User talk:John Spikowski/Archive July 2006 - May 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Removing warnings

Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks.

Look John, you can delete this info all you want, but it's there in your history all the time and people here are smart enough to know how the MediaWiki application works. Anyone and everyone can see what you're doing. They'll see that I've tried to reasonably work with you tonight on several subjects, but that you continued to maliciously edit work no one agrees you should be editing and deleting warning after warning being given. I seriously don't think you have done one thing tonight that didn't go completely against one Wikipedia policy or another. Again, it's very easily seen going over the history. And for what? Just to get a site that is yours up on the external links sections? Personally, I don't see a reason why the site can't be included. Seems like a decent resource. You just need to keep in mind there are many resources out there most of them contain more content than yours with a user-base much greater than the 2 (literally 2!!!) users on yours.

That being said and all of this being recorded into the history, I see there are two different directions you could take at this point:

1 - You constructively and interactively help shape these articles by participating in the discussions and, in turn, edit with and not against the other editors of the PanoTools subjects. No more rogue edits. No more malicious edits. No more defamation of users. No more spamming your site. (all of which are a form of vandalism WP:VAND)
2 - You can delete all of this on your users talk page, remove the very valid warnings once again, and continue to vandalize the articles in the same manner you have been doing all night. All this option is going to do is add more negative edits to your history and give more reasons to the admins to ultimately block you from editing these articles all together (a task that should be pretty clear for them to do at this point).

It's pretty much in your hands now. Roguegeek 08:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

You should also read and understand the three-revert rule WP:3RR Wikipedia policy and know that you've already broken in several times here and on other articles tonight. I'm simply trying to inform you that a rule really does exist. Roguegeek 08:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time to stop

First up, vandalism is a loaded term, it's defined at WP:VAND and specifically does not include good-faith content disputes. To accuse other editors of vandalism when they are acting in good faith, regardless of how strongly you disagree with their edits, is uncivil and can lead to your being blocked from editing. Please do not do this.

Second, there is credible evidence that PanoTools should be a redirect, since the verifiable content about the company itself is small and you have not provided any evidence that it meets the guidelines for inclusion of companies. Either way, it makes no sense to link the product's common abbreviation to an article on the company in the context of an article already about the product, which is the major problem with the last couple of edits you made.

Third, edit-warring is not the way to resolve disputes. Please try dispute resolution. Guy 11:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Hi. You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to a WP:3RR breach. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. El_C 11:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] signing notes

Please learn how to sing your notes correctly. I'll even give you the link so you don't have to look around. WP:SIGNATURE Roguegeek (talk) 22:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I want your feedback

John, I want your feedback on the issues being discussed in the Talk:Panorama Tools (software) page. Keep it constructive and organized. I am very much in favor of putting the external links you want to put in the article to show everyone there's worth to them. I just need it discussed in the open and kept on track. It's when all of the reverting and edit wars start is when I get upset. Stay with me here. Be calm and constructive. No more reverting please. We don't need to go through what happened the night before. Roguegeek (talk) 01:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Roguegeek (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Continued personal attacks

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --Konstable 04:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral point of view

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! Roguegeek (talk) 21:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need source

Your recent contribution(s) to Wikipedia are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! Roguegeek (talk) 21:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Off topic

Please don't post messages on pages that are completely irrelevant to the topic of the page. It can be seen as spam and Wikipedia regards adding spam to articles or talk pages as a form of vandalism. Thank you. Roguegeek (talk) 21:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks last warning

You were warned up above, and hey presto you do this. It's not allowed. See WP:NPA. I mean, read it please, and just stick to observations on content, not on other people's supposed shortcomings. Otherwise you'll just a block. Thank you. Tyrenius 03:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He made a complaint on WP:PAIN, which I responded to, as you had made a personal attack. If you have a problem, you should post there yourself. Tyrenius 12:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Warnings

You really out to read WP:SUBST. My bot did not warn you and had no part in your dispute. That said, you're demonstrating a lot of anger. I'd suggest you tone it down if you want to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks. Alphachimp 14:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 24 hour block

You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to violations of WP:CIVIL. I recommend this essay and a lighter touch when you return. Respectfully, DurovaCharge! 04:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Panotool site.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Panotool site.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 48 hour block

You have been blocked from editing for 48 hours due to violations of WP:CIVIL. DurovaCharge! 03:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Thomas started the attacks and I responded with facts - Has he been blocked from editting for 48 hours?"

Decline reason: "I may look into their actions, but your history of attacks, provoked or not, leads me to think the encyclopedia is best served if everyone has a little time away from this apparently heated issue. Consider dispute resolution, or even the mediation cabal, once you return -- and please do. Luna Santin 07:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Tu quoque is not a line of defence when trying to get unblocked. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 06:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial links

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. -- GraemeL (talk) 12:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue spamming you will be blocked from editing. -- GraemeL (talk) 18:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

W

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. -- GraemeL (talk) 19:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added the license to the footer as you have asked. Can you PLEASE put the PanoTools group link back?

I haven't actually checked and will take your word for it. You are now unblocked. You can add the link to the .info site back to the article, but please do not re-add the links to software, WP:NOT a web directory. --GraemeL (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, if your IP was autoblocked and you still have trouble editing, drop me an email and I'll dig around to correct that problem. --GraemeL (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Ignore that last bit. I wasn't able to check for the autoblock as the servers kept timing out on me. I've now managed to get through the slowness and clear the autoblock as well. --GraemeL (talk) 21:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
John, you know there is still a severe copyright problem with the wiki on panotools.info, the real contributors of the articles are not mentioned, and the Recent Changes page is showing no entry to hide that you alone copied everything from a different source. This is a violation of the GFDL and you know it. Please fix that immediately.--Einemnet 01:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other popular software

If the programs related to the external links that were in the "Other popular software" section are indeed popular, you could create articles (even as stubs) for both of them (Enblend & Autopano-sift). The external links would be acceptable in the new articles and you could add the articles to the popular software section. --GraemeL (talk) 21:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The PanoTools wiki and mailing list dwarfs the NG group in the major search engines. When Google is finish indexing the site, there will be over 50,000 pages. All one has to do is look at the page hit counts on the PanoTools wiki then check out NG's. Since the NG group is so new, the search engines haven't had much time to index the copy of the PanoTools groups resources yet. This also means that people doing a search will now get two copies of everything. :-(

Thanks for the hints ! John Spikowski 22:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

No number of page hits will make your copy/paste version legal if you violate the GFDL. Only adding a license footer is not enough if you don't fullfill the terms. See my comment above in the Commercial links section. I can only strongly suggest to fix these problems. --Einemnet 10:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Also you copy the original. If you worry about duplicate copies you can remove the copied content from your private [1] Wiki. --Wuz 14:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Can the number of links be reduced on the NG group submission. All the extra links can be accessed via your group site. I thought there was a one link per site rule here on the Wikipedia. If there is any question as to which wiki is the original and has the most activity, just look at the page hit counts. (NG - you know my e-mail address, take your issues off line please) John Spikowski 18:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
We are talking about Wikipedia and facts. Your Wiki is a copy of the .org Wiki and and is violating the GFDL and for that reason there should not be a link. Please try to focus and stay on topic. --Wuz 18:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas, you copied the PanoTools wiki in July of 2006 and used it as your 'home page' till you were able to build your CMS front for your site. Why are you posting misinformation here in the Wikipedia? What is the topic? The PanoTools group has one link here on the Wikipedia and you seem to spend all your time trying to get it removed. Can you start adding panorama content to the page instead? John Spikowski 18:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Just answer to this, ok? Your Wiki is violating the GFDL and for that reason there should not be a link. --Wuz 19:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas,

You make blanket statements (most untrue) that the PanoTools group (caretaker for the PanoTools wiki) is violating the GNU FDL. Have you even read the license. If you have, you would understand the concept of the license. You have privatized the NG copy of the PanoTools wiki which IS a violation of the GNU FDL. PLEASE stop posting untrue statements here. Once again, you know what my e-mail address is.

FACT The PanoTools wiki is the orignnal and the NG is a copy. Please change the name of your group to stop the confusion in the community. The PanoTools group membership is recovering from the false e-mail your group sent to all the PanoTools members even though this was a major violation of Yahoo's terms of service.

Yes John, I have read the GFDL and a simple look at random page [2] on your site and a click on "history" shows your violations. So now please make a prove of your claims? Yes, sure the Wiki was copied conforming with the GFDL to panotools.org after you have asked for 50.000$ to compensate for your "work" while you just provided web space. All the real work was done by others. Your major goal as with ScriptBasic is to make money with open source projects.
Btw: Why should we change the name? The group is built around the PanoTools software by Helmut Dersch. Name just 3 contributors to the PanoTools software that are on your Userlist [3]? This is all is still getting nowhere since you are not able to proof on of your claim and you are continuing repeating yourself. --Wuz 20:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

1. The Wikipedia software offers a utility to remove old history to save disk space and help the pages load faster. I run this utility about every 6 months to as part of the admin work I do in my free time. If you wish to keep all edits ever done to a page, then have at it. This could be why your site loads so slowly. (20-30 sec. to get a page up)

2. I never asked $50K for the site so please stop posting that lie. A comment was made that if the time I donated to manage the PanoTools group were a client, this is the value of my donation. When your even in the ballpark compared to my contributions, we can start counting beans.

3. You guys decided to bail and start a NEW group. Why didn't you do this instead of taking all the resources from the PanoTools group and base your future on your own merits rather then riding on ours?

Hint: If you plan to keeping the remaining members you do have, you should be spending your time working on your group site which hasn't been updated in ages. Why do you and your buddies spend so much time trying to trash our group when I supported you for years on the PanoTools site?

PLEASE end this now and stop trying to have the PanoTools group site removed from the Wikipedia. PLEASE reduce your links for NG to one. PLEASE change your group name and expand your site using your content rather then another groups.

I could have sent this to you in a e-mail but you refuse to use this as a form of communication. John Spikowski 21:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


John, this all is completely off topic. You are violating Copyright. Thats the only point! You are stealing our content, so there should not be a link in Wikipedia. Just remove your illegal copy of the Wiki our make it conform with the GFDL and stop stealing the emails and nobody will every bother you again. --Wuz 22:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Thoms, Shutdown the illegal copy of the PanoTools wiki you took and stop abusing the wiki for your groups personal admin projects and keep it panorama based as it was intended. Use the "Panorama Tools" group URL and group name you started off with till Yuval convince you and Ian to steal the PanoTools groups resources. Leave the PanoTools group alone and stop contacting our members and harrasing them to join your group. I could care less what the NG group does as long as you leave us alone. John Spikowski 22:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
So if you don't care about panotools.org why do you steal the content? Maybe you should show evidence instead of just making unprovend accusations. This is Wikipedia where you have to proof things. I have asked you several times and still no single link that can proof any of your accusations. You should really read WP:REF, WP:NPOV and WP:NOT --Wuz 22:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas,

You need to get your priorities in line. The PanoTools and NG groups are here for the members benefit and not to sell your wares. I haven't made a dime off this and ALL my time and out of pocket $$$ has been my contribution to the PanoTools group. Since when is making a commitment and following through with promises I made to the group from day one a crime?

The PanoTools site aggregates panorama information from many sources. Why do you host the PanoTools wiki and the all the posts to the PanoTools groups old mailing list? For once, think of the members you serve rather then using your position as a moderator to advance your own personal projects for profit?

John Spikowski 22:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Just scroll some lines up. Now for the n'th time: Your wiki is violating the GFDL. Your remove all references to the original author. You steal the Panotools NG emails. Your remove all references to the original author and the original source. This is the topic, nothing else. Please stay on subject. --Wuz 22:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm tired of your "who's on first" posts here. If you want to send me a e-mail, I will try and work out your issues you have with the PanoTools group. John Spikowski 23:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I will try one more time to explain the purpose of the PanoTools mailing list archives. If your looking for a raw blow by blow account of the flood of e-mail to the list then the members should use the Yahoo groups message display and search features. If however your only interested in panorama based content and have no interest in administrative announcements with short shelf lives then use the PanoTools facilities. No one is forcing you (most popular visitor) to use any of the services offered on the PanoTools site.

Google and the other major search engines are about half way through the cleaned up PanoTools archives indexing them for all to use. When this is completed, there will be over 50,000 pages indexed on the PanoTools group site. The PanoTools wiki holds top position in the search engine for content indexed.

I tried to do the right thing and provide the bright side of what the group is all about. If you want promote the rants, arguments and other off topic content in your offering then that's your choice. (maybe you should take a poll and see how your members feel about your archiving methods for the search engines)

If the PanoTools wiki was shutdown, 95% of the links for PanoTools based wiki content in the search engine would break. If the NG wiki were shutdown, no one would notice other then the NG members that access it directly.

John Spikowski 02:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Your wiki is violating the GFDL. Your remove all references to the original author. You steal the Panotools NG emails. Your remove all references to the original author and the original source. This is the topic, nothing else. Please stay on subject. --Wuz 02:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you forgetting who's TALK page your visiting? If you want to post repetitive messages then do it somewhere else. I thought you were here to resolve issues. John Spikowski 02:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I still got no answer why you still violate Copyright. This is all that matters. --Wuz 03:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have not remove any author's wiki signatures in any of the pages. People that add content to a puplic wiki and don't care to 'sign' their contribution is their choice. If your saying that the GNU FDL says edit logs must be keep to identify contributors, I think your incorrect. Why would Mediawiki have a utility to remove old edit logs if it was a violation of copyright? You are just looking for any angle to trash the PanoTools group. John Spikowski 03:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Apache allows to share mp3s so its legal to put up what ever you like??? What kind of stupid argument is this??? Guess why Wikipedia is keeping the history? You know that you have removed all original authors and made them to "John Spikowski". You also still steal the emails and remove the original source. --Wuz 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

What? I haven't changed anyones signature in the content. When you wanted a copy of the PanoTools wiki to mirror, I went out of my way and on my on time to create backups for you guys. When I asked for a backup I was told to get lost. I had to mirror the content by hand. I even went through the trouble of putting the contributors name in the comment.

I have already gone over the mailing list archives with you many times. If you don't want to read what I post then that's your problem. John Spikowski 03:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GFDL and linking

Hi, I am a passer by in this little 'war' you have going. May I just point out that under the GFDL all details of edits to a page must be kept (ie. the history of edits) - as long as any of the material on the page is available for public download. Removing the history to save space is a violation of the GFDL as it removes this paper trail.

Secondly, as indeed pointed out by Wuz on the Panorama Tools article, your archive of mail on the site breaks the Yahoo Terms and Conditions.

These 2 problems combined make linking to your site an impossibility under our site's rules. However, if you can explain how you are keeping track of the history of the wiki and also how you are not breaking the terms and conditions from Yahoo then this may be reconsidered.

Also note that if you edit against the general consensus of the community, you will likely end up blocked for disruption. If you edit war, you may well end up breaking the 3 revert rule which will also lead to a block.

Finally, as I pointed out at the WP:AN/I post regarding this issue, you should not be posting any links to sites ran by yourself. It is a conflict of interest and as it is a site covered in adverts, it is WP:SPAM. If you re-add the site again, it will be reverted as such and you will end up being blocked.-Localzuk(talk) 17:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final warning

I would have blocked you were it not for this edit in which you conceded the external link issue.[4] I strongly recommend you request a mentor through Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. You may be knowledgeable about the subject at hand, but your participation has been highly disruptive. Brief blocks have been tried already - you're approaching the point where long blocks or a topic ban become possibilities. DurovaCharge! 23:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright infringement

What is the alleged copyright infringement, where may be the allegedly infringing text be found, and from where it is it copied? —Centrx→talk • 04:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The two authors posting here (Carl & Thomas) were part of a small group of PanoTools members that used our member list, use our group name and advertise they are the new PanoTools group. They have taken the PanoTools archives and wiki. Just look at the page hit counts between wiki versions and you will see that the PanoTools group is the caretaker of the original PanoTools wiki project. They left an establisted group to start another of their own free will. The were never ban or asked to leave.

The content on the PanoTools site is property of the PanoTools group members. The NG group has taken these resources without permission.

John Spikowski

It is difficult to tell which site you are referring to in which statement, but regardless both sites have notices stating that the content is licensed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, which permits copying in either direction, and such a licensing cannot be rescinded. In addition, removing the external link to the panotools.org website would only be a courtesy. Wikipedia contributors have no obligation to remove the link to this website even were it a copyright infringement, and I see no evidence of copyright infringement. Do not edit war. —Centrx→talk • 05:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Based on your call, there is no reason both group sites shouldn't be able to post a single link in external resources section. John Spikowski

[edit] Wikipedia is not a forum

I'm simply done hearing whatever beef you have with some community. Wikipedia is not a forum. Under this policy, editors are allowed to remove discussions like the ones you continue to try and have. I'm going to begin removing discussions that you turn into this because (1) it's disruptive and (2) I couldn't respond even if I wanted to because I don't know the history behind it. Please read up on this policy and keep it in mind when commenting on discussion pages. There are far more than enough instances of this from you and can be considered uncivil. Roguegeek (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original list

Hello John. I've done a little investigating into the original list claim and decided to bring it here instead of share it on the article page where most people are looking. In visiting panotools.info (your site), I found the following statement in which you authored back on June 30, 2006:

proj-imim, Helmut Dersch's original mailing list no longer exists

The archive of that list (which I was able to find on several sites) have threads starting back in Feb 2000, which obviously pre-dates April 2003. With this information and the fact that you've clearly stated the original list does not exist, I think it's enough information to remove the original claim. In trying to keep the info as accurate as possible, I'm going to remove that one word from the link. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense to me, but don't you think it should be in the context of the article and not the site? After all, the article is about the software and not the communities involved, not to mention that the article also states Panorama Tools and PanoTools is the same thing. Roguegeek (talk) 23:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

FYI, please read http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-January/061137.html. There no value for you anymore to promote your site on wikipedia. --Wuz 00:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Panotools.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Panotools.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PanoTools discussions

As much as I want to discuss and edit with you collectively and constructively, you make it very hard to do because you turn every conversation back to an argument that I have no knowledge of. I am more than willing to get as many resources as I can into the article, but you are not making it easy to do. Please don't discuss with me (at least in the article discussion page) about whatever beef you have with whatever it is because I don't know it and don't refer to me as an NG editor because I've never made a single contribution to that wiki. The moment you do those things is the moment I turn off from wanting to help which really sucks because it should be about making the article a good article. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 03:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You're now making posts directly out of frustration and are starting to personally attack people. Please try and calm down for a sec because this stuff is definitely not helping your cause. Roguegeek (talk) 03:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

John, can you please remove the line "and the services they provide" from your last post on the discussion page. You know as well as I do that's just not true. It seems you're only placing it to make people assume it's trying to sell a service, which is obviously not true. It's these mallicious edits you create that make it hard for me to help with your cause, which I am trying to do. Removing that one false statement would be a very nice show of good faith on your part and definitely help other editors listen to you. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 03:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know those people, although I think Thomas is Wuz here. Roguegeek (talk) 03:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Also keep in mind I didn't delete your link. I, in fact, have always recommended it should stay. Roguegeek (talk) 03:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

In reply to Roguegeek's Talkpage

John,
1) You forgot that I also contributed code to PanoTools which you never did, so I am interested in a good article about the software. I am also not making money out of PanoTools as you try to do. So my concerns are about quality not money.
2) PanoTools is discussed on the list very often. See for example these messages just of today: [5], [6] or see for example all messages about pano12 [7]
3) There are dozens of articles on the wiki. Just follow for example the links at [8]
4) I didn't delete your link. I just think a forum started August 2006 can't be the "original mailing list", and you as the owner of the site should not be allowed to make those claims and changes, thats all.
5) It would be nice if you find sources for your claims. Preferably from messages that you have not written yourself. --Wuz 11:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to PTgui. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you.

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Pano2QTVR. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you.

--Wuz 12:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Pano2QTVR, you will be blocked from editing.

--Wuz 16:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

John, you have violated WP:3RR on Panorama Tools if you continue I will report you to administrators to be blocked.-Localzuk(talk) 18:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment

I have put the article up for deletion due to it not being notable and a promotional page. -Localzuk(talk) 18:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

That's what I'm here for! :D -Localzuk(talk) 19:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on 3rr

Hi John, it is best not to comment too many times on an AFD - espeically when only 1 other person has !voted so far. You'd probably be best simply providing your vote and giving your explanation with that.-Localzuk(talk) 10:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing that link

Hi John, you went against my advice and removed the link anyway - why? You have a huge conflict of interest over at that page and the constant link removal is disruptive and is a WP:POINT violation. This is your last warning, if you do not stop with the 'but their group says X' based editing of links, I will open an RFC on your behaviour.-Localzuk(talk) 10:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing of other contributors signature

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

John, you altered my signature on Articles for deletion/Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities, which I regard as vandalism, see Wikipedia:Signatures. I will revert both your edits of my signature and that of Wuz, if you continue I will ask an Administrator to intervene since this seems not the first incident of that kind in the last time. Einemnet 09:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

This page in a nutshell: Comment on content, not on the contributor.

John Spikowski 10:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tag Line

I didn't touch your signature. I added the tag line you attach to all your posts on the list. It's important to the others to know your personal relationship with the topic. John Spikowski 10:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.

You also altered other contributors' signatures (i.e. not your own) in another debate. Please act according to How to discuss an AfD/Wikietiquette and especially

  • Start your comments or recommendations on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *), and sign them by adding Einemnet 11:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC) to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs, making sure it is indented (using multiple bullets).

I will be happy to disclose whether I am that article's primary author or if I have otherwise a vested interest in the article as mentioned in the same etiquette. Vandalism in a nutshell: Intentionally making non-constructive edits to Wikipedia will result in a block or permanent ban. Einemnet 11:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Carl, I think you been working too hard on the PanoToolsNG rules and regulation guide. Isn't "Vandalism" a bit over dramatic? You seem to spend a lot of time writing endless comments behind the articles but have nothing to contribute to the topics. Isn't there rule about constant whining? John Spikowski 11:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

John, you already received two warnings, if you want to comment in a debate, do so. But make sure everyone sees that it is an addition from you, i.e. sign your contributions. If you want to try out something use the sandbox. The line is not that fine that you are not able to see where vandalism starts. Einemnet 11:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. --Wuz 12:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Comment Removal

Thanks for your message on my talk page, sorry that you still do not understand the problem. As I explained earlier today on this page your addition was no comment as it was not signed. The way you did it counts as vandalism. Next time please be careful that your comments keep enough distance (new line is ok) from my signature and to sign your comments. You already received enough official warnings. Einemnet 21:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop with the threats and claims of vandalism. Once again, I added to the comment text and didn't touch your signature. Please try spending a little more time on the content rather then on talk / discussion pages. John Spikowski 21:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Personal attack

John, according to the AfD etiquette I will remove your edit on PTgui's talk page where you list other wikipedians in bad faith. It definitely looks like a pillory. As the person who initiated the AfD process for the PTgui article you should know and follow the AfD etiquette. Even if this edit from you counted as something else than your personal list of people that just happen to have a different opinion (to say that in mild words) it doesn't belong to the talk page. The debate is on it's own page, please comment there. I will report your personal attack. Einemnet 22:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PTgui

Tough decision, but I agree with your view. There seems to be a violation of conflict of interest on the AfD; I will relist. You and Einemnet seem to be accusing each other of vandalism, so please try to calm down the discussion between you two. Sr13 22:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PTgui^2

Please read your version http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PTgui&oldid=131864883. The first and second paragraph include the same information and you deleted valuable parts. Be more careful when you edit articles. --Wuz 21:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities

Hi John. At Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) you have accidentally reverted a bunch of my edits several times when adding your edits. Please always retrieve the latest version of an article before editing a section of it. --Timeshifter 07:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please Stop spamming Wikipedia

Please stop generating a link farm out of the redirects Panotools and PanoTools. Thank you. --Wuz 11:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't archive valid talk pages

Please don't archive valid talk pages just because you don't like the content as you did with Talk:Panotools. Please look at WP:ARCHIVE

is customary on Wikipedia to periodically archive old discussions on a talk page when it becomes too large

it doesn't say archive them when they become unhandy. --Wuz 11:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link farm

John, please understand this - you have a conflict of interest in these pages. Removing a redirect to an article and replacing it with a list of external links is not what wikipedia is about. Please go and see the policy - which is one of our 5 pillars of the site. If you keep up your disruptive behaviour I shall be opening an RFC regarding your behaviour - you are behaving in a very disruptive manner whilst presenting very little to the site.-Localzuk(talk) 07:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you do have a conflict of interest. And I am editing as me - I have never used any of these tools, and am not in the slightest bit interested in them. I am simply interested in getting you to stop being disruptive.-Localzuk(talk) 08:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, besides the nearly 6000 edits across the site, none... I have no interest in the content of this subject. I am simply acting in a neutral manner to stop the stupid war that has been going on across the pages - as the group of editors who edit the pages regularly don't seem to want to do this. -Localzuk(talk) 08:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Because you are using it wrongly. A hatnote is where you have a page, say People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals which has a redirect pointing to it from PETA. At the top of the page there is a line which says 'PETA redirects here. For other uses, see Peta.' with Peta pointing to a disambiguation page. You don't create individual pages as hatnotes - what you are creating is a disambiguation page. The page is not suitable as disambiguation page as it would only contain one internal article, external links are not appropriate. So, please take some time to read and understand the policy I posted above. Also take a more indepth look at the hatnotes page - one of the things it points out is that we shouldn't include external links in hatnotes. Finally, can you tone down your accusatory tone? You should assume good faith-Localzuk(talk) 08:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PanoTools and Panotools

Hi, John. I've only been tangentially involved in the panorama/photostitching pages via WP:AFD and a casual interest in the subject but since I have most of the pages watchlisted I noticed a mini edit war broke out over Panotools and PanoTools. I really would advise you to realise that the two pages are very unlikely to be permitted to stand in the form that you want them and you risk a block for link spamming should things continue and an admin get involved. I hope you will take this as friendly advice and not in any way a criticism. CIreland 13:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities

Hey John. About this page:

Since you were editing on that page, I thought I should tell you of the discussion concerning it at Wikipedia talk:External links.

The deletion of the external links section by Localzuk was unjustified in my opinion. Here is the diff of that deletion. I think Localzuk incorrectly interpreted this wikipedia guideline: WP:External links. Feel free to discuss it at Wikipedia talk:External links. --Timeshifter 09:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Timeshifter, I have better things to do then fight with format fanatics that contribute nothing to the articles. John Spikowski 09:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I think your efforts would be fruitful at WP:External links. Other editors there are beginning to see the damage done by the misinterpretation of that guideline. Please do not be intimidated. I follow correctly-interpreted wikipedia guidelines, not wikipedia editors. Over time I have seen common sense prevail. --Timeshifter 10:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • It's not just the non-related format folks I have to deal with but a group of angry old members that forgot why the PanoTools group was created in the first place. (to help people interested in panorama photography) If the PanoToolsNG members (Carl, Thomas, Yuval, ...) that edit here want to revive the Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities page (or start one of their own), it's fine by me. It's too much work to make any progress with this topic on the Wikipedia. John Spikowski 10:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand the politics, but I understand multiple editors causing problems. It took months for me to help resolve another set of issues I was working on. I had to help out on several wiki-projects and help get them working better. See my user page for more info. It took multiple editors working on the issues to resolve them. It also took some good editors from opposing POVs working together. I suggest coming back to this issue in a few weeks or months, and see if things have changed. --Timeshifter 10:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm going to let Carl take the lead with representing the panorama community. If he would like my help, I will do my part. I really think this page should be used as the "Poster Child" of external links and find some common ground before any further work is done on it. If you could post a note on Carl's page and see if there is a way that we all can work together then I'm in, otherwise moving forward is too difficult. John Spikowski 11:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
The links are citation/reference links and not just external links. I think there needs to be some kind of Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists and charts. Kind of like Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias and many other wikipedia project pages. Someone needs to start it. I am sure many editors will join it if it gets started. Because there is a group of editors going around and blanking large parts of list and chart articles. They are violating wikipedia policies by deleting sourced info and the citations for it. It is a very serious violation of wikipedia policies when looked at correctly as blanking sourced info. --Timeshifter 11:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I added some categories to Category:Panorama software.

I also found a relevant wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists. My user page has a section of wikipedia guideline/policy links and quotes that are relevant for list and chart articles. --Timeshifter 10:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

John, please take a read of WP:OWN. Don't revert on grounds of 'user didn't discuss' as that is simply not a relevant remark. The issue at hand is that the information is already present in the article in the form of links on each item. The ref's list simply duplicates this information for no reason.-Localzuk(talk) 15:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Localzuk, Why are we using footnote like external links if there isn't a need for a 'Reference' section. I started this page using embedded external links which looked good and followed the theme of the internal links. As it is now, we have numbered links that have no meaning. John Spikowski 16:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving

Please read WP:ARCHIVE.

Archiving of one's own user talk page is not required. A user may simply delete any comments they have read, whether they have acted on them or not. The only exception to this are warnings of vandalism and other abuse on anon IP talk pages. These must be retained so that admins can readily apply or remove edit blocks.

--Wuz 10:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)