User talk:MikeWazowski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
/Archive 1 - Feb 2006 - Dec 2006

[edit] AnimeIowa Page Revision

Do not alter our emergency message again. This is a crisis on our end and we have virtually no other way of telling our userbase that our domain is down. I'm reverting your change and I'm going to keep reverting it if you keep changing it. I'll remove it once this disaster is resolved. Cverlo 03:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:NOT#WEBSPACE - Wikipedia is not your convention's personal webpage, and this information does not belong on this site. Do not order me around, especially in a situation where you are violating community standards. MikeWazowski 05:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I've sent a notice to WP:AN/I about Cverlo's threats to edit war. If you want to contribute anything more, feel free to do so. --Farix (Talk) 13:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Borg War

Why are you giving me such a hard time with these edits? It's not like they're earth-shaking or anything. I'm the guy who made the film. Believe me, if I were going to make up things, I could make up much more imaginative stuff than the information you're reverting. If you've got a problem, call me on toll free number: 800-743-8951

It's not a matter of whether I'm "impartial" or not. This isn't a review; just a collection of facts. I'm just trying to keep the entry accurate and your reverts are simply making the article less accurate.

You're reverting things that can be easily proven -- such as the fact that the website claims to have 1.3 million downloads. That the website makes that claim is a fact -- which you would have found out if you had clicked on the link I added and looked at the blinking number at the top of the page.

Similarly, since I made the Borg War website, the change I made recently that "Geoffrey James" is "claiming" that a certain number of downloads is is also a fact. You changed that back, too. And that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Why are you busting my chops on this? You're just making the entry less accurate.

RE: The showing of Borg War at the official convention. You are incorrect. New Voyages may have been shown at some conventions, but there is only one officially-licensed Star Trek convention and that's the one that put on by Creation Entertainment. Both Gary Bermen, the CEO of Creation Entertainment, and John Van Citters, the CBS person responsible for Star Trek product development (games and conferences) have confirmed that the BW showing was the first to be approved. I posted the email thread from CBS on the Of Gods and Men website. You're free to contact the sources, if you like. The writer of the referenced article did so. Unless you can cite an actual article that shows that NV was approved by CBS at an official convention, then you're just expressing your memory of a rumor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.96.25 (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Empire

I've responded to your reply on The Empire Strikes Back's talk page. The Filmaker 00:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Hey Mike,

Sorry to have taken the lead on the webcomic AfD, but I've grown very tired of overloyal fankids trying to violate our rules/policies because they're overly interested in non-notable content. I believe your AfD was appropriate, and it appears most of the community agrees.

/Blaxthos 16:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:WeirdAlShow Complete.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WeirdAlShow Complete.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indiana Jones

Thanks for your contributions to the Indiana Jones page. Note that a good proportion (not all, but most) of the show was released in 1999, with George Halls sections removed. The article does not state these elements have been retconned by Lucas, or that they are no longer canon. It does however say that their canonicity is now unclear - a fair statement. Therefore the qualifying note about the 93 year old Indy stays. Regarding the fact that the elder Indy sections will be removed for the DVD release, this is in fact the case; however I can't find a direct citation for it, so I'll leave your edit in there. Mikejstevenson 04:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why are you being foolish? You appear to be interested in getting involved with edit wars - surely you can find better things to do with your time? Mikejstevenson 05:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Not interesting in discussing it I see. Fair enough. Mikejstevenson 05:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Not interested in paying attention to or noticing my comments and discussion on your user page and the Indiana Jones talk page? Fair enough backatcha. MikeWazowski 05:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another Anime Convention

Mike, I'm not sure which part of this discussion you are commenting about. My statement that they have been added is referring to This Edit, in reply to Farix's request for independent, non-trivial, reliable sources stating that. That referred all the way back to my assertion that AAC is the largest anime convention in the state. Kopf1988 17:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mindbridge Foundation

Mike, have you ever heard of a -prod-? Kopf1988 18:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AnimeIowa

Mike, the article speaks for itself. I really have to do little to prove my case, which is why I would say you were operating in bad faith. Kopf1988 05:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Star Trek Audio Dramas

Recently there was an unsuccessul attempt to create an article for Pendant Productions, one of the production Groups that is making Star Trek audio dramas, specifically ST: Defiant. I negotiated to have it put on my talk space so that I could rehabilitate it by turning it into a split-off article on Star Trek fan audio dramas. Its starting to take shape now and I'd like a bit of advise on different formatting aspects of it: is it too big? Should i drop the actors wikitable? Am I using the InfoBoxes correctly? ... It currently isn't fully populated with data so it isn't ready to post as an article yet - when it is, I'll get your opinion as to its viability re: notability since I think the concept is as full of holes as a cobblers purse. I'd appreciate your help getting it set up before it get's released though so that the majority of problems are settled before hand. if you don't have the time yourself, is there someone you know who could help? Thanks --Kirok of L'Stok 16:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SDeletion tags

Regarding the four Scottish historians you tagged one after the other: every one asserts notability, though the question this notability relative to wikipedia standards is a separate question. I doubt any of them would get deleted through a vote, but who knows. They are clearly not candidates for speedy deletion however, so I removed the tags. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

You recently edited an article for Dekker Dreyer... the article is up for deletion based on notability, and I would like to ask you to chime in on the discussion of that deletion. Wikimegamaster 22:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Star Trek Unity

You have deleted the entry on Star Trek Unity. Why? They may not be filming right now, but they are recording for an audio-only season. Wich equals "in production" for an audio production. 81.201.238.210 11:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About AI Edit

About this edit:

Well, there was this edit where you worded your summary as if you were representing AnimeIowa. Regardless, why don't you two kids stop trying to play "Who's got the biggest thing" and just post a new link when it finally exists? Please leave the petty posturing for somewhere else. MikeWazowski 05:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to note I am now affiliated with AnimeIowa, unlike I was in previous edits (and haven't edited them since, btw). I tend to use "we" a lot just as a generalization, however. By "we" I mean the convention itself is working on the problem, my fault, I'm definitely not perfect. Thank you, though, and the discussion has ended on that page so I hope. Kopf1988 05:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and if you were talking about the summary "Notice for visitors trying to get to the website." I dunno if that really says I'm from AnimeIowa either. I just want to be clear that I'm not trying to misrepresent myself. I'm just one editor out of thousands. Kopf1988 05:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1906

Do you understand how my giving this guy warnings for deleting CSD & AfD templates is bad faith? This really makes me laugh. I don't know what some people are thinking. See the comments he left on my talk page and the ones that I returned. Slightly amusing. - Rjd0060 00:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

He's completely off-base and wrong on every count - looks to be bitter that us "bullies" won't kowtow to whatever he wants... MikeWazowski 01:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought so. Thanks for the clarification. - Rjd0060 02:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:FanboysPoster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:SandyCollora.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SandyCollora.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:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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) 21:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:TerraceTNG.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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.

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:KevinRubio.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:KevinRubio.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:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
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) 16:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Time and Again.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Time and Again.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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.

[edit] Christopher Knight AFD

I did change because the WSJ, ABC and C|Net news make it notable to me. While some are blogs, I think blogs on the news sites, such as WSJ are a far different standard than John Doe blogs. We'll see what happens but I think he's notable. Travellingcari (talk) 21:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fellowship.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Fellowship.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)