User talk:Ksofen666

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, Ksofen666, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Dear_tabby.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dear_tabby.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 07:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Category:Thunderbolts Members

Your recent edit to Category:Thunderbolts Members (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 03:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abe Jenkins

Please read and understand Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics) before you go moving any more pages. What you did does not conform and I am going to ask an administrator to reverse it. CovenantD 03:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Erik Josten

Stop renaming comics characters who have had more than one code name to reflect only their most recent one. The Comics Project members have discussed this and come to a consensus on how to deal with such characters. If you wish to discuss a change in the guidelines, please bring it up BEFORE you go moving any more pages. It just creates unnecessary work for others to move them back. CovenantD 04:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Rafe and Alison Kovich

Your recent edit to Rafe and Alison Kovich (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 09:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your Speedy delete requests for Passions family characters.

I have denied your requests for speedy deletion of the Passions show character categories. There are very narrow requirements for speedy deletion of categories. The fact that you have performed an informal rename of the categories is not one of these reasons. There is a specific process for changing the name of categories that should be followed. I have instead placed all these categories up for rename at WP:CFD. This will set the process in motion for making the rename official. It also lays open the possibility that there might be objections to the rename.

The process will take a week or more and, at the end, if the rename is formally approved, the empty categories will be deleted. I would suggest you visit the discussion and add your input and reasonings for why they needed to be renamed.

Do note that this should not be considered a warning or criticism or any such. We all have to learn how things work around here bit by bit. - TexasAndroid 19:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Superteam members templates

Please read Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_14#Superteam_member_templates_.28multiple.29 for discussion on why these are discouraged. This is also the discussion that I am following by deleting these templates. I am sure you worked hard on it, and it pains me to do so, but the consensus of the project is that there are a number of reasons member templates cannot work on Wikipedia. If you have more questions, please ask. Also, if you would like to raise the issue again, go to WT:CMC and start a new conversation. Although I am deleting these templates, I can just as easily restore them should there be a change in the direction of the conversation. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 00:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Supreme Intelligence.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Supreme Intelligence.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This image is a duplicate of Image:Supremein.jpg

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gman124 04:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I've blocked you for three hours since you are emptying a category which is listed for renaming. The template on the category is quite clear that the category should not be emptied whilst the debate is in place. I feel the block is necessitated by the fact you have refused good faith attempts to discuss this issue with you and have removed any attempts at such discussion from your talk page. I suggest you now start to discuss the issue. Steve block Talk 17:39, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I accept the block and admit I'm guilty. I will not however apologize. I created the page Lists of Marvel Comics superhero teams and it was nominated for renaming which was fine. But it was a renaming that had the incorrect spelling of the word organization. Not only that but nearly a month later the issue STILL had not resolved itself between deciding on the category name I originally created which someone had a problem with or the one with the incorrect spelling. So I took matters upon myself to create categories that fit in with the naming convention AND used the proper spelling of organization.
Did I circumvent cfd...absolutely. Would I have done so if the cfd not took the better part of month to resolve or if the proposed rename used the proper spelling of organization...probably not.
This "organisation" business deals with multiple categories that were named incorrectly to begin with and that mistake was propagated to several articles.
If I misspell dog as dogg and create a category for "famous doggs" I would expect it to be renamed and everything moved over to "famous dogs". I wouldn't expect it to require a month long debate on the subject..especially in my situation where the misspelling was propagated to several pages.


Am I in the wrong...absolutely. Should I have opened up the floor for discussion...sure. But what will that accomplish really? The categories would still be named incorrectly and nothing would be done about it just as it hasn't been up to this point.
And why didn't any of you catch the fact that these categories used the misspelling "organisation" to begin with? I get that the original creator of these categories is australian (I think) but this wikipedia should use the conventional spelling correct? The category "Lists_of_fictional_characters_by_organisation" was created back in May 3 of last year. Why was nothing done about this then? Forgive me if I have no faith in the power of cfd. --ksofen666 08 February 2007.
As the one who put the Marvel cat up twice (once for deletion as the apparent parent had a small pop and once, the current one, for rename as that the "strong suggestion" of the "no consensus") I think I can see two reasons why the need to change the spelling was over looked for so long:
  1. The variation between the British and American spellings can be easy to over look and "s" for "z" is something most people will skim over. Doubled letters, dropped letters, and dissimilar letters have a better chance of standing out.
  2. The original reason it caught my attention was the dissimilarity between the Marvel cat title and the apparent parent title. Consistency would dictate the Marvel cat follow the broader parent.
Since, as noted above, the strong suggestion was that since the parent has a fair chance to grow, and sections of it could, and should be split off. I created the DC cat using the parent as a template. Mea culpa for not catching the difference then and there. The only explanation I can offer is it looked right. I'm probably looking at it from the worst possible position: raised and educated in the States, but living and working in Canada. The preference here is consistency with a strong leaning to British spellings. I'll catch "o"/"ou" and "re"/"er" conflicts, but "...ization"/"...isation" is applied almost equally. As long as it's used consistently in a work, it doesn't really twig as American or British for me.
But is it even used consistently? This is a little outside of the scope of the discussion but take the article "List of fictional military organizations". Before I went on my rampage it had the categories "Fictional military organizations" and "list of fictional organisations". One of its category was spelled one way and another the other way. Plus in some of the categories using the word organisation you have articles using the word organization. There may have been internal consistency with the category and subcategory that caused this initial controversy but spread out a little further and you see there are categories that use organisation and ones that use organization. It should be one or the other.--ksofen666
  • No, on wikipedia we use the spelling of the first contributor. Uniformity isn't as important as avoiding edit wars over spelling. We have editors from a number of backgrounds using a wide variety of English spellings, so the best thing to do is use the spelling of the first contributor unless the topic is country specific, and then that country's usage wins the day. Hope that helps. Steve block Talk 19:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, there is a bit of the "nation of origin" point here. Some of the categories can be pointed at as having entierly, or predominatly, American items, either by opoint of creation or fictional setting. If the convention is that such a point of origin determins which spellings are to be applied, then the cats need to be fixed. (example, sort of, if I edit Alan Moore or a Doctor Who article, I should try to keep to British conventions, but editing Batman or George W Bush should be done in American.)
My original point, and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, was that I took what was already there, sisn't see a problem with it, and used it as a template. To me, since the three cats grouped, the bulk of the name, "List of ... by organisation", needed to be consistant. Just like many things that get thrown up for CfR. — J Greb 20:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
As for the back logged CfDs... I'm honestly more of a "wait and let the Admins get to it" type. I think, however, if there is a desire to see one close in a timely manner nudging an admin might be the best way to get an item closed so it can be acted on. — J Greb 18:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Did you actually tell anyone they were misspelt? Had you brought it to an admin's attention it could have been sorted immediately. We don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point. Still, if that's all there is to it, if you're prepared to let the wheels grind as fast as they do, then I'll unblock you. Steve block Talk 19:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll leave that to your discretion.ksofen666
I'll assume good faith then. Steve block Talk 19:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thunderbolts category

Just an observation here... If the intent you're aiming for is to include the articles for the characters as well as the article for the team and the roster list, this will most likely wind up on a CfD as a recreation of the deleted "members" cat. — J Greb 22:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I was also going to include Graviton, Crimson Cowl since they are notable villains as well as the V Battalion who are notable supporting characters :)
Also tell me why the category X-Men is allowed to have members articles but other categories for teams do not?
--ksofen666
Small suggestion then... get the non-member articles in place first. That way if/when it does go you can make a strong case for "All articles related to the book". To that end the creators of the series may also be valid for inclusion.
As for X-Men... it really shouldn't. If that's what's happening, it should go for Discussion as well. — J Greb 22:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Helmut as Citizen V edited.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Helmut as Citizen V edited.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Skrull2 edited.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Skrull2 edited.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Skrull B.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Skrull B.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


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

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sprocket_Barnhardt.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. ↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:06, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

um...forgive my ignorance on the subject but I never consciously included a tag that said fair use (not sure about what qualifies either way honestly).


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

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Volx.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. ↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Skrull A.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Skrull A.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/s/o/User_talk%7EKsofen666_0d34.html"