User talk:71.35.46.20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users, and you will be able to:

Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, remember to sign and date your comments with four tildes (~~~~).xC | ☎ 04:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey there

Hi!

Are you a registered editor editing anonymously? Because you really seem to know how things are done around here (judging from your recent edits). If you haven't signed up yet, please do consider signing up for an account! Wikipedia could do with more great editors like you!xC | ☎ 04:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I am a Wikignome that generally prefers to edit anonymously, though I do have an account - it's FishUtah (talk · contribs). I have no need to accrue credit for what I do (my ISP rotates me though IP addresses fairly often), I am not interested in becoming an Admin, and personally feel that edits from named accounts should not get any more or less credence than anyone else (doing so is just another form of creeping credentialism -- we should focus on the edits, not the editor). However I am for accountability, so if I do something that I think someone will question/challenge I will login, but otherwise I'm usually content to stay away from all of the drama that seems to get in the way of the real work. -- 71.35.46.20 04:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC) -- FishUtah 05:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding HymnWiki.org

What determines whether this website is actually mine, or not? I am the only administrator who has been editing articles regularly on the site. I do not, however, own the server(s) that contain the site, and I have no legal deed to it (nor have I signed some sort of agreement). I did not set up the MediaWiki software. Does any article I've created on any wiki count as my site? Unofficially, however, HymnWiki may be looked at as my site (and for many intents and purposes, it generally is, but it's not legally so, as far as I know). I'm not able to make alterations to the site beyond those any other administrator can (although I know who to ask to get them made, if he agrees to do so). I did come up with the idea for the site, and thus call myself the founder. Anyway, I'd like to know the policies on this if you know and don't mind sharing. Would any other administrators added later on also count as owners? It seems they would have as many privileges as I would. The More Good Foundation, which is a corporation, may actually be the ones legally considered to own the site, if anyone really does. Is anyone who signs up for an account there considered an owner? Also, it is not a personal website, if that counts for anything, seeing as it is a wiki, editable by all. I did set up the content for most of the uneditable wiki pages, though. Thanks for your time and patience! I am perfectly willing to be considered the owner as far as this matter of Wikipedia is concerned (I just want to know for sure), by the way (I've been called that, but I don't know if it's official). Shoreu 00:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Word of Wisdom

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Word of Wisdom. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Daven200520 23:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Please look at the dif again -- there was no vandalism or unhelpful edits. I substituted the less elegant <div class="references-small"><references /></div> for {{Reflist|2}} (which had the added benefit of putting the long notes section to 2 columns) and changed the section header from the less standard "Footnotes" to the more standard "Notes". Please actually look at what's being done before you make unsubstantiated accusations. -- 71.35.46.20 23:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey! I would like to thank you for bringing this to my attention , Please note the template says “appears to be” it couldn’t be that’s why I decided to go with a level 1 instead much higher warnings. I hope this resolves our issue….Btw your edit’s are wonderful and now I see the meaning behind your edit. --Daven200520 23:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abraham Hoagland

This is your last warning.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Abraham Hoagland, you will be blocked from editing. Daven200520 05:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about?!?! Here is the dif - There was no text deleted, nor was the page blanked. The stub was one big, disorganized text block, which I broke up into paragraphs, moving around the order of a few sentences, and performed some other wikification tasks, adding DEFAULTSORT, ab'ing the cats, etc... -- Are you even looking at whats being done before you revert and warn? This is twice today that you have shown a itchy trigger finger with me. Perhaps you need a little break? -- 71.35.46.20 05:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

When adding links to material on an external site, as you did to Abraham Hoagland, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website has licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

  • If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
  • If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
  • If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. {{unsigned2|05:47, 20 August 2007|Daven200520

Again, did you look at the dif? I suspect not (or you did not understand what you are seeing) as I did not add any external links, thought I did move a ref up to its first occurrence in the text. Again, please be specific here -- what exactly are you talking about, how does it possibly infringe on anyones copyright, and how otherwise are you justifying this warning based on the actual edit history? -- 71.35.46.20 06:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Sorry for what ever is going on in your life that’s making you cranky or a Cretin but please calm down, when I’m rc patrolling I see two things the before and the now, for me I saw before a big chunk of text on the left and I saw 1 word one the left due to the strain to read and skim over every article made by anon or edited by an anon, I immediately marked it and rev it then I was given the option to look at this users past history I did I didn’t even know it was you but I did recognize one of my templates therefore I gave you a higher template. If I may suggest you’re a great editor you need to get an account so you won’t even be targeted on my or other rc patrols. If you have any more questions feel free to leave them on my talk page. --Daven200520 06:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It's interesting that you used the pejorative "Cretin" to describe me (WP:NPA), because your actions are far more inline with that label than mine are. You are the one that engaged with me, not the other way around; you're the one that demonstrated a lack of ability in doing the task being attempting; and you're the one making unsubstantiated accusations. Here's a few hints for the future: (1) don't use wikignomes for target practices, because they get "cranky" about it; (2) it's bad to assume that any edit is vandalism without examining and understanding the edit - even if the edit came from an IP (especially on rc patrol), you should WP:AGF unless there is a good reason otherwise (remember, "Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia."); (3) when you want to remove a comment from a talk page (say because you made a mistake), use strikethrough ( like this --> <s> </s> ), because just deleting comments is usually a bad idea, especially when you delete someone else's; (4) when you make a mistake, it's best to admit it, as it helps everyone be WP:CALM. To answer your other question, I already have an account, and if you want to know more just look a little higher on the IPs talk page. -- 71.35.46.20 14:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Look I’m not targeting you out or using you as targeting practice I just go by what I see… if it makes you feel better then I apologize for making a common human mistake. --Jayson 17:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daven200520 (talk • contribs) 17:20, August 20, 2007 (UTC).