User talk:Akc9000/ArchiveTalk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

test

[edit] Undelete Help

Administrators or other users can determine the editing pattern is sockpuppetry. However, you can perform a checkuser to see if the accounts are the same. Cheers. Miranda 16:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Done. Remains as a reference only Undelete Help Needed:

Could an admin please help me with the following: I edited an article "Dynamic Submission" its a company with a company stub.

I request this article be undeleted.

According to the wiki rules any article that was deleted because of PROD expiry can be restored by any admin by any restore request (even the author's) I have requested it to be restored and have not heard back yet. Please correct me if I am wrong -- and if I am wrong point me to a reference because I spent an hour reading about this process last night to understand it.

I restored this for you a little while ago. I'm guessing that you didn't see my response as I happened to put it below the line. HTH --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 00:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Everything below this line has already been resolved,

Thanks!

Done. Remains as a reference only

[edit] Upload Snapshots

1. Could you tell me the proper way to upload a snapshot so it can be viewed in an article? or point me to a reference? Its a jpg.

You can upload the Pic via here and if you took that snapshot yourself, then you can tag it as {{pd-self}} and add it to the article...--Comet styles 17:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

2. I edited an article "Dynamic Software" its a company with a company stub, I added one article "Dynamic Submission" and came back to add more and both articles were deleted. No Admin contacted me prior to the deletion and I do not think the deletion procedure was followed. How do I get my articles undeleted ?

Note: John Reaves restored the Dynamic Submission article but I have not heard a word on the other Dynamic Software article.

According to the rules any article that was deleted because of PROD expiry can be restored by any admin by any restore request (even the author's) I have requested it to be restored and have not heard back yet. Please correct me if I am wrong and if I am wrong point me to a reference because I spent an hour reading about this process last night to understand it.

Thanks.

[edit] Prod

Done. Remains as a reference only

Both articles were deleted because of expiry of prod. As for the deletion log, please see here and here. PeaceNT 01:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I restored it. -- John Reaves (talk) 03:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I've put a copy of the other article in User:Akc9000/sandbox. You might want to work on improving it a bit with some references, etc. and then it can be moved back to the main namespace. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 21:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wow, a lot of questions!

I'm glad you're interested in getting more involved! Let's see if I can't answer some questions.

The boxes on the side of my userpage under the "About Me" heading are called userboxes. You can find all kinds of ones people have created here. The box indicating I'm female is one I made myself, since I get mistaken for a gentleman pretty frequently. If you want to proclaim that you're a dude, you can use the one I'm putting at the bottom of this message. You can change the colors if you want; it's pretty easy, I think.
You can upload an image by going to Special:Upload. On that page you'll find links about our policies regarding images, copyright, and fair use.
You can suggest changes on the talk page of any article or category. If you're proposing a massive change, however, you may want to list it on Categories for discussion, where editors discuss the merging, renaming, or deleting of categories.
Yeah, that sure would be great! Unfortuantely, it's a limitation of the software.

I hope that helps! If you ever have another question, you can put {{helpme}} on your talk page along with your question, and an experienced editor will be by to help you out. Happy editing! -- Merope 23:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

This user is male.

[edit] Dynamic Software

Hi. I noticed that you copied the article to Dynamic Software, instead of using the move button as we had discussed. I am assuming that you just forgot, so I've deleted the copy and moved it from your sandbox instead. If you made any subsequent edits, you may need to re-do them. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 21:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you copied it into the other article, but you should have moved it. Do you see a tab at the top of the screen that says "move"? You need to use that to move an article without losing the edit history in the future. Now it may look like it is in both places, but it really isn't. It is at Dynamic Software, but your sandbox is redirecting to that location, so when you click on the User:Akc9000/sandbox link, it will put you in Dynamic Software with a special note that says (Redirected from User:Akc9000/sandbox) click on the link for User:Akc9000/sandbox in that phrase and you will then see a page that says User:Akc9000/sandbox at the top and has a funny arrow symbol next to a link for Dynamic Software. When you get there, click edit this page at the top and you should see #REDIRECT [[Dynamic Software]]. Just clear that out and you will have a new empty sandbox. HTH --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Afd

Please follow the afd instructions properly as you havent done so nor have you logged it. if you dont do so it will be removed but just follow the instructions on this page, SqueakBox 19:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

No, its a mess Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 June 7, I am not sure why though, but it hasnt formatted properly, SqueakBox 20:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

New Help Needed:

Not sure why the article I nominated for submission did not format properly on the page. Could an admin please fix this or tell me why it did not format properly.

Why don't we talk about some of these Internet marketing articles before you go AfD them? Jehochman ^Talk 20:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The AFD is formatted properly. The AFD just shows where the article was nominated previously for deletion and reached no consensus. Next time, please place the helpme before the question so that helpers can read the question quicker. Miranda 20:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

A discussion has started that you may wish to comment on here. Jehochman ^Talk 06:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets at work here!

[edit] Little context in Template:Latest preview release/Dynamic Submission

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Template:Latest preview release/Dynamic Submission, by Athaenara, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Template:Latest preview release/Dynamic Submission is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Template:Latest preview release/Dynamic Submission, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Template:Latest preview release/Dynamic Submission itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 08:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam in Image:Dynamicsubmission screenshot.gif

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Dynamicsubmission screenshot.gif, by Athaenara, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Dynamicsubmission screenshot.gif is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Dynamicsubmission screenshot.gif, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Dynamicsubmission screenshot.gif itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 08:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Cobalt app.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Cobalt app.gif. 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:

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. 04:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June 2007

Please do not remove maintenance notices from articles, as you did to Server appliance, if the suggested changes are still needed. If you believe that the problems outlined in the maintenance template do not apply to the article, it may be best to discuss the issue on the talk page. Thank you. DearPrudence 22:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Server Appliance category

Hi Rich, yes I know it should be Server appliance but I have no idea how to rename it so I built a redirect for it. There are already 11 articles in it. I have been fixing things. Any ideas? I see you are an admin can you rename it? It does not work for me.

--Akc9000 07:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. You have to create a new cat and move the items, then delete the old one. WP:AWB helps. Rich Farmbrough, 10:54 15 June 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Dynamic Submission, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);

and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for blatant self-promotion may be blocked indefinitely without further warning.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 22:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't remove maintenance tags

This has been reported on WP:COIN Please comment there, and don't remove the maintenance tags again, please. Jehochman ^Talk 22:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with Dynamic Submission. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. :) Chetblong 22:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamic Submission

Hey please do what you can in the next 2 hours with Dynamic Submission. I've asked on WP:COIN for Dynamic Submission not to be touched by anyone else for the next 2 hours so you can modify the article to meet up to Wikipedia's standards, and if it isn't modified that it should be deleted. So do what you can. :) Chetblong 23:15, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've looked at the article since you've modified it and there's one more place I think could be improved, Section 2 still sounds a little like an ad in the way it's worded. Reword it to not sound like an ad and it should be fine. I'll check it out after you've modified it and I'll tell you what I think. :) Chetblong 01:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Admin input: If you were in communication with an admin, and were actively working on it, you (or the admin) should have actually put a valid hangon message on the talk page. Quite frankly, I don't believe the draft article you're working on is ready to go for the following reasons: There's a number of grammar and spelling errors Headers should not have caps except for first letter, and should not be wikilinks Bolding is for the first use of the subject in the lead paragraph only References shouldn't be generalized like you've put them. Individual facts in the article should be footnoted to the references (see WP:FN and WP:CITET if you don't know how to do this) The section on "Search engine submission software" should be omitted entirely, as it's covered in a separate article. Don't duplicate material, that's what wiki links are for Move the reasons why its notable (media coverage, awards) to the 1st or 2nd paragraph Please be aware that wikipedia is not a how-to guide, so instructional information about how to use the software is not appropriate. You can eliminate the "further reading", as the book is in the refs (and get rid of the dummies graphic - it's not relevant to the particular program...it looks like you're plugging the book). AKRadeckiSpeaketh 04:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Akradecki"

[edit] Search engine submission

I partially reverted your edits because you removed properly sourced material. Don't do that again, please. Jehochman ^Talk 13:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been indefintely blocked from editing Wikipedia, because of your repeated violations of the conflict of interest policy as detailed here, and also for your personal attacks against User:Jehochman in that thread. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

{{unblock|This is unbelieveable! I have written a number of articles now. I am one of an elite number of people who have authored rfcs and you block me? I have asked a number of people to help me concerning this editor. I cannot understand why he would tell me one thing and do the opposite. The article in question came out of deletion review. It was deemed there that COI did not keep me from editing it. I wanted to complete the article and the other editor kept changing it as I was working on it. I appealed for help, I was given two hours to complete the article. I make a backup of the article in my user area. I was working with a person involved with a person on the notice board that allowed me the two hour. Afterwords and admin (Akradecki) gave me some useful information and I modified the article exactly how he told me to. Now, I did not repost that article, it was in my user space and I was trying to figure out if everything was ok with it and I was seeking advise from an admin. Secondly I have made a number of contributions see [[server appliance]] for example. I just don't understand. If the article was undeleted I thought it would be ok to complete it. Akradecki, explained a number of issues that were wrong with the artcle and told me to move the award section to the second paragraph. As far as the other editor is concerned. I do not believe it is a personal attack, I just said he lied to me and he did. If you check the talk pages he said he was going to help me with this article and instead as soon as I started working on it he kept placing maint tags on it. It was very shocking to me. I do not believe I did anything wrong. This article came out of deletion review and I revised it as an admin suggested and I did not repost it. Please advise to me why you should think I should be blocked when I was trying to follow the rules. Remember I have only been here one month. If you check my talk history, you will see I reached out to admins for guidance about this editor with no advise. So I did not know what to do. I would really like you to explain --[[User:Akc9000|Akc9000]] 21:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)}}

Ok, I've looked this over a bit. First off this is your first block ever, so keeping that in mind I looked over the situation some. I noticed this edit, which is very strongly worded. Its not a good idea to accuse others of being a liar, and you might want to have a read over our policy on that. I'm also going to point you to our conflict of interest guideline. I'm going to drop the block from an indef block/community ban to 24 hours from the time that the block was initiated. I will warn you that continuing to act as you have may result in you getting re-blocked, please read over our guidelines. Thank you. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 22:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

When you return, you may wish to comment at this discussion. Jehochman ^Talk 14:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I attempted to login but I could not! Eagle 101 unblocked me and I did not edit anything or login since that unblock but an admin Ryulong who I do not know, re-blocked me and I do not know why.

I've contacted Eagle101, who originally unblocked you, and Ryulong who reblocked you. Hopefully one of them can explain the situation. - auburnpilot talk 22:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you AuburnPilot but Eagle 101 is on vacation for a few day. I really am interested in know why this other admin blocked me when I had no edits inbetween the time of the unblock and his block.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

After looking over the entire situation, it appears Akc9000 was reblocked due to an edit he made back in March (over three months prior to being unblocked) [1]. This edit was discovered by Ryulong, reverted, and Akc9000 was blocked. Note the edit appears to be an attempt at requesting adminship, not an attempt to spam wikipedia. As no edits were made between the time AkC9000 was unblocked and reblocked, I do not believe he received the second chance offered to him. Let's remember that blocking takes only seconds, and if AkC9000 makes me regret this leap of good faith, the situation can easily be rectified. If AkC9000 becomes a constructive member of the community, the encyclopedia benefits. AkC9000 is being given the opportunity to act on the second chance he was given, and having been contacted off-wiki, I believe he intends to use it well. As such, I've accepted this request to be unblocked.

Request handled by: - auburnpilot talk 22:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know from an Admin if there is someplace to post a recommended suggestion on how to improve wiki? Specifically I would like to propose an article tag that when used would NOT display if the article is viewed but would display infomation if someone attempted to edit the article. Furthermore placing the tag on the article would in itself generate a cat for all articles using this tag.

This tag for lack of a better word would be artexpert (not to be confused with the expert tag now used. The tag would flag the article letting editors to be advised that to edit this article you would need a great deal of knowledge, that cites basically would not be enough you would already need a good working knowledge of the subject matter so the editor would be able to apply the infomation correctly that they find cites.

This tag would apply only to very complex articles and would not interfere with anyone editing the article. It would just advise the editor in edit mode that they should be well informed to edit this article. I suggest this because of the great deal of mis-information I have found in wiki and I am cleaning it up but really something needs to be done. Not everything you read is correct and not every cite you find is correct. At somepoint the editor needs to know what is correct infomation and what is not. What I consider an expert or at least a knowedgeble editor.

Discovered this issues with History of Internet, Router etc.

Please let me know if there is a place to post the suggestion

--akc9000 ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Your idea sounds similar to the {{expert-subject}} template, which adds pages to Category:Pages needing expert attention. Messages to other edits can be made on the talk page, or using invisible HTML comments. View this page in edit mode to see an example.--Werdan7^{T @} 20:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

--- End of Help

The expert tag should suffice in this case. Miranda 20:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I do not understand but when the expert tag appears on the top of the article, an expert comes and fixes it. The expert tag comes off correct?

Then down the road, a different editor who is not an expert adds wrong information and it could be wrong for a long time until a different expert, who know the info, fixes it. Am I wrong about how the existing expert tag works?

--akc9000 ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

First, anyone can edit an article. The expert tag just states that an expert is in need to refactor the article in question. Miranda 20:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Help

Does a sysop or an admin or even an editor know if the functionality of HagermanBot is going to be supported or is HagermanBot going to be fixed? It was very useful.

Why don't you ask on WP:BOT? Miranda 03:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

--- End of Help Me ---

[edit] Your Help Request

Is there a command that I can use to determine how many people are searching for (looking up) a given article? If so how do I access this command?

Thanks!

Hi! I don't think there is one available on the English wikipedia, as the software does by default have one, but it has been disabled because it uses too many server resources. Sorry! Stwalkerster talk 16:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

PS - I moved this to the bottom of your talk page. Hope you don't mind Stwalkerster talk 16:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm rather concerned about the current split among router, routing, switch, and routing protocols, which seems to be introducing a fair number of technical errors.

Your recent edit to List of routing protocols (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. // MartinBot 15:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

==Where, and how much, "planes" in "router"== Howard C. Berkowitz 16:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The more I look at related articles, such as "routing table" and "forwarding information base", the more I think there needs to be a certain consolidation. If you would, help me out on how much is permissible to have in the "router" article about "control plane" and "forwarding plane". To me, moving much detail to the plane artice (and hierarchically subordinate to them) can make the "router" article less technical. I do not, however, see a reason, at the nontechnical level, for separating "router" and "routing".

While not as ambiguous as "switch", "routing" is not an especially useful term. In my experience, people with some technical knowledge most often use it as a synonym for "forwarding". My proposal would be to mention it, as an informal synonym, under the minimal "forwarding" section in "router", with much more detail in "forwarding plane".

So, I suppose my short term proposals are:

Router

 Merge "routing" into router; there's very little unique nontechnical detail there.
 Minimal sections on forwarding and control planes

Control plane

 Routing tables/RIBs and their hardware and software implementation
 Detailed writeup of hardware state and static routes as they pertain to the routing table
 Pointer to routing protocols
    "routing protocols" gives general concepts such as link state and distance vector, then
      points to individual protocols.
    I note the pointers are now to unicast protocols, and I might link multicast and constraint-
      based routing as introductory material in the "routing protocols" articles.

Forwarding plane

 FIBs
 Encapsulation and perhaps a pointer to tunnel interfaces
 uRPF and other decisions made by forwarders that are not dependent on pure next-hop routing information

Switch

 An enhanced disambiguation entry, which recognizes there are multilayer switches, and, for 
 each pointer (e.g., bridge) does discuss the features that marketeers used to differentiate 
 L2 switches from conventional bridges. Alternatively, that differentiation could be under
 bridge, showing the evolution of bridging.

[edit] Router and Routing

To me, redirecting "routing" to "router" would be preferred. The existing "routing" article, to me, fairly randomly mixes some quite unrelated subjects, such as Internet and PSTN routing. I see no reason why "router" cannot focus on IP routing (with a brief mention to historical routed protocols such as IPX and AppleTalk), with disambiguation for radically different things such as ATM (of which Frame Relay is properly a subset), MPLS, and the PSTN. As far as MPLS, about the only nontechnical thing that can be said about it is that it is can be an alternative, and sometimes economical, alternative to Frame Relay and ATM services offered by carriers. Beyond that, much magic; gods cause packet flow (or, alternatively, a sufficiently detailed discussion to explain IP-based path setup, MPLS route setup, and MPLS forwarding, plus, probably, pros and cons of MPLS, such as QoS and failover).

I'm not sure where to go with this, as I hesitate to write much if there's no structural consensus. I'm certainly open to free editing of the details, just as I cleaned up some OSPF material today. Until the basic articles and their relationship is agreed upon, however, I don't want to be creating articles to have them deleted. Howard C. Berkowitz 19:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revisions on WP:CN

Hi, I reverted your edits here on the community noticeboard, because this board deals with discussing blocks and banning users. Please read what constitutes vandalism on how to combat vandalism. If the issue serious enough, please report to Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks. Miranda 02:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Systems_analyst

Hi, thanks a lot for the stub! In fact to my knowledge this text comes from a State of California website, and the content is therefore not in the Public Domain but is copyrighted by the local state. -- lucasbfr ^talk 11:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cisco images

I replied on my talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Glad to hear that you heard back from them! You can just change the license on the image Image:SnapServer-NA.jpg to whatever fits best. {{attribution}}? {{GFDL}}? Whatever they agreed to. (You can remove the non-free promotional tag and the replaceable tags.) And then add text on the image description page saying you received permission in an e-mail, and that you have forwarded it to Wikimedia for verification. That should do it!

I also undeleted Image:Linksys48portswitch.jpg and reset its rfu for another week, so it won't be deleted before next Friday. I'm willing to do that for the other images too, but I don't remember which they are. Could you link to the image names here or on my talk page? All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 22:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Linksys befsr8.jpg is now undeleted as well. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Cisco7600seriesrouter.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cisco7600seriesrouter.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -N 14:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I feel really bad that I might have steered you wrong here. If I can help you in any way in getting these images relicensed, let me know. Sorry! – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 20:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Router Images Permission

This page should answer all of your questions. Good luck! -- But|seriously|folks 20:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Permission from Cisco

Did you forward the e-mail to the folks at Wikimedia? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 23:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, The emails were all forwarded.

Al --akc9000 ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 23:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I run into a lot of cases where folks get the permission but don't send it to OTRS. Thanks for your work on getting the free content. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 23:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Closing deletion discussions

I know you were acting in good faith, but concerning the edit you made to the ifd for Image:Cisco7600seriesrouter.jpg please be aware you are not allowed to close a deletion discussion for an image you uploaded. An administrator will verify the information and close it. I have undone your closure. -N 00:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I just saw this, and I closed the ifd for you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 02:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

how come all of the router images are only "Cisco"?

The pictures are from Cisco because they gave Wiki permission to use them. No one else offered or had photos. Do you have a company in mind that offered photos and granted permission to use?

--akc9000 ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 14:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Router disambiguates to DSL router

What was your reasoning behind linking to DSL router instead of residential gateway? The residential gateway page very accurately describes what marketing at Linksys, Netgear, etc. call "routers." 171.71.37.103 23:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)