User talk:BradPatrick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I NO LONGER WORK FOR WMF. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT ME FOR LEGAL ADVICE.

If you have a legal issue concerning the Foundation, email info-en at wikimedia dot org.

Contents

[edit] Archives

I plan to archive my talk page regularly.

Archive 1 (before June 2, 2006)

Archive 2 June 2, 2006 - August 25, 2006

Archive 3 August 25, 2006 - September 30, 2006

Archive 4 October 1, 2006 - December 31, 2006

Archive 5 January 1, 2007 - March 31, 2007

[edit] Welcome

to Wikinews. Doldrums 20:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Les Balsiger (disambiguation)

Just to let you know that in light of your comments on the need for this page, I have closed the AfD discussion as keep. WjBscribe 22:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin status

Hi. I note that your account on en.wiki still has its admin bit set. It's my understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this was enabled due to your position at the Foundation. As it appears you're no longer working in that role, it would seem that there's no reason for that bit to continue to be set. Perhaps you'd consider requesting its removal at meta:Requests for permissions; if, however, you feel that you'd like to continue to contribute to en.wiki as an admin, it's probably best that you go through the normal WP:RFA process to affirm that status. It's my understanding that, upon his resignation, Danny did something like that. Thanks. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

If I may chime in, this was discussed here and here, and I think there was a large, though certainly not total, consensus that such a step was unnecessary. Sirmob 17:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - that'll teach me to read the archives ;) I'll go do something constructive now. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your email to me

Hello BradPatrick. I noticed you sent me an email four days ago (sorry, I don't check email very often nowadays). You ask me for help with your research with place names in Slovakia before 1918 and 1939/1945. What do you mean exactly? Please respond so we can discuss. MarkBA t/c/@ 15:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ellen Ash Peters

This article seems to be a copy and paste from [1], with minor changes but entire sentences copied over. The site claims a copyright on it's main page [2]. So um, it would seem to be a copyright violation unless you have permission to release this under the GFDL. I'll wait a while for a reply before taking any action. --W.marsh 16:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Just to be on the safe side, I've replaced this article with the possible copyvio template. We can always reverse this if appropriate. --Butseriouslyfolks 02:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Reworked. No copyvio. Thanks for checking up on me guys, and not letting our standards slide.--Brad Patrick 16:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What ever happened to the "shoot the spammers on sight" letter?

Brad, once upon a time, Signpost had a link to a letter you wrote about spam and spammers, and how to deal with them. It was wonderful, and I saved the link, but when I went there recently, I found the link going to a totally different thread. Did your letter vanish after your resignation? Can it be found elsewhere? Thanks! AKRadeckiSpeaketh 22:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:OFFICE pages on WP:MFD

Two pages presumably protected under the WP:OFFICE policy have been nominated for deletion here. You have been contacted either as an office contact or as someone involved in the editing or maintenance of the nominated pages. If you with to comment, please see the deletion discussion. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 14:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the situation was resolved.--Brad Patrick 01:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Corporate vanity policy enforcement

Paul, I read with interest your post about corporate vanity [3], and was wondering if you could make an opinion on this article Railpage. In the scale of things for Wikipedia, it might be a small fish, but in this case these guys seem to have treated Wikipedia as place for self promotion for themselves and their businesses (Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd and Digital River Networks Pty Ltd, both are website hosting companies). The content has been in dispute for some time, the subject of the article is commercially owned by Interactive Omnimedia, but in the past couple of days has become more blatant with additional commercial promotion content added. The article has been nominated for deletion on numerous occasions, but always seems to survive, on one occasion support against deletion was drummed up via Google Groups[4] I hope you don't mind me posting here, I just require an independent opinion !!! Thank youTezza1 20:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

By way of background, Tezza1 appears to be waging a lone jihad against the article principally because he is very anti the subject. He has has openly stated he does not believe the article should exist and campaigned for its deletion. Having failed to get it deleted, he has engaged in long-term disruptive editing, POV abuse, repeated reverts, agenda pushing, WP:POINT and listing the article for speedy deletion immediately after it was unprotected after a third failed AfD. Evidence and endorsements are shown in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tezza1. The Null Device 04:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

This is an active case at WP:COIN. I have placed weeklong semiprotection on both the article and its talk page and filed a request at WP:RFCU. DurovaCharge! 05:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I asked Paul to provide an independent opinion, nothing else!, and no opinion from other users!!! I believe the organization behind the article is privately commercially operated [5], and a non community organization [6]. The problem is some believe otherwise. I was only asking an opinion after reading Paul's post about corporate vanity. I didn't intend to bring these users here, Sorry!!Tezza1 09:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are three view drawings of aircraft PD-ineligable ?

I know you are no longer working as general council - but I thought you might be able to contribute to this discussion at at [7] which appears to be arguing that three view drawings of aircraft are ineligable for copyright and we can thus simply scan them from books and use them in wikimedia projects. Megapixie 23:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, not my issue. Contact the new general counsel, a great lawyer, Mike Godwin through the Wikimedia Foundation offices.--Brad Patrick 05:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the redirect. Megapixie 07:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for input

As an experienced editor, and if you have time for it, please consider commenting on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#User Benderson2 and TREC. I took the liberty on the related Afd of quoting from your Corporate Vanity Policy Enforcement post. — Athaenara ✉ 12:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

Hi, I hope this isn't canvassing but I was wondering if you would be interested in this Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia and Popular Culture. If not, could you share this link with editors you think may be interested. Thanks Ozmaweezer 13:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)