23 01:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The admin who serves as the mediator will deal with this. It's out of my hands now, Jasper. Wandering Star 02:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/a/n/User_talk%7EWandering_Star_8f15.html"