User talk:In23065

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Celebrity Big Brother 2008 (UK) eye.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Celebrity Big Brother 2008 (UK) eye.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother sidebar

Please comment here about the recent changes to the template. Tra (Talk) 20:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BB on More4

Hi I have removed More4 again as a broadcaster for BB UK. Just because it was shown in a documentary about Channel4's 25 year history doesn't make it a broadcaster. In order for More4 to be counted as a broadcaster they would have actually have to aired a series of Big Brother. This is the same case in the US with VH1, VH1 aired a special about BB US but just because they aired a special doesn't mean they are included in the broadcaster section. I hope you understand. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 21:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Big Brother (UK)

Please do not add speculation to articles. Continuation to do so may result in you being blocked from editing. Please also note that fair use images are not permitted on your user page. Thanks. anemone│projectors 19:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

A "fair use" or non-free image is basically one that is copyrighted. Fair use means that under US law, you can use copyrighted images without requiring permission from the copyright holder (however it doesn't mean you can use the images anywhere you like). As Wikipedia is hosted in the United States, the laws of fair use apply to Wikipedia. Wikipedia's policy on non-free content is fairly complicated, and there are restrictions on the location of these images. The policy states that "Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in article namespace" i.e. not in your userspace. Basically, the logo you had on your userpage is only allowed to be used in the article for the television series it relates to. I hope this helps. For more information, read Wikipedia:Non-free content. anemone│projectors 20:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of The X Factor (Denmark)

A tag has been placed on The X Factor (Denmark) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Alexfusco5 00:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of The X Factor (Kazakhstan)

I have nominated The X Factor (Kazakhstan), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The X Factor (Kazakhstan). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. EJF (talk) 12:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. anemone│projectors 15:49, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. The template was better before. anemone│projectors 15:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
But i think it is better now and i gives much more information in much littler space In23065 (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Still, this isn't Big Brother, there's no need to create a new template and copy theirs. It's fine as it was. anemone│projectors 15:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Whats wrong with creating a new template and copy theirs if it makes the arctile better then it goodIn23065 (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't make it any different. I'll add the voice over artists to the current template, but there's no need to make another one. Having all the sections collapsible makes it look very strange. anemone│projectors 16:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
It makes the information much more easier to read and is compact. In23065 (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
OK i'll do a deal with you. u can have your infobox and i can have my sidebar. In23065 (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I'll do a better deal. The infobox stays, and I'll edit the current template so it's more compact and has former presenters and judges in separate boxes, so it's a cross between both. anemone│projectors 16:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Why do you want to keep it so much. It is not need and if you want a a fight i will take this to the admins and i think they will agree that smaller templates are better than big ever templates In23065 (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, I think the current information should be displayed, and the information on former presenters and judges, maybe that can be hidden. It's just better to have the current information on display. It's not even that big! It's essentialy an infobox and infoboxes don't have any hidden information on them, some of those are huge. anemone│projectors 16:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I will agree to that as long as you edited upon Template:The X Factor UK sidebar In23065 (talk)
Why? There's no difference, but it's better to edit the existing one than the newly created one. anemone│projectors 16:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother Sidebars

Hi In23065, I just wanted to let you know that I am reverting your edit to the Template: Big Brother UK sidebar. The current format for all Big Brother sidebars call for this order: Presenters (must be shown), Shows (must be collapsed), Current Series/Season (if one, cannot be collapsed), Past Series/Seasons (must be collapsed). If you have a new order that would befit the sidebars then please start a discussion at WP:BIGBRO as these changes need to be discussed first with the project and must be applied to all. Thanks and if you have any questions please feel free to drop a line at my talk page. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 21:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother 2008 (UK)

Big Brother 2008 (UK) has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this information might be inappropriate for Wikipedia because it is about something which has not happened yet. Please review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so, citing sources.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. --Hiltonhampton (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copy and paste moves

Please don't create new pages from old by copying and pasting unless you write into the edit summary where the text came from. Failing to do this is a copyright violation, as you take the credit for all the text even though you didn't write it. --kingboyk (talk) 22:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

i didnt i copied it from a different page on wikipedia In23065 (talk) 15:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:iPod

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. (DANG that was scary to see!) - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 19:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Secret Story (2007)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Secret Story (2007), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Secret Story (TV series). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently copied the contents of a page and pasted it into another with a different name. This is what we call a "cut and paste move", and it is very undesirable because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. The mechanism we use for renaming articles is to move it to a new name which both preserves the page's history and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself by this process, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request the move by another. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. -- lucasbfr talk 18:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother Page

Um In23065 why did you remove the Controversy section from the article and placed bits pertaining to each version on their pages without a proper discussion? Also I thought you were going to make a version of the "series" table in your sandbox. I think the links should go back into the table as each country has an official website for the show and most countries have sites for their spin-off editions. Also I think that E4 under under the Network portion under the US section shouldn't be there. An individual mention in Big Brother 4 (U.S.) and Big Brother 9 (U.S.) is sufficient enough. CBS & Global should be the networks listed since they have aired each season to date plus the US & Canada viewers are the only ones able to participate in votes, etc. This is just helpful information and my thoughts on how to improve the article. I think the modifications you made to the table makes it look cleaner. And I have had a discussion on WP:BIGBRO that I would like your opinion on. I suggested it back in January but no one has commented yet. I mentioned in the discussion about how the lead should be re-written and how the "Variations in Format" section was really a bunch of twists. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 09:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Template:Big Brother UK. Thank you. Your edits on Template:Big Brother UK removed content pertaining to the subject. Please remember that deleting content from articles or templates may seem to look like vandalism. If you think something should be changed or deleted please have a discussion about it first. Thanks. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 06:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BBAuEye2008.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BBAuEye2008.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Balls of Steel.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Balls of Steel.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother (TV series)

Hi, please remember that the seventh season of Big Brother (U.S.) is also a special edition. Special editions such as All-Stars, Celebrity, etc. are separated in their own sections in the "Big Brother series" table. In the case with Big Brother (U.S.) the main editions are 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10. Season 7 is in the All-Stars category. Please do not revert this again without a discussion as it will be counted as vandalism. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry i just thought that someone had vandalised it and gotten rid of it not that it was in a different sectionIn23065 (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Big Brother Newsletter - April 2008

The above newsletter was delivered by an automatic bot because you are registered on the WikiProject Big Brother spamlist. Please feel free to remove yourself if you do not wish to receive these messages anymore.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 14:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Hi, I have reverted your edit to Big Brother (TV series). Please don't add a network to a different country's version of Big Brother like you did with Big Brother UK. Unless there is a proper source for these extra networks like E4 airing BB9 US then please don't add them back as it speculation. Remember Verifiability, Thanks. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BAN vs BLOCK Big Brother 2008 (UK)

I'm not sure if you have ever read Verifiability, it basically states what editors can and can't use as source in an article. Generally national newspapers fulfil those guidelines. Weasel words like rumoured are an anathema to Wikipedia so they have good reason to be reverted.

If editors take their time to add sources to an article I'm not sure if you should really be threatening them with a ban. I'm not even sure what you mean by a ban? Editing requirements which don't meet the policy or guidelines of Wikipedia could be seen as an ownership problem with an article or conversely as an attempt to disrupt Wikipedia. I am sure that you acted in good faith to preserve the credibility of the article but please act within the spirit of Wikipedia. BpEps - t@lk 00:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

HE CANT BAN PEOPLE! AND EVEN IF HE COULD ITS NOT BIGGY! HE'S JUST A LITTLE BABY WHO THOWS HIS TOYS OUT THE PRAM WHEN HE DOESN'T GET HIS PATHETIC WAY! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.149.17 (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Balls of Steel (TV series)

Please stop edit warring. You reverted my formatting change twice, and each time gave no explanation. OK, so you made a comment between the two instances, but otherwise are acting as though Wikipedia revolves around your opinions.

Please make an effort to discuss disputed changes and allow a consensus to be reached. See also WP:EW and WP:ROWN. -- Smjg (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Big Brother Newsletter - May 2008

The above newsletter was delivered by an automatic bot because you are registered on the WikiProject Big Brother spamlist. Please feel free to remove yourself if you do not wish to receive these messages anymore.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Big Brother 9

Why did you delete my 2 post. A Candela (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

They the discussion page is there to discuse what is in the article and how it can be changed and is not there to report storys.

[edit] Terri/Big Brother Australia 2008

Hi, Since Terri was evicted and if she passes her mission and is allowed to become a housemate again then her row would be like this:

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12
Public Nomination No Public Vote
Terri Nobbi HouseGuest Re-evicted
Day xx

Similar to Sharon's row on Big Brother 9 (U.S.) where her & Jacob was evicted on Day 3 but she returned on Day 7 as Neil's replacement. Due to her coming back before the second eviction she doesn't have an "Evicted Day xx" just a "Re-evicted Day xx". However if she is just a HouseGuest and nothing more then it would look like this:

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12
Public Nomination No Public Vote
Terri Nobbi HouseGuest Evicted
Day 1

♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

But if she passes her task of looking after corey then she will be come a housemate again and then we wont know when she was evicted in the first place. In23065 (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
It should be kept like this as this show the most information and the ones above lead you to believe that she was never evicted.
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12
Public Nomination No Public Vote
Terri Nobbi Evicted
(Day 1)		 HouseGuest Re-evicted
Day xx

In23065 (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have to disagree with you it is in the evicted row for Week One that she was evicted, also a note should be put in Week 2 to clarify that she was in fact evicted and she is classed as a HouseGuest. Again it is the same case with Sharon from Big Brother 9 (U.S.), please look at that table. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 17:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Name on thing that is bad about my way of presenting the information. Because I can think of loads of bad points about yours. In23065 (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Your version makes the table look crowed and junked up. It really isn't good with tables like the ones used in past Australian series. Also again to keep up with the goal to standardize the articles (AU, UK, USA, etc) Sharon in Big Brother 9 (U.S.) would have to be altered to include an "Evicted Day 3" but again would really make the table looked junked up. For now it looks fine but as a season progresses it will look really looked junked up. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Big Brother Eye

Hi In23065, I just wanted say with images if you upload a new version (like the BB9 UK Eye) it is best to just replace the one already up. I re-uploaded the higher quality file to replace Image:Bb9uklogo.gif since it had a Fair Use for both articles. Also the file name needs to be more specific than just Big Brother Eye as that name could refer to any of the show's eyes. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Where do you get off saying "You are not a admin yet you think you own the place get over your self and do something good for the article and not just to make your self look good" I was contributing to the article. I have been contributing to various articles now for a while not just Big Brother. No I don't own the place nor do I think I own anything on Wikipedia. Get your facts straight, you make major changes without discussion, you think your way is always right, so who here has ownership issues. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
When I make changes you then revert them and say discuss, how about you discuss before changing them In23065 (talk) 23:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The logo wasn't a big issue, I just said that the name Image:Big_Brother_Eye.gif was vague and could mean any of the UK eyes and next year some editor could upload the potential BB10 eye to the same file name and overwrite the BB9 eye. However you moved the page from Big Brother 2008 to Big Brother 9 without a discussion. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry if I had offended you in any way but if you have an issue with me please comment on my page instead of the edit summary of a page. Thanks. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Duplicate Image:Big Brother Eye.gif

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Big Brother Eye.gif, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Big Brother Eye.gif is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Big Brother Eye.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. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 04:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Big Brother 2008 (UK) Daily Highlights

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Big Brother 2008 (UK) Daily Highlights, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)