User talk:Mad Hatter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] User name "change"

Please go to WP:USURP to request a user name change. Simply moving your user and talk pages to a new user space is not the correct way to do this. The Mad Hatter account would need to be usurped as it was created, although never used, in July of 2006. --Onorem♠Dil 13:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

  1. REDIRECT User talk:Mad Hatter

[edit] March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Iron Maiden. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NeilN talk ♦ contribs 14:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining your changes. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Iron Maiden

Do it or do not revert me. However, I don't think my edits need to be discussed anywhere. I am bold and that's what I am. Either acknowledge my edits, either do not. But my stance is clear and this article needs a lot, a lot, a lot of work.

Mad Hatter (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The article looks much, much better for what I did. Look at it and tell me I am wrong. If people are unhappy - then let's discuss. But reversion is bad, bad habit and I never do it. So, man, I am pledging for loyalty and acknowledgement in the name of the future developping. I don't think I need permission or anything else in order to explain and justify an edit. I am an established and seasoned editor, not some fellow with yellow around my mouth. I know what I am doing and I consider it right. That's why I don't think I need any kind of permission. If you are not happy - then I am open to discussion. But if you come and decide to revert, just for the sake of it with such beaurocratic reasons as "We have to discuss" - I don't think so.

Regards:

14:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Right... just because you consider it to be correct doesn't make it so. You're making major changes that really need to be discussed first on the IM talk page. Please also be aware of WP:3RR. If you continue to rv myself and other editors you will be blocked for breaking the 3 revert rule. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. ScarianCall me Pat 15:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Additional note - Here you can propose your major changes. ScarianCall me Pat 15:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Raymond E. Feist

Are you interested in the Raymond E. Feist series? Currently, there has been a new Wiki-project set up especially for anything to do with Raymond E. Feists' works and that includes characters, items, places, reces, etc, etc. If you are interested why not sign up at the members section at WP:RAY

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. ScarianCall me Pat 09:58, 5 March 2008 (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: "Scarian is taking personal jab against me. He is abusing his power in order to silence my opinion and is persistently reverting me on the Iron Maiden page, because of relative inexperience and relative incompetence. It is remarkable that person of his standing - an administrator - has fallen to such petty ways of resolving issues. He didn't discussed anything about Iron Maiden, just kept reverting and then suddenly when I expressed disappointment in his way of resolving issues, he decided to block me up, saying it is a personal attack. While I wasn't happy, I had no intention to attack Scarian or to cause my blocking. My version of Iron Maiden can be found on the history page, I regard it as a better and I was continuosly hindered by Scarian adn other editors. I am appealing to administrators because of Scarian's inability to see the truth and his remarkable disrespect toward my standing as an established and capable editor"

Decline reason: "Block seems appropriate. Insistence on talk page discussion rather than edit warring is the norm for Wikipedia, and personal attacks are highly discouraged (calling someone inexperienced and incompetent in an unblock request is hardly likely to win a reprieve) - however one week is somewhat excessive given generally clean block log, am reducing to 48 hours. Orderinchaos 11:36, 5 March 2008 (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.

Note to unblock request admin - See here for evidence of personal attacks. Myself and others were referred to as "blockheads" and I was called a "silly revertor [sic]". As for the discussion of the Iron Maiden dispute, I asked the said user to discuss it here. I also made a section on the IM article talk page for the said user to discuss it here. ScarianCall me Pat 10:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Granted, I called you blockhead, and I still think you are blockhead, because of your lack of common sense, lack of tactfulness and lack of respect and understanding toward my edits and toward my stance as Wikipedia editor. You acted like a total jerk, your behaved as if I am a rookie and I don't know what I am doing, you behaved like a insulted lady and not as a man and resorted to blocking me, because you had nothing to say about the issue. You still can't say much about it and I am still flattered that people like you are administrators.
Regards: Mad Hatter (talk) 10:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Iron Maiden

[1] - Please take heed of this and discuss on the article's talk page so we can gain consensus. Thanks for your understanding, friend. ScarianCall me Pat 11:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I was incorrect in reverting you on Blur (band). Thanks for undoing my edit. Just one thing; the paragraph starting "At the end of their 2003 tour..." could do with some Wikifying and some sourcing. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Usurpation

With regards to this, if you are renamed, you will be issued a one-second block to link back to the Painbearer blocklog due to recent and important blocks. Is this acceptable? seresin ( ¡? ) 21:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Olympos copyvio

Please don't make edits like this. Copying straight off an outside website is a copyvio; I know you're familiar with the concept from experiences on your previous account. --Gwern (contribs) 04:43 1 April 2008 (GMT)

[edit] AfD nomination of Imoen

An article that you have been involved in editing, Imoen, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imoen. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Gavin Collins (talk) 08:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Coldplay 177057m.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Coldplay 177057m.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Airbag.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:Airbag.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. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)