User talk:Blammermouth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{{helpme}}

I wish to remove all content and trace of my participation on this site. I am unsatisfied with the licence WP abides by, and henceforth DEMAND that all my contributed content be deleted. Blammermouth (talk) 01:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I also have used WP under other names, which I also require to be deleted. I will provide usernames to officials as required.

I WANT OUT

I do hope you reconsider. The articles you provided are useful and there is no reason to delete them, or the images they use, over a simple problem with an unrelated image. I am trying to be helpful and show you how to correct the problem, and this is frankly a very rude and offensive way of responding to that help.
As for your request above, user accounts cannot be deleted. The software does not provide the means to do so, and we require the account to remain so that contributions can be properly attributed according to the terms of the GFDL. You do, however, have a WP:Right to vanish, should you wish to exercise it. Again, I do hope you reconsider. Good day. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Please consider my request.

{{helpme}} I have added CSD tags to images I have added to Wikipedia. For some, my current username is different to the uploader name. If you require confirmation that I uploaded the images, I can probably log in and leave a note or whatever. I want my contributions to Wikipedia destroyed, please. Blammermouth (talk) 01:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Your contributions cannot be withdrawn. However, as a courtesy, I can erase any trace of your accounts existing. If you want to provide a list of your accounts, please do so privately by emailing me. east.718 at 01:50, February 23, 2008

{{helpme}} Then delete all of the images I have tagged for CSD. This is all I request. I don't want my images associated with this site any longer. Blammermouth (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, contributions cannot be withdrawn. Ostensibly, I agree with you that Steve Wright's image would qualify as valid fair use (the original issue which appears to have made you upset). You appear to be a good editor, so I hope you reconsider, but if you really want to disappear, please post again and I can "vanish" your accounts away. east.718 at 01:55, February 23, 2008

And you get a goofy smiley face in return. Happy editing! east.718 at 02:19, February 23, 2008

For what you have just put at the Ipswich page (you know the one) you are a star. If I knew how I would give you one. Let the move on begin. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 21:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ipswich murders PR

Hey Blammermouth, I'd love to help get the article up to, at least, GA. Let me know how I can help. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Wright image

Hey do you know where you pulled the image of Steve Wright from? I was reading a reuters article on the case and they had copyrighted the image to ITN, I am trying to figure out if I need to change the fair use rationale or not! Million_Moments (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah they'll be produced by the police, and they won't be PD, but it is possible ITN bought the image off the police. Not sure how that kind of thing works. I'll leave as is for now, I doubt anyone will question it. I hope somebody reviews the article for GA soon! Million_Moments (talk) 21:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to User talk:158.125.9.4/monobook.js has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 21:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)