User talk:John Spikowski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Removing warnings 2 WP:3RR 3 Time to stop 4 Block 5 signing notes 6 I want your feedback 7 Personal attacks 8 Continued personal attacks 9 Neutral point of view 10 Need source 11 Off topic 12 Personal attacks last warning 13 Bot Warnings 14 24 hour block 15 License tagging for Image:Panotool site.jpg 16 48 hour block 17 Commercial links 18 Other popular software 19 GFDL and linking 20 Final warning 21 Copyright infringement

[edit] Removing warnings

Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks.

Look John, you can delete this info all you want, but it's there in your history all the time and people here are smart enough to know how the MediaWiki application works. Anyone and everyone can see what you're doing. They'll see that I've tried to reasonably work with you tonight on several subjects, but that you continued to maliciously edit work no one agrees you should be editing and deleting warning after warning being given. I seriously don't think you have done one thing tonight that didn't go completely against one Wikipedia policy or another. Again, it's very easily seen going over the history. And for what? Just to get a site that is yours up on the external links sections? Personally, I don't see a reason why the site can't be included. Seems like a decent resource. You just need to keep in mind there are many resources out there most of them contain more content than yours with a user-base much greater than the 2 (literally 2!!!) users on yours.

That being said and all of this being recorded into the history, I see there are two different directions you could take at this point:

1 - You constructively and interactively help shape these articles by participating in the discussions and, in turn, edit with and not against the other editors of the PanoTools subjects. No more rogue edits. No more malicious edits. No more defamation of users. No more spamming your site. (all of which are a form of vandalism WP:VAND)

2 - You can delete all of this on your users talk page, remove the very valid warnings once again, and continue to vandalize the articles in the same manner you have been doing all night. All this option is going to do is add more negative edits to your history and give more reasons to the admins to ultimately block you from editing these articles all together (a task that should be pretty clear for them to do at this point).

It's pretty much in your hands now. Roguegeek 08:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

You should also read and understand the three-revert rule WP:3RR Wikipedia policy and know that you've already broken in several times here and on other articles tonight. I'm simply trying to inform you that a rule really does exist. Roguegeek 08:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time to stop

First up, vandalism is a loaded term, it's defined at WP:VAND and specifically does not include good-faith content disputes. To accuse other editors of vandalism when they are acting in good faith, regardless of how strongly you disagree with their edits, is uncivil and can lead to your being blocked from editing. Please do not do this.

Second, there is credible evidence that PanoTools should be a redirect, since the verifiable content about the company itself is small and you have not provided any evidence that it meets the guidelines for inclusion of companies. Either way, it makes no sense to link the product's common abbreviation to an article on the company in the context of an article already about the product, which is the major problem with the last couple of edits you made.

Third, edit-warring is not the way to resolve disputes. Please try dispute resolution. Guy 11:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Hi. You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to a WP:3RR breach. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. El_C 11:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] signing notes

Please learn how to sing your notes correctly. I'll even give you the link so you don't have to look around. WP:SIGNATURE Roguegeek (talk) 22:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I want your feedback

John, I want your feedback on the issues being discussed in the Talk:Panorama Tools (software) page. Keep it constructive and organized. I am very much in favor of putting the external links you want to put in the article to show everyone there's worth to them. I just need it discussed in the open and kept on track. It's when all of the reverting and edit wars start is when I get upset. Stay with me here. Be calm and constructive. No more reverting please. We don't need to go through what happened the night before. Roguegeek (talk) 01:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Roguegeek (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Continued personal attacks

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --Konstable 04:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral point of view

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! Roguegeek (talk) 21:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need source

Your recent contribution(s) to Wikipedia are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! Roguegeek (talk) 21:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Off topic

Please don't post messages on pages that are completely irrelevant to the topic of the page. It can be seen as spam and Wikipedia regards adding spam to articles or talk pages as a form of vandalism. Thank you. Roguegeek (talk) 21:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks last warning

You were warned up above, and hey presto you do this. It's not allowed. See WP:NPA. I mean, read it please, and just stick to observations on content, not on other people's supposed shortcomings. Otherwise you'll just a block. Thank you. Tyrenius 03:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He made a complaint on WP:PAIN, which I responded to, as you had made a personal attack. If you have a problem, you should post there yourself. Tyrenius 12:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Warnings

You really out to read WP:SUBST. My bot did not warn you and had no part in your dispute. That said, you're demonstrating a lot of anger. I'd suggest you tone it down if you want to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks. Alphachimp 14:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 24 hour block

You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to violations of WP:CIVIL. I recommend this essay and a lighter touch when you return. Respectfully, Durova^Charge! 04:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Panotool site.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Panotool site.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 48 hour block

You have been blocked from editing for 48 hours due to violations of WP:CIVIL. Durova^Charge! 03:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Tu quoque is not a line of defence when trying to get unblocked. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 06:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial links

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. -- GraemeL ^(talk) 12:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue spamming you will be blocked from editing. -- GraemeL ^(talk) 18:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. -- GraemeL ^(talk) 19:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added the license to the footer as you have asked. Can you PLEASE put the PanoTools group link back?

I haven't actually checked and will take your word for it. You are now unblocked. You can add the link to the .info site back to the article, but please do not re-add the links to software, WP:NOT a web directory. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, if your IP was autoblocked and you still have trouble editing, drop me an email and I'll dig around to correct that problem. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Ignore that last bit. I wasn't able to check for the autoblock as the servers kept timing out on me. I've now managed to get through the slowness and clear the autoblock as well. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

John, you know there is still a severe copyright problem with the wiki on panotools.info, the real contributors of the articles are not mentioned, and the Recent Changes page is showing no entry to hide that you alone copied everything from a different source. This is a violation of the GFDL and you know it. Please fix that immediately.--Einemnet 01:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other popular software

If the programs related to the external links that were in the "Other popular software" section are indeed popular, you could create articles (even as stubs) for both of them (Enblend & Autopano-sift). The external links would be acceptable in the new articles and you could add the articles to the popular software section. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The PanoTools wiki and mailing list dwarfs the NG group in the major search engines. When Google is finish indexing the site, there will be over 50,000 pages. All one has to do is look at the page hit counts on the PanoTools wiki then check out NG's. Since the NG group is so new, the search engines haven't had much time to index the copy of the PanoTools groups resources yet. This also means that people doing a search will now get two copies of everything. :-(

Thanks for the hints ! John Spikowski 22:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

No number of page hits will make your copy/paste version legal if you violate the GFDL. Only adding a license footer is not enough if you don't fullfill the terms. See my comment above in the Commercial links section. I can only strongly suggest to fix these problems. --Einemnet 10:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Also you copy the original. If you worry about duplicate copies you can remove the copied content from your private [1] Wiki. --Wuz 14:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Can the number of links be reduced on the NG group submission. All the extra links can be accessed via your group site. I thought there was a one link per site rule here on the Wikipedia. If there is any question as to which wiki is the original and has the most activity, just look at the page hit counts. (NG - you know my e-mail address, take your issues off line please) John Spikowski 18:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

We are talking about Wikipedia and facts. Your Wiki is a copy of the .org Wiki and and is violating the GFDL and for that reason there should not be a link. Please try to focus and stay on topic. --Wuz 18:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas, you copied the PanoTools wiki in July of 2006 and used it as your 'home page' till you were able to build your CMS front for your site. Why are you posting misinformation here in the Wikipedia? What is the topic? The PanoTools group has one link here on the Wikipedia and you seem to spend all your time trying to get it removed. Can you start adding panorama content to the page instead? John Spikowski 18:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Just answer to this, ok? Your Wiki is violating the GFDL and for that reason there should not be a link. --Wuz 19:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas,

You make blanket statements (most untrue) that the PanoTools group (caretaker for the PanoTools wiki) is violating the GNU FDL. Have you even read the license. If you have, you would understand the concept of the license. You have privatized the NG copy of the PanoTools wiki which IS a violation of the GNU FDL. PLEASE stop posting untrue statements here. Once again, you know what my e-mail address is.

FACT The PanoTools wiki is the orignnal and the NG is a copy. Please change the name of your group to stop the confusion in the community. The PanoTools group membership is recovering from the false e-mail your group sent to all the PanoTools members even though this was a major violation of Yahoo's terms of service.

Yes John, I have read the GFDL and a simple look at random page [2] on your site and a click on "history" shows your violations. So now please make a prove of your claims? Yes, sure the Wiki was copied conforming with the GFDL to panotools.org after you have asked for 50.000$ to compensate for your "work" while you just provided web space. All the real work was done by others. Your major goal as with ScriptBasic is to make money with open source projects.

Btw: Why should we change the name? The group is built around the PanoTools software by Helmut Dersch. Name just 3 contributors to the PanoTools software that are on your Userlist [3]? This is all is still getting nowhere since you are not able to proof on of your claim and you are continuing repeating yourself. --Wuz 20:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

1. The Wikipedia software offers a utility to remove old history to save disk space and help the pages load faster. I run this utility about every 6 months to as part of the admin work I do in my free time. If you wish to keep all edits ever done to a page, then have at it. This could be why your site loads so slowly. (20-30 sec. to get a page up)

2. I never asked $50K for the site so please stop posting that lie. A comment was made that if the time I donated to manage the PanoTools group were a client, this is the value of my donation. When your even in the ballpark compared to my contributions, we can start counting beans.

3. You guys decided to bail and start a NEW group. Why didn't you do this instead of taking all the resources from the PanoTools group and base your future on your own merits rather then riding on ours?

Hint: If you plan to keeping the remaining members you do have, you should be spending your time working on your group site which hasn't been updated in ages. Why do you and your buddies spend so much time trying to trash our group when I supported you for years on the PanoTools site?

PLEASE end this now and stop trying to have the PanoTools group site removed from the Wikipedia. PLEASE reduce your links for NG to one. PLEASE change your group name and expand your site using your content rather then another groups.

I could have sent this to you in a e-mail but you refuse to use this as a form of communication. John Spikowski 21:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

John, this all is completely off topic. You are violating Copyright. Thats the only point! You are stealing our content, so there should not be a link in Wikipedia. Just remove your illegal copy of the Wiki our make it conform with the GFDL and stop stealing the emails and nobody will every bother you again. --Wuz 22:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thoms, Shutdown the illegal copy of the PanoTools wiki you took and stop abusing the wiki for your groups personal admin projects and keep it panorama based as it was intended. Use the "Panorama Tools" group URL and group name you started off with till Yuval convince you and Ian to steal the PanoTools groups resources. Leave the PanoTools group alone and stop contacting our members and harrasing them to join your group. I could care less what the NG group does as long as you leave us alone. John Spikowski 22:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

So if you don't care about panotools.org why do you steal the content? Maybe you should show evidence instead of just making unprovend accusations. This is Wikipedia where you have to proof things. I have asked you several times and still no single link that can proof any of your accusations. You should really read WP:REF, WP:NPOV and WP:NOT --Wuz 22:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas,

You need to get your priorities in line. The PanoTools and NG groups are here for the members benefit and not to sell your wares. I haven't made a dime off this and ALL my time and out of pocket $$$ has been my contribution to the PanoTools group. Since when is making a commitment and following through with promises I made to the group from day one a crime?

The PanoTools site aggregates panorama information from many sources. Why do you host the PanoTools wiki and the all the posts to the PanoTools groups old mailing list? For once, think of the members you serve rather then using your position as a moderator to advance your own personal projects for profit?

John Spikowski 22:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Just scroll some lines up. Now for the n'th time: Your wiki is violating the GFDL. Your remove all references to the original author. You steal the Panotools NG emails. Your remove all references to the original author and the original source. This is the topic, nothing else. Please stay on subject. --Wuz 22:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm tired of your "who's on first" posts here. If you want to send me a e-mail, I will try and work out your issues you have with the PanoTools group. John Spikowski 23:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I will try one more time to explain the purpose of the PanoTools mailing list archives. If your looking for a raw blow by blow account of the flood of e-mail to the list then the members should use the Yahoo groups message display and search features. If however your only interested in panorama based content and have no interest in administrative announcements with short shelf lives then use the PanoTools facilities. No one is forcing you (most popular visitor) to use any of the services offered on the PanoTools site.

Google and the other major search engines are about half way through the cleaned up PanoTools archives indexing them for all to use. When this is completed, there will be over 50,000 pages indexed on the PanoTools group site. The PanoTools wiki holds top position in the search engine for content indexed.

I tried to do the right thing and provide the bright side of what the group is all about. If you want promote the rants, arguments and other off topic content in your offering then that's your choice. (maybe you should take a poll and see how your members feel about your archiving methods for the search engines)

If the PanoTools wiki was shutdown, 95% of the links for PanoTools based wiki content in the search engine would break. If the NG wiki were shutdown, no one would notice other then the NG members that access it directly.

John Spikowski 02:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Your wiki is violating the GFDL. Your remove all references to the original author. You steal the Panotools NG emails. Your remove all references to the original author and the original source. This is the topic, nothing else. Please stay on subject. --Wuz 02:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you forgetting who's TALK page your visiting? If you want to post repetitive messages then do it somewhere else. I thought you were here to resolve issues. John Spikowski 02:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I still got no answer why you still violate Copyright. This is all that matters. --Wuz 03:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have not remove any author's wiki signatures in any of the pages. People that add content to a puplic wiki and don't care to 'sign' their contribution is their choice. If your saying that the GNU FDL says edit logs must be keep to identify contributors, I think your incorrect. Why would Mediawiki have a utility to remove old edit logs if it was a violation of copyright? You are just looking for any angle to trash the PanoTools group. John Spikowski 03:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Apache allows to share mp3s so its legal to put up what ever you like??? What kind of stupid argument is this??? Guess why Wikipedia is keeping the history? You know that you have removed all original authors and made them to "John Spikowski". You also still steal the emails and remove the original source. --Wuz 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

What? I haven't changed anyones signature in the content. When you wanted a copy of the PanoTools wiki to mirror, I went out of my way and on my on time to create backups for you guys. When I asked for a backup I was told to get lost. I had to mirror the content by hand. I even went through the trouble of putting the contributors name in the comment.

I have already gone over the mailing list archives with you many times. If you don't want to read what I post then that's your problem. John Spikowski 03:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GFDL and linking

Hi, I am a passer by in this little 'war' you have going. May I just point out that under the GFDL all details of edits to a page must be kept (ie. the history of edits) - as long as any of the material on the page is available for public download. Removing the history to save space is a violation of the GFDL as it removes this paper trail.

Secondly, as indeed pointed out by Wuz on the Panorama Tools article, your archive of mail on the site breaks the Yahoo Terms and Conditions.

These 2 problems combined make linking to your site an impossibility under our site's rules. However, if you can explain how you are keeping track of the history of the wiki and also how you are not breaking the terms and conditions from Yahoo then this may be reconsidered.

Also note that if you edit against the general consensus of the community, you will likely end up blocked for disruption. If you edit war, you may well end up breaking the 3 revert rule which will also lead to a block.

Finally, as I pointed out at the WP:AN/I post regarding this issue, you should not be posting any links to sites ran by yourself. It is a conflict of interest and as it is a site covered in adverts, it is WP:SPAM. If you re-add the site again, it will be reverted as such and you will end up being blocked.-Localzuk^(talk) 17:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final warning

I would have blocked you were it not for this edit in which you conceded the external link issue.[4] I strongly recommend you request a mentor through Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. You may be knowledgeable about the subject at hand, but your participation has been highly disruptive. Brief blocks have been tried already - you're approaching the point where long blocks or a topic ban become possibilities. Durova^Charge! 23:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright infringement

What is the alleged copyright infringement, where may be the allegedly infringing text be found, and from where it is it copied? —Centrx→talk • 04:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The two authors posting here (Carl & Thomas) were part of a small group of PanoTools members that used our member list, use our group name and advertise they are the new PanoTools group. They have taken the PanoTools archives and wiki. Just look at the page hit counts between wiki versions and you will see that the PanoTools group is the caretaker of the original PanoTools wiki project. They left an establisted group to start another of their own free will. The were never ban or asked to leave.

The content on the PanoTools site is property of the PanoTools group members. The NG group has taken these resources without permission.

John Spikowski

It is difficult to tell which site you are referring to in which statement, but regardless both sites have notices stating that the content is licensed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, which permits copying in either direction, and such a licensing cannot be rescinded. In addition, removing the external link to the panotools.org website would only be a courtesy. Wikipedia contributors have no obligation to remove the link to this website even were it a copyright infringement, and I see no evidence of copyright infringement. Do not edit war. —Centrx→talk • 05:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Based on your call, there is no reason both group sites shouldn't be able to post a single link in external resources section. John Spikowski