User:Aido2002/Archive Dir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

11:16, Tuesday April 3, 2007 (UTC)
   
User:Aido2002/Archive Dir
Aido2002 Photography Archives Talk
   
77px

This page is still being compiled and constructed. Please bear with us.
This is an archive page. To start a new discussion topic, please click here.

Contents

[edit] Image:Ipodcolorpic.jpg

Why upload Image:IPodColorPic.jpg as fair use when we already have a perfectly good free picture of the iPod? Edward 22:32, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WABC-TV logo

I removed your entry of a logo for WABC-TV since there is already one on the upper right hand corner of the article. I also see that you placed it in a questionable spot in the article. Please check for these things if you want to contribute in this manner. ErikNY 21:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Aido2002/Archive Dir, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 22:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I request that IP Adress 167.206.185.194 is unblocked. It's a school. I am not the one blocked, but I attend the blocked school, and are representing it to request its unblock. There are people who will do this, but, for the most part, we should not be blocked.

Well why should the other editors of wikipedia bear the burden of putting up with and cleaning up after the vandalism? If you want to help, then help prevent the vandalism in the first place, talk to the system admin for the computers in the school and see if they are willing to work out who is responsible for the vandalism and deal with them. No vandalism = no blocks. --pgk(talk) 16:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
New messages usually go at the bottom of a talk page. You don't answer my question, which is worse blocking a few editors or making the 1000's of other editors suffer from the actions of the others who vandalise? You also don't answer if you are willing to help yourself by seeing the system admin is willing to deal with those doing the vandalism. --pgk(talk) 21:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah so me the unpaid volunteer admin (like all the other admins) should put up with the vandalism. Great. What can the network admin do? He can look at the logs of the network access, look at the times of the vandalism, put the two together and you know who is responsible. How your school then deals with idiots is up to them. To answer your other question, no the software doesn't have a facility to do that, there is a long standing request for the feature, but no ETA as to when/how it might be implemented. --pgk(talk) 22:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
  • WP:UBX is a good intro to userboxes. It has a pretty comprehensive list of userboxes and ways of presenting them on your page.--Aleron235 22:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I cannot accept your offer, I don't represent all admins and I can't instruct them to behave a certain way. We can't leave pages vandalised waiting for someone to come along at some point to revert it, that doesn't work. If I unblock then more vandalism and it'll get blocked again, the only way to ensure you get uninteruppted editting from school is to stop the vandalism occurring in the first place. --pgk(talk) 06:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm not annoyed with you and didn't see it as an argument, believe it or not I am actually trying to help. More vandalism occurs and the IP will get blocked again, the only way to prevent the disruption of that cycle is to get the vandalism stopped. Despite what you seem to think admins roles are on wikipedia it's not to spend all their time removing vandalism. Part of the role is to protect the integrity of the project, any vandalism no matter how briefly visible damages that integrity (e.g. it could be the first thing a new visitor sees). So ideally we'd prevent it occuring in the first place. Trouble is that admins only have a very blunt tool to stop it happening, blocking those who do it. For shared IPs it is far preferable to get those who "own" the address to deal with it further upstream. --pgk(talk) 20:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AT&T Split

Thank you for reminding me about the talk page...I believe I know how to get that moved, using a little cut/paste. Also, the reason I changed Pre-2005 AT&T to AT&T Corporation is because it seems more professional looking, not that Pre-2005 AT&T is bad. However, I am suggesting possibly that the AT&T issue should be dealt with in the manner that the CBS Corporation/Viacom split was dealt with: change Pre-2005 AT&T to AT&T (1885-2005) and change AT&T Inc. to AT&T (2005-present). KansasCity 22:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I've got the solution. Just like the current CBS Corporation, the article regarding the current AT&T will be titled "AT&T"; the article regarding AT&T pre-merger will be titled "AT&T (1885-2005), a la pre-split Viacom (1971-2005). Just as in the case of CBS Corp. and Viacom, a disclaimer will be placed at the top of the AT&T page directing users whom want to see information regarding the original AT&T to the AT&T (1885-2005) page. KansasCity 22:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New SBC article

I'm sorry about cutting and pasting, but it is impossible to move an article to a page when it already exists. "SBC Communications" already existed, and I couldn't move the material from "SBC (1984-2005)" to SBC Communications without copying/pasting.

I'll seek higher authority regarding the title of the SBC page. I just don't see the need for (1984-2005). KansasCity 20:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Please Assist...

The matter has been dealt with, by a different administrator. — FireFox usertalk 20:30, 05 June '06

[edit] RFA

If you remove a vote from your RFA again you will be blocked. You have no right to remove anybodies votes. Spaming Rfas is frowned upon by many editors and if you had read the guide to RFAs you would know that. --pgk(talk) 20:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

As warned above, you have been blocked for tampering with votes at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Aido2002. I would recommend withdrawing the RFA and re-applying in a few months. — Jun. 5, '06 [21:02] <freak|talk>

[edit] Your RfA

Hi Aido. I am dropping you a note to inform you that I have closed your request for adminship early. At the time of closure the vote was (1/12/0) - although the support vote would not have counted under closer circumstances. My reason for doing this was that the request was beginning to resemble something of a pile-on - which would only have worsened given your low edit count, your removal of votes, and current block. Given your actions this time round, you may find it difficult to be promoted in the future. However, you may be able to succeed in a request if you work hard, and within the rules, over the next few months. Good luck, and I hope to see you around. Rje 14:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The page history reveals that you removed the comment made by Pgk several times, which is why you were blocked (although it could perhaps have been explained more clearly to you). Irrespective of your opinions on another user's comments, it is very bad form to remove their comments - even anonymous votes on RfA can only be striked-out. As for Pgk's blocks: these all seem to be in order - the usernames he blocked are all either linked to known vandals, personal attacks, or are gobbledegook. I also very much doubt that Pgk and Freakofnature are sockpuppets of each other, although I cannot prove that (Freakofnature's user page is fine by the way, anothing goes really as long as doesn't offend anyone). Obviously these are only my opinions, if you wish to pursue the matter the place to do so is at WP:RFC/ADMIN; it is far better in my opinion to be open about questioning the actions of another user, as opposed to asking individuals to look into them. I hope all of this is of some use to you, see you around. Rje 21:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Owned

HA! You got owned on Cyber Nations. Infact you were owned pretty bad, really bad. Rje 16:53, 18 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

This is an archive page. To start a new discussion topic, please click here.

[edit] WP:Tel

I'd love to join the project! It's about time articles on telecommunications get attention, especially considering the flurry of mergers/spinoffs that have happened/will happen. I probably will specialize in the Bell-related areas, as I'm not too familiar with independents (except for Sprint). KansasCity 00:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My User Page

In response to your comment on my user page, I did not use {{User Marlboro,NJ}} because it not come out too great. I would appreciate it if you don't edit my user page in the future. Thank you, aido2002 23:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

  • And all of us would be appreciate it if you created templates in the correct namespace. Editing your user page seemed the easiest way of notifying you that I had moved the template. Sorry if it annoyed you. -- RHaworth 12:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:COBFinland.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:COBFinland.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Red Sox Greeting

I decided to finally pay you back for yours--Q 13:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Denver 2008

Hey, how's it goin'? I'm gathering support from Wikipedians to help bring the 2008 DNC to my hometown of Denver. If your interested, just post {{User:1ne/Userboxes/Denver2008}} on your page. Anyhow, have a good one. Editor19841 23:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signature change

24.187.25.51 (talk • contribs) has been modifying your old signature on User talk:Pgk/archive2. If it was you, please redo it while logged in; I reverted the changes because I couldn't be sure that it was you. --Nlu (talk) 23:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Tsst XBOX 360 Controllers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tsst XBOX 360 Controllers.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Languages

Hi There! Can you translate my name in what language you know please, and then post it Here. I would be very grateful if you do (if you know another language apart from English and the ones on my userpage please feel free to post it on) P.S. all th translations are in alpahbetical order so when you add one please put it in alpahbetical order according to the language. Thanks!!! Abdullah Geelah 16:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked for 48 hours. You clearly knew that you were vandalising the article on elephants. --Yamla 21:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

This is an archive page. To start a new discussion topic, please click here.

[edit] Admin abuse

Here's some help in releaving your problem with User:JDoorjam: Admin Abuse Somnabot 02:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Late Night

Thanks. I do what I can for the things that I love... well... used to love. Poor Consey has been taken over by digital cable... But I spent a good several hours going over old episodes to come up with a set-change section and cap caps. It was good distraction from the essay I was supposed to be writing. TheHYPO 05:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Hope You Don't Mind...

It's fine, go ahead. — FireFox (talk) 10:23, 03 August '06

[edit] Wikiality

For what it's worth, I'm not too much interested in an edit war, but there does seem to be a pretty strong consensus for redirecting, at the talk page (at least for now). Care to comment and make your voice heard? :) Luna Santin 09:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Naaah, you just missed the talk page. Given the evidence I think you were working with, I think it was a pretty good call. We've always got to make pretty quick calls with the best information available, and it's only natural that there'll be the occassional mistakes and disagreements. If you'd like to discuss at the talk page, you're more than welcome, from my perspective. Although I see you had a bit of a run-in, shortly after that edit. o.o;; Not sure what to say about that one. Hope it didn't put you off too much. Luna Santin 09:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:M105s3041.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:M105s3041.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sets1a.jpg

To be perfectly honest, I'd prefer if you didn't add the current set to the image. The current set already has it's own image lower on the page and doesn't need to be in the collage of old sets. I think it's overkill. As for why it didn't work when you uploaded, I honestly don't know. TheHYPO 07:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Aido2002/Userboxes

Hi, I noticed you recently created the template Template:Aido2002/Userboxes. This template seems intended only for your personal use, which means it should be in a user subpage, rather than in the template namespace. Please move the template into your userspace – I suggest renaming it to User:Aido2002/Userboxes. Once you have done that, you will still be able to include it in your userpage and sandbox as you are currently doing by typing {{User:Aido2002/Userboxes}} instead of {{Aido2002/Userboxes}}. I will leave the template where it is for now, though I can't guarantee it won't be deleted by someone else.

Thank you for your co-operation – Gurch 09:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Please help me out...

I am unaware of any userbox that displays a user's number of edits. The closest thing I am aware of, or could find listed at Wikipedia:List of userboxes, are the {{User_1000edits}}, {{User_2000edits}}, {{User_3000edits}}, and {{User_4000edits}} templates. --Allen3 talk 09:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New baseball article improvement drive

Baseball Greetings fellow WikiProject Baseball member! Just a quick note: there is now an article improvement drive just for baseball-related articles at WP:BBAID. Please take a look and vote on an article or add one of your own. Once an article has been agreed upon, feel free to stop by and lend a hand in getting it to featured article status. Hope you can participate! —Wknight94 (talk) 23:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

Your userboxes weren't appearing on your userpage, so I've fixed it for you. If you didn't want this, I'm sorry. J Ditalk 08:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks warning

Please do not make Personal attacks. [1] Note: this is a warning. Ansell 09:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, I really didn't intend it to be a personal attack, but, in retrospect, I can easily see how it cold be taken as one. Regardless, I said this because he had attacked me, and, frankly, I'm glad he's gone.By which, I mean that I think many wikipedians will be better off without him, judging by his past actions. aido2002 19:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I didn't see why it was needed. They were blocked on their own volition quite a while ago now. And because of my own issues with the person I had the page watched, for vandalism reversion purposes I guess. I am not saying they were a nice wikipedian, just that you should probably type those sort of comments and then not save the page. No real harm done by it though I guess. Cheers, Ansell 08:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Could I ask you to rethink your replacing, what you agree could be a personal attack? It is not necessary to do that, and although there is discussion about my reverting it (see [[WP:RPA) , your insistence on keeping it in its current wording, against an essential community policy, is not going to be looked upon in a very good way. [2] Thanks, Ansell 04:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I dis revert it once, because I thought that it is not supposed to be reverted, but, to tell you tell you the truth, I really don't care about having it there to go back and check, and keep reverting it. :) aido2002 04:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
If you could reword it so that it is no longer a personal attack but is just a comment about his actions in an objective way I would not mind. I do not insist that you not comment on the persons actions, just that you do it within what the wikipedia community thinks is reasonable in order to keep a good sense of community. Thanks, Ansell 04:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Red Sox GA

No problem. I just didn't want to confuse people in to thinking the article was a Wikipedia-approved good article. It might be worthwhile for WikiProject Baseball to come up with a rating system that applies only to baseball articles (to get a broader range of evaluations), because right now an article can only be B-grade unless it goes through either the GA or the FA process. - Pal 20:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I've moved your signature template

I moved your signature template from Template:User:Aido2002/signature to User:Aido2002/signature. You can still use it just like a template. For example, {{User:Aido2002/signature}} renders as aido2002 Talk E-Mail. This was done because single user templates are generally held in that user's userspace, rather than in the main template space. All the best, --Durin 21:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Aido2002! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego talk 15:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Late Night Sets.JPG

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Late Night Sets.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. ResurgamII 22:55, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:South Park into.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:South Park into.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. ResurgamII 21:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Manbearpig1.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Manbearpig1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. ResurgamII 21:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Old AT&T Logos.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Old AT&T Logos.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 20:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I see that you removed the orpahned fair use tag from this image. That is fine to do if you put the image into an article, but you have not. If you do not insert the image in an article in short order, I will will nominate at IfD for deletion. If it has a use, by all means keep it, but if it does not then under US copyright it needs to go. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 12:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing "wrong" with the image or the text on the page describing the image. The issue that there is comes from the fact that the logos are copyright protected. The only way they can be used on Wikipedia is through a claim of fair use; read that page for information about fair use. If an image is copyrighted and not used in any article, it should not remain on Wikipedia as it contravines the copyright laws. If the image is used in an article and that use fits within the fair use claim guidelines. Orphaned copyright images should be deleted.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 20:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
I would like to continue discussing this as I do not understand what you don't understand. Wikipedia does not allow copyrighted images - with one exception. The exception is that images used for commintary about the image's subject can make a fair use claim. Since this image is not in use, no fair use claim can be made, so we are back to the statement, Wikipedia does not allow copyrighted images. As such, the image should be deleted. If you would prefer, I will nominate the image at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion and a community concensus can be reached about the image.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Old AT&T Logos.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Old AT&T Logos.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Nominated again after discussing above and on my talk page about this image not being in use, orpahaned, and it being deleted.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/i/d/User%7EAido2002_Archive_Dir_594f.html"