User talk:Photocopier
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Please do not edit my 'User' page
[edit] Your defense of Bm gub
Alfred, your defense of sock puppet Bm gub's deletion of refereed content on the basis that I am being "uncivil" by being factually correct - referring to Bm gub's vandalism of Ivor Catt page (inserting falsehoods and insults, which factually can be called "rubbish") and also vandalism of Jeremy Webb (NS editor) page by Bm gub (sock puppet for New Scientist in dispute) by removing facts and claiming he is removing "comments" when in fact the links he removed were to lengthy posts in cases followed by many comments - is obviously biased. Notice in Jeremy Webb page history, someone claiming to be Jeremy Webb has made changes to their own page, which is against Wikipedia rules. The person (Jeremy?) claimed to be deleting "silliness" but it was about the negative impact of his editorial policies on A-level uptake in physics, hardly a matter of being silly. Before judging if a person is being abusive, please actually read the facts they deleted and the lies they placed as reasons for doing so in the history, and also read they lies they replace the facts with. The work rubbish is not an insult if it refers to garbage. It is an insult however for you to claim that I am being insulting by referring to garbage as rubbish. There is a difference, you see. Thank you, Photocopier. Photocopier 14:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Photocopier, please do not edit my user page. Feel free to add content to my talk page.
- Regarding your comments: any 'reasonable' person understands that I was scolding you for you unacceptable comments toward Bm gub only. No defense of any edits or editors was made. This shouldn't be hard to understand. Why do you insist on being [| dense]? Alfred Centauri 01:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:IvorCatt.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:IvorCatt.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) 17:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)