User talk:Dsol

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive: 1

Unless you request otherwise, I will respond here.

Hi Dsol. I've responded to your questions on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:71.33.114.38, I'm new to this "contributing" thing, so I'm not sure if I should have done anything else, like somehow let you know that I've responded. Feel free to delete this once you're read it. Thanks.


Dsol, I was looking at Oleh Blohin's page because he's the Ukrainian soccer coach. Something seems wrong about the section entitle Racist Comment. Lack of other quotes by him makes it seem like that's the most important quote from him. Seems skewed. What do you think? --Dunadan11

Dsol-- I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I am not sure what to do about that IP address we both commented on, which I think is the same as User:omarthesecond (see my user page for why I think this. I am not sure what to do. Do I report this as vandalism? It is not obvious vandalism, so I am hesitant... What do you think?

Also, do you think my add regarding the similarities to the 1996 incident is worth restoring? I knew it was borderline, cuz it's a little bit analysis-y rather than fact-y, but I thought it might be enlightening to know why Qana is a strategic location, etc. I dunno, sorry to bug you, I'm just looking for some advice from someone who is obviously a much more experienced Wikipedian than I :) --Jaysweet 21:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your edit to Mark Ames

Your recent edit to Mark Ames (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 12:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Brecher

Could you instead link to the subpage where it says so? Cheers Ingolfson 15:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's there on one of the ehem pages (or linked to), I'll look for it but I don't have time now. Feel free to revert in the meantime if you want. Dsol 15:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, a possible reference is better than none ;-), so I'll leave it. Tried to find it, but today, it was dead :-( Ingolfson 08:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Dsol -- sorry, I haven't logged in for a while, so I just saw your message. The Brecher interview is about 1 hour 17 minutes into the podcast I linked to at http://server.wnur.org/thisishell/archive/pods/20080405.mp3. Like all of Chuck Mertz's interviews, it's very good, although the questions focus on Brecher's views rather than his identity. Just after the interview there's a mention of the show's producers having an amusing time contacting Brecher on the phone. I added the interview time to the Brecher page, HTH. Fang2415 (talk) 09:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hi Dsol, it's probably best to discuss this on the article talk page. Which other reliable sources discussed it? Yahoo News is just a list of other people's stories, not a source in itself. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 18:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, and thanks for your note. I'm really sorry I'm not on the ball with this, but I've been a bit tied up. I'll try to find time next week to take a closer look. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 01:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:156.56.151.70

Was this IP you? If it was, please make sure you log into your account. Otherwise it's a violation of WP:SOCK. The Evil Spartan 16:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Matt taibbi promo.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Matt taibbi promo.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 17Drew 06:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The eXile

Hello. I have protected the page The eXile once more. I strongly urge you to find other ways of resolving the editorial conflict. I chose not to block you because I think you tried harder than that IP to resolve the problem on the noticeboard but no good can come out of edit warring. If this issue comes up again, consider a request for comments or contact the incidents noticeboard because we clearly have reached a point where the two of you are too entrenched in your positions to move the article forward. Pascal.Tesson 02:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My user page

Hi,

I haven't been around much lately. I put up an explanation on my userpage. It includes a short narrative about Peter Ekman. Since you were also so involved in that episode I certainly would value any feedback you could give me on my talk page. Happy Holidays. -- Ryan Utt (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hi Dsol, I am sure you mean well, and I appreciate your taking the time to voice your opinion. I can tell you that in this case, the editor made a total of four offensive edits. One when he came into a discussion thread just to abuse another editor, and then he posted three more attacks to the same page, two after he'd been warned, and one right after he was warned that he'd be blocked if he continues. I think this short block should help him understand that calling a fellow editor a liar, and continuing to restore the offensive edit after warnings, is something that we won't tolerate. Hopefully he'd be a better editor from now on. Crum375 (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Calling another editor a "liar" is an epithet, which according to WP:NPA is a type of personal attack. And if it is not clear to an editor that his action constitutes an attack, getting warned about it 3 times, including once with a block warning, and proceeding to restore the offensive post yet again right after the block warning, is poor behavior in and of itself. Crum375 (talk) 23:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
If you don't want to argue, as you say, then why are you raising the issue again? As you yourself quoted from the NPA policy, it clearly says, or other epithets. Nowhere does it say that calling a fellow editor a "liar" is excluded. And again, even if he had a question about it, repeatedly posting the attack after three warnings by admins, and immediately after a block warning, is asking for a block. And by the way, I notice now that he has also posted material in violation of WP:BLP after he was blocked. This kind of behavior is bound to get him blocked for prolonged periods, or banned altogether from editing here. Crum375 (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Dsol --Greg Comlish (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Mark_ames.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Mark_ames.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in here. If you'd like to participate in drafting it, please feel free. Cla68 (talk) 03:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)