User talk:Sameboat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Copyright

Dear Sameboat, I feel that you are taking advantage of me when on Image:MTR_Stock_Merger, you have only noted yourself, making it seem that YOU were the uploader. You have also not requested for permission from me when uploading it to Commons. In any case, you may be in violation of Wikipedia rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toyotaboy95 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] With regards to your latest post to the MTR talk page.

Dear Sameboat,

I would like to ask about your latest post on the MTR talk page. Who is it intended for?

Just would like to have things sorted out, with good faith.

Thanks in advance, --Kylohk 15:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course for user:Huaiwei. Assume good faith, yeah, but he(she) is the exception. I've just expressed the thought of every offended one in that discussion. -- Sameboat - 同舟 16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


Dear samboat,

I did not put anything that was not truthful. They were people not insects. They were MURDERED in cold blood. They were not killed as one kills a mosquito. These were human beings. I may not like people coming to my door and telling me to convert to Christianity either, but I am not going to MURDER them for it. It is blatantly wrong and people should denote it as so - at least out of respect for those who were unjustly murdered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.102.75 (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of 2008 Hong Kong celebrities porn photo incident

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. Acroterion (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 HKCPPI

The article is more of a biography of living persons violation; speedy A10 applies there too. Such information concerning living persons must meet stringent criteria for references, with multiple, non-trivial coverage in major publications. A reference from a non-English-language source doesn't have much applicability for such an article on WP:EN, and certainly doesn't meet BLP criteria. Whether or not there's a consensus on ZH: is irrelevant: different wikis have different requirements, although I'd point out the BLP criteria are supposed to be applied equally across all Wikipedias. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblock

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 222.166.160.138 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: krimpet✽ 14:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Please wait as I contact the blocking admin. Sandstein (talk) 14:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:About MTR station article (User talk:TheBigGap)

What is the limit of sizes and number of images in articles? TheBigGap (talk) 11:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lam Tin Station

I added back the image of the plaque - not much point removing it. If you insist on having it taken please explain why. --Deryck C. 10:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The image doesn't override the entire article unless you use a 1600*1200 superwide screen (or above) in full-screen mode... I think it's a bit too paranoid to remove the image. Furthermore, I added the image as requested by another editor about two years ago - apparently there are more unimportant images to remove, especially one or two of them that are present in other articles. I'll wait till you reply, or three days' time if there is no reply, to act. --Deryck C. 14:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I moved the calligraphy to the Lam Tin article - I think calligraphy on the platform is rather less important. Few other stations have plaques but nearly every one has calligraphy. --Deryck C. 14:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's pray the same. Happy working =) --Deryck C. 14:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Railway system graph

Do you mean the new style as in Image:Hong Kong Railway Route Map en.svg? I guess that's better too, since the East TST - Hung Hom section previously was really confusing. – PeterCX&Talk 05:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It's fine for me and I am not against it – PeterCX&Talk 11:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Power plant icon

Needless to say, your image of a coal plant is not an appropriate icon for almost all of the energy templates which it was added to, and has been removed. 199.125.109.136 (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] KBFa/e

To the majority of editors and viewers, KBFa/e and KBFa/e2 are the same icons and serve the same function. It would be difficult to manage if we make another similar variation. Also, in de: discussion, only two users gave comments: one agree, one waiting for other comments after knowing the situation. After waiting for a few day and have no more replies, I feel that it's quite safe to do the change. – PeterCX&Talk 03:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

(replying WT:RDT/C)I guess so, "So I would agree with the suggested change" – PeterCX&Talk 11:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)