User talk:Pebs96/Archive-original

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

WELCOME!! Hello, Pebs96/Archive-original! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself new user log and list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. It would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. If that's confusing, or if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl♪ 20:59, 20:59, Tuesday June 10, 2008 (UTC)

[edit] http://www.ranchcardoso.biz/

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ranch cardoso, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material.

This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.ranchcardoso.biz/. As a copyright violation, Ranch cardoso appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Ranch cardoso has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Ranch cardoso. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Ranch cardoso, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words.

Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand why you would mark this as a speedy deletion? Please explain and DO NOT DELETE!
Sorry, but we feel your ranch does not meet Wikipedia notability standards. The article therefore becomes blatant advertising. -- RHaworth 04:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
It is informative information relating to the "Bullfighting" world. We are the only site that exists contributing to Bloodless Bullfight. We are linked on the bullfighting page on wikipedia. So, if I were you, I would reconsider your thoughts on this prior to deleting our page. We are extremely vital to the Portuguese community as well as bullfighting. Our site is to educate and increase awareness of "bloodless bullfights". Also, our goal is to let everyone know that there is more to bullfighting other than killing the bulls. Portuguese style (especially in California) is bloodless... the bulls are not harmed.--Webmistress Diva 05:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
If you refer to a Wikipedia article on a talk page, please use a wikilink. The fact of a link in the Bullfighting article, means nothing - you created the link.
By all means try again with the article - the title should be Ranch Cardoso (with a capital C) or you could try creating an article called bloodless bullfighting. Do not simply copy and paste from your website - I know it is not a copyvio, but others might not realise. More importantly, it is an insult to Wikipedia to copy and paste - if you cannot be bothered to create a proper article in Wiki style, then we don't want your contribution. And we do not accept advertising. -- RHaworth 07:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
I did write it with a capital "C". The first one was a lower case "c" it somehow got that way, but when I re-created the new one, it was with a capital "C". So, where is my article now? Is it totally deleted and I have to start fresh again? I am not advertising. As you can see from my website, I do not like advertising and I keep links in one location. So, next time, I'd appreciate it if you guys would look into the website before deleting articles here. It's an insult to us who are trying to make a difference in the world. By the way, what do you think I'm trying to advertise? I'm not selling anything on my site.--Webmistress Diva 18:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate

Please consider the appropriateness of your additions, particularly when adding commercial external links. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of web links - Marshman 18:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia, as you did in Bodybuilding. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Yankees76 14:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

 == I never got a chance to respond to this.... so here it is ==

I am not being inappropriate when I'm simply showing people examples of what I am talking about. I am also extending the views and minds on things other than what they are use to thinking when it comes to bodybuilding. It seems so one-sided and based on one "ethnicity". I was expanding the thought of other "ethnicities" involved in this type of a sport as well as other sports and competitions.

If Wikipedia is an encyclopedia on the internet, then there should be "external links" explaining one's sources and being able to share an event.

I understand your concerns, but you need NOT be concerned about little 'ol me when it comes to advertising. I would not degrate myself to such a low level of a human being. I have more class than that! Shame on you for thinking otherwise!

Regards,

[edit] Hi there!

The article Bloodless Bullfighting you had started carries the risk of being taken into consideration as an advertisement and being commercially motivated, since you are the owner of Ranch Cardoso and the term "bloodless bullfighting" had been apparently coined in your assets in order to deal with the probable criticisms on the side of the U.S. public, for as far as I know, bullfighting in Portugal is not "bloodless". The main article (if it is necessary) should be "Portuguese bullfighting" or "Portuguese-style bullfighting" and the version of Portuguese bullfighting in California may (or should) be mentioned in the article with a comparative analysis, including the nerf thing. Ciao! Behemoth 10:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

 == reply to Behemoth and everyone else ==

I beg to differ. It may seem like it, but if you read the paragraphs right above "inappropriate", RHaworth told me to write an article on "Bloodless Bullfighting"..... and I did just that.

I will go back in the article and mention that in Portugal, it is not bloodles, BUT the bulls are still not killed. It is Portuguese style because it's bullfighting on horseback rather than on foot. The Spaniards came up with bullfighting on foot. And yes, I agree with you. I read what you wrote on your page.... "there is indeed rivalry in bullfighting between Portuguese and Spaniards criticizing each other just the same as they trash talk about a lot of other stuff." This is very true indeed! As I am a witness of it during many sessions on a google group I belong to. Some agree, some don't... blah, blah, blah. It's all the same song and dance..... some people just don't want to get along for the sake of "I don't know why". I think it's ridiculous. But it's not to say that there are those who embrace the culture and vice-versa. I love both countries. I may lean more towards bloodless bullfighting because I'm an animal lover. I will go to a bullfight in Spain and Mexico, but my hands are over my eyes during the kill. I am not a supporter of blood shedding..... not my thing.

Anyways, it is "Bloodless Bullfighting, Portuguese Style because that's what it is. If I didn't see the need to separate it from the bullfighting section, I would have left it alone. But it is very important because it has a whole new meaning to bullfighting when you don't kill the bull.... (don't ya think so?). Thanks again.

p.s. I don't know how to "wikify" my page.

[edit] Re: Rancho Cardoso

hi! thanks for contacting me on my TALK page. i have been to your website before and i enjoyed it very much. do you know Dale Pierce?

i will help when and if possible. i am thinking to begin wikifying the Bloodless Bullfighting article if that's ok with you.

ill also try to add images if i can find any i can use. Dale Pierce should have something and he said i could use whatever of his that i need.

take care.

ps. "there is indeed rivalry in bullfighting between Portuguese and Spaniards criticizing each other just the same as they trash talk about a lot of other stuff."

actually, i wrote that plus some more but it was edited out. yes it is true. the spaniards and portuguese are really pretty much the same. its not like saying the spanish are similar to italians and so on- because the spaniards and portuguese are not just similar, on the whole we are practically the same. the hispanics are not just the spaniards, hispania was the whole peninsula. it is the fact that portugal is seperate from spain while sharing the same heritage that creates all the spats and resentment. but what can one expect- even different regions in spain have animosity toward eachother and for things castillian in particular... so of course there is going to be resentment by some for the other because afterall we were the ones that managed to escape from the grasp of castille. i argued about this kind of thing all the time on the discussion pages of Hispanic, Lusitanic and Latino articles and other forums, but i got tired of it although sometimes i can help saying something now and then.

Lusitano Transmontano 19:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 == Hello Lusitano Transmontano ==

Thanks for responding. I would love you to help me wikify the Bloodless Bullfighting article as well as giving your input.

Yes, I know Dale Pierce. I have not met him in person. Only through the Mundo-Taurino google group as well as on MySpace. We both have an account on there.

Well, if you can help me with anything, it would be greatly appreciated as I would really love to clarify for once how Bloodless Bullfighting started, the Forcados, Cavaleiros, etc., etc.

Then, I can put it on my site so that viewers can be educated as that is one of my goals.

Thanks for visiting our site and if you have any inputs as to what else I should put on there, just let me know.

Take care and God bless --Webmistress Diva 02:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bullfighting

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Bullfighting. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. Veinor (ヴエノル(talk)) 02:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Bloodless bullfighting, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.


[edit] Image:Tevitapic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tevitapic.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Metros232 20:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


Hi Metros! I'm not exactly sure what you mean by all of this, but I could have sworn that the image was given this copyright license.... [[1]]
Can you please explain further on what I need to do... because it's too confusing.... (maybe cause I'm too tired right now to appropriately deal with it). Thanks!--Webmistress Diva 18:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, you are correct that a license like that can be used on a magazine. However, under fair use rules, a magazine cover can only be used to illustrate the magazine. It cannot be used to illustrate the subject of the cover as it's being used in this case. See WP:FU#Counterexamples. Number 7 on the list states that it is not fair use:
An image of a magazine cover, used only to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover. However, if that magazine issue itself is notable enough to be a topic within the article, then fair use may apply.
So the image would need to be replaced with something else representing the subject instead of a magazine cover. Make sense at all? Metros232 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I have also removed the photo at Freddie Letuli on the same grounds. A fair use image of a book cover needs to be used to illustrate the book, not the subject or author of the book. Metros232 17:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; 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. Metros232 00:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

What are you refering to? I've never personally attacked anybody! The only thing that I've been doing is defending myself and the contents that I have copyright to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pebs96 (talk • contribs)
These are clearly personal attacks:
"Either way, you "ASSUMED" which makes you the "first 3 letters from that word." "It is not up to you to decide what makes it look "encyclopaedic". Oh yeah, I guess you don't know everything because you can't even spell the word correctly."
By the way, please see the article on encyclopaedia. It is a properly accepted form of the word. Metros232 01:10, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I think you are mistaken. If you read what he had said, you can see that he misspelled the word... see below...
"that entries that use said pictures will look more encyclopediac. Fethers 00:19, 24 December 2006"
I had commented on him misspelling the word.
But on the other notation, it's ok for him to attack me by calling me a "dumbass, dummy, etc., etc. and not only me, but on countless occassions, this user Fethers have been doing it for quite some time now and NOBODY has reprimanded nor have they banned him for his abusive remarks and behaviour. Not that I am perfect, but I did not come right out and say it to his face like he has been doing to me and constantly attacking me to no end. And not just by the name calling, but by through his actions as well. Also, he hides his comments along with the many complaints that he has been getting for his rude behaviour.--Webmistress Diva 01:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
"NOBODY has reprimanded...for his abusive remarks and behaviour." I warned him several days ago and he hasn't committed a personal attack since then. Metros232 01:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
What about the other attacks before then? He/she is not going to stop and will continue because that's the type of person they are. He/She has done it before as proven in his history records..... which he/she hid from everyone to see it. He may not be calling me names right this moment, but his actions are still considered a "personal" attack --Webmistress Diva 01:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

(unindent)But administrative action on Wikipedia is meant to be preventative, not punishment. I warned him. He stopped. Therefore, the behavior has been corrected. If he starts attacking again, that means it's possible that he hasn't learned, therefore, further action will have to be taken to prevent further attacks. Metros232 01:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Same Notation from the Bloodless Bullfighting article

All of the disruptions on this article, photos, and any other articles that I contribute to (especially relating to the bullfights stuff) really needs to come to a halt. I mean this is ridiculous.
I can relate to Montana and anyone else who is TRYING to express that the article needs to be wikified and so on. But the recent vandalism and removal of the photos is just obscene! It is also being documented as a "personal" attack towards me.
Here are the culprits and I will add to this list as I see them popping up:

Signed,--Webmistress Diva 01:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your concerns about my deletion of links to your businesses

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia.

Hi, Pebs96 (Webmistress Diva), I deleted the link to the ranch you own. It does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for inclusion. Please see these Wikipedia policies and guidelines; they apply to all Wikipedia articles:

  • External Links Guideline -- in particular the text: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked."
    • I notice your businesses' links appears on other article pages. I will begin removing them as well.
  • Conflict of Interest -- you are never supposed to add links to or promote yourself or your business
  • Spam Guideline
  • Ownership of Articles Policy -- no one editor controls or "owns" an article
  • Copyrights Policy: About 4 or 5 rows above the "Save page" button, you'll see a sentence that reads "You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL." In editing Wikipedia, like all the rest of us, you have surrendered any claim of copyright to the material you add or modify.

I think that after reading these, you'll better understand why a link to your business just isn't appropriate here. We appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, but they do not give you the right to promote your business any more than my own work gives me any rights to promote my own business.

So please, do not add any links to:

If you see others' links that are inappropriate, by all means, please delete them.

I notice that you have been asked/warned 4 times already[2][3][4][5] to stop adding your links. I'm now asking you for the fifth time to stop. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing and your domains added to the spam blacklist. --A. B. (talk) 05:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

If continue to believe that you are being wronged by various deletions, you may ask for a second, neutral opinion by posting a request on the talk page for WikiProject Spam. The editors there are very experienced and will give your situation a fair and informed assessment of the material you are adding that others are deleting. --A. B. (talk) 05:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I just got the e-mail you sent me and I also saw you left me a long message on my talk page. I will look at these when I can. --A. B. (talk) 06:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quiver (Lusitano horse) article flagged for speedy deletion

A tag has been placed on Quiver (Lusitano horse), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --A. B. (talk) 05:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More personal attacks

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. This is in reference to your "external links" post where you call people like myself and Fethers trolls. Metros232 17:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you guilty?? Because neither one of your names were not mentioned.
  • I'll consider this message from you as a "personal attack" and not acting in "good faith" by jumping the gun and assuming that it was both of you that I am referring to.
  • The only disruption is from you and Fethers who "CONTINUE" to edit my items.
  • Let's move on from here so that we can have a normal functioning life. I do have a life outside of Wikipedia.--Webmistress Diva 17:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Your next line was "you know who you are". It is quite obviously a personal attack and quite obviously a personal attack towards me and Fethers. But, I'll assume good faith here and believe you that it wasn't against me or Fethers. But that still doesn't change the fact that it was a personal attack against SOMEONE. Metros232 17:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • You are smart in having "good faith" because my comments are in general.
  • But if you continue to assume that it was on you and Fethers, then that's on you and I have nothing to do with how "guilty" you feel.
  • So next time, PLEASE refrain from writing "unnecessary" comments on my page.... because whether you or Fethers believe it or not, it is quite DISTURBING and DISRUPTIVE... while bordering ABUSIVE and HARASSING.
--Webmistress Diva 18:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Unnecessary comments? They were warning you about uncivil comments you've made. Warnings of such nature are appropriate in response to comments such as the ones you made. It's not abusive and harassing, it's appropriate per the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. Metros232 18:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Several tips

I'm taking a large glass of big-boy juice, here. I have several suggestions that I think will help you immensely. To start, I would highly recommend that you go to Special:Preferences, click on the Editing tab and uncheck "Mark all edits minor by default," then click Save. Marking all edits as minor by default is something that is often abused by serial spammers to avoid notice by making significant changes under the guise of a minor edit. Next, you should click on the User Profile tab and uncheck the Raw signature box. That will add a link to your Talk page so that people can add comments for you directly on your talk page, instead of forcing them to dig through a history page to find your Talk link.

There are several policies and guidelines you need to read up on. The most important one at this point is Wikipedia:Fair Use. The images I have removed from articles are ones that are being used incorrectly according to the Fair Use guidelines, namely that cover art can only be used to illustrate those works, whether they are magazines, books or albums. As an example, the Freddie Letuli article contained Image:FreddieLetuli.jpg, which is marked Fair Use using Template:Book_cover.

The GNU Free Document License is another one that you're misinterpreting. This is how each and every one of your textual contributions is licensed. In addition, you licensed several photos that you took using it. The GFDL, despite its name, applies to both text and media. Again, as an example, you uploaded Image:AntonioRibeiroTelles.jpg, which I later retouched and reuploaded. Your claim to copyright on that photo, though correct, is irrelevant. You released the photo under the GFDL, which allows anyone to do what they please with it, even sell it or modify it, provided they credit you (which remained on the image page) and that they distribute a copy of the GFDL along with the image.

I sincerely hope that helps you understand where I'm coming from. These licenses exist so that Wikipedia may truly be a free as in speech encyclopedia as well as free-as-in-beer. It makes it better. Fethers 18:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

  • "Preferences" is simply what the word means.... meaning if "I" prefer to do have my signature that way, then it is "my" preference to do so. If "Wiki" wanted a standard way of having "everyone" sign the posting, then there should not be a "preference" area for us. And in most cases, most people probably don't even go in that area..... at least I don't. I've only gone in there maybe once or twice in the beginning and didn't care much for it other than how I want my signature to be. Everything else must have been defaulted the way it is. I don't know and I don't care cause it's just a "preference" and does not really matter.
  • But I'll play your silly little "controlling" game, because that's how it sounds now. Because you are now discussing how my signature should be..... which does not fall under my "preference" anymore. It doesn't matter. So what if they have to dig to contact me.
  • And the whole blah-blah on the image licensing stuff. You are NOW trying to be the big boy by explaining it to me, when YOU should have been a big boy in the first place without having my images removed..... which you still have not acknowledged that you were wrong about.
  • Simple solution would have been for you to apologize and NOT have had the continued disruption that you and Metros232 have been doing. It sounds that both of you are one in the same.... or at least know each other, or you are on me because someone put you up to it. Either way, I don't appreciate all of the disruption caused by both of you. But both of you continue to disregard how I feel no matter how much I express it.
  • If you were being a real big boy, you would just stop this nonsense all together and move on like I've mentioned over and over again.
--Webmistress Diva 05:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC) (there... are you happy now? you can just click on my signature.... your request was petty just so you know)