User talk:Hamedog

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note:If you post a message here, I will reply here. If I post a message on your talk page, don't reply here. I have your page in my watchlist. This keeps the conversation from breaking.

Archives

*User talk:Hamedog/Archive 1: 23 November 2005 – 14 September 2006 User talk:Hamedog/Archive 2: 18 September 2006 - Current

Jellybeans

You have been awarded these Jelly Beans from -The Doctor- Please, enjoy them.

Here are some Jelly beans for you. I love jelly beans as they have sugar in them and most people love sugar. But on the other hand just receiving somthing from somone else just makes you happy and also just giving this to you makes me happy. I hope to spread the jelly beans all over Wikipedia, so here, you can have this lot. Please enjoy them. (I like the lime ones.)

Editors need a bit of a sugar high too.

An apple a day keeps -The Doctor- away. Or does it! ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

David Beckham

Chocolate

Hi, do you like whittakers chocolae?

2006 Tri Nations Series images

Hey, I was wondering if you could create two more of those starting line-up images for this article? I have added the starting line-ups, and replacements and everything to the article, and all that is needed are those images. Would be great if you could do this, thanks! - Shudda ^talk 00:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, if I get time.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 06:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Wallabies

• Do you want to help me in order to better this article Wallabies (version française) ? It should be a very nice result... Ddfree 18:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

If I get time.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 22:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

2007 final

Hey, have started something here. - Shudda ^talk 03:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Hey, thanks for the RfA nomination. I must decline however. I don't really have any need for the admin powers, and am quite happy contributing the way I am at the moment. I'm really flattered that you nominated me - so please don't be offended that I have declined. Thanks. - Shudda ^talk 01:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

No worries.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Hamdog Willkca has been warned that repeating the comments will result in a block please leave the issue alone, in short the comments were offensive statements about staff, student and parents of student at the school including names. Gnangarra 02:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I assume you deleted the edits? Yes, sorry about this I was curious as to what had happened, not trying to re-start the fire or anything. Was I mentioned?--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 02:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

What was said was deleted, there is no need for further comments. If you have concerns raise it WP:AN/I. Gnangarra 03:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you make it sound like I have done something wrong.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:LIBEL is the official position of Wikipedia, please read it Gnangarra 03:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Also Slander_and_libel#Australian_law Gnangarra 03:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Come on- just stay off the issue or a more adventurous admin will block you on the spot, Stay out of the issue and dont leave anything on any page to do with the issue. Simple as that. SatuSuro 03:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I am aware of slander and libel but I don't think Australian Law applies in this situation as the offence technically occurs in Florida, coming under United States Law (as Wikipedia's servers are hosted there). On what grounds would I be blocked? As far as I am aware I have just made an inquirey into the events that occured on the talk page of an article I have made major contributions too (a mouthful!).--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Having read Slander_and_libel#Australian_law, I take back some of the comments made earlier. But I have not made claims that could be regarded as libel (at least not recently :P)--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 04:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

you asked about the willkca comments, They are why I have referred to those links, I have ask you to cease I'm now officially warning you that continuation of this is disruptive and are asking people to violate Australian law as that article link indicates. I am also requesting that you move this discussion to your current archive once you have read this message. Gnangarra 04:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I would suspect that anyone with knowledge of wikipedia policies - reviewing the situation can clearly state that any attempt to circulate or any way show knowledge of, or circulate the willkca comments back into circulation makes you party to the issue. Archive now, so you will not regret !SatuSuro 04:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I have this page set up so it is achived every 16 days. I don't believe I have done anything wrong, I just wanted to know what had occured on the Scotch College talk page, an article I have heavily contributed to. In no way am I trying to help anyone spread material that could be regarded by the courts as libel.

Just a small tip - there's an old saying "choose your battles", this is *really* not worth going down over in my opinion. The above people aren't taking personal issue with you, it's the job of an admin to watch out for this kind of stuff to ensure Wikimedia Foundation doesn't get sued. Orderinchaos 05:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to see WF getting sued either. I was simply trying to find out what occurred on the talk page of Scotch College, Perth, an article I worked on to get up to GA status. I am sure 95% of editors would also like to know what occurred on the talk page of an article they have made major contributions. I no way am I condoning or attempting to aid the spread of this material - the edits are deleted after all, but I was very interested in why such a fuss was thrown up by admin following these edits. I have not done a thing wrong so I will not archive now - this discussion is still active in my mind.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 01:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

You are your own undoing mate - you have what some police, ambulance and fire workers call it the I have to see the car crash/fire syndrome - long standing editors and admins have perused the talk page item and deemed it inappropriate - If you cannot hack that try worrying about something else. There is something wrong in wanting to resurrect or spark interest in an item that is no longer there - leave well alone. It has absolutely not one iota or anything to do with making wikipedia a better encyclopedia.SatuSuro 05:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't believe that I was trying to "spark interest" - as I have restated numerous times, I was curious as to why edits were deleted from the talk page of an article I have made major contributions to. It concerns me - I don't want to see WF get sued but I had genuine interest in what occured - both the Scotch article and user talk page were in my watchlist before the events. How long is long enough to be regarded as a long standing editor - I've been here for a year and a half and don't deem it inappropriate. Maybe this has dragged on for too long, maybe not, but much of it has revolved around me trying to defend myself and my actions. No, I was not spreading libel related material and I wasn't trying to restart a spread of libel; I wanted to have knowledge of what had occured. As a "kinda harsh" end note, some people call these kinds of actions the sign of a cabal. But thats just a conspiracy theory - or is it?--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Archived

That discussion is now in your archive2, and should remain there. Willkca has already apologised for the comments so its finished with. Gnangarra 06:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I have reinstated it has I believe the discussion is still active. A bot will archive when the discussion becomes in active.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Gnangarra 00:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, in reply to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Hamedog_--_Block, I can't find were I believe the comments may of been about myself unless it was in an email. At no point do I believe I have pushed the "Since then Hamedog has continued to push the I want to know its my right and every body elses to know the comment line". And besides, if I am being blocked under WP:LIBEL, then shouldn't this blocked be reverted as I am currently not blocked for breaking WP:LIBEL but for trolling? Also, my previous block wasn't for vandalism but was for "mis-using" WP:AIV under the belief my account was compromised.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 05:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

note this dif "was I mentioned?" and this reinstating the discussion on your talk page after inital request to remove it where declined stating the matter wasnt closed. Gnangarra 06:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Leaving Wikipedia

It appears I am not allowed to leave Wikipedia via an IP address (see revert on my user page by User:Pilotguy and the block of the IP address 202.135.64.225).--Hamedog_Talk|^@

Leaving

Hey, yes I have seen whats been going on here. I think it's a shame you are going to leave over it, but I do sympathize with you. Your contributions to wikipedia have been appreciated by many, and maybe now you'll see why I don't really want to be an administrator! ;-) Anyway, I'm trying to create biographical stubs of all the French players here at the moment so bests be off - there is bugger all info out there on them - even in French! Anyway, good luck with whatever you get up to in the future. - Shudda ^talk 05:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks mate. - Shudda ^talk 05:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Dave Gallagher Trophy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dave Gallagher Trophy.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. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:SC_Pipe_Band_pose.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SC_Pipe_Band_pose.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media 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 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 the fair use 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 fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use 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, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 22:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Red Bull Task Force

The Red Bull task force is fairly quiet, and has a grand total of 21 articles in its scope, and 4 members. Since there are many articles in the air sports area that have no project to look after them, and since Red Bulls articles would fall under the air sports scope, would you object to the scope of the task force being expanded to include air sports, and the task force being renamed and retasked as the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Air sports task force? - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Chris Cairns final.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Chris Cairns final.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Bledisloe_cup.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bledisloe_cup.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) 22:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2003_RWC_5_Dollar_Uncirculated_Coin.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:2003_RWC_5_Dollar_Uncirculated_Coin.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 22:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)