User talk:Skybunny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Skybunny, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela 13:24, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)

Hi, see my note to you at JFK assassination, please 129.33.49.251 18:07, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Odd...I don't see a comment there? Maybe it needs to be re-submitted to the page. Skybunny 19:51, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I noticed your draft for a television station article. I am a member of Wikiproject Television Stations, and I've been using a nifty table for each affiliate I've worked on. Take a look: WEAR, WTEV, WTLV, WJXX, WKRG, and WPMI. Tell me what you think about using it in your articles. Mike H 18:43, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

I saw your addition to WGBA. Nice work! At Wikipedia:WikiProject Television Stations, I've started a list of affiliates served by the chart. I added WGBA to there already, but when you're done, can you add the rest to that list? I've alphabetized them. Mike H 20:54, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)
I even took your lead and added the FOX, UPN, and WB affiliates to my Mobile boxes. Haven't done it to Jacksonville yet, but I will tomorrow. Have a nice evening! Mike H 20:55, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] W. Mark Felt

Salve!
I nominated W. Mark Felt as a WP:FAC. As you commented on the Deep Throat talk page, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/W. Mark Felt. PedanticallySpeaking 15:50, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Badly Animated Man

I made two minor tweaks to your paragraph and fixed the Badly Animated Man redirect to match your section heading. Cool? Pleasure working with you. David Bergan 16:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brett Favre image

According to my note on the talk page from a few days ago, it appears that low-res cover images can indeed be used under fair use. Click on the image and read the copyright tage there. --mtz206 03:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

i'm no expert in the fair use claim of these cover images - I only saw that example and presumed its justification was valid. Now that I've dug up the discussion regarding thse images, perhaps your assessment is more accurate. --mtz206 03:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WGBA and WACY

I was able to find the logos I was looking for for WGBA on my tapes and uploaded them to the article, but I don't have anything for the WXGZ days; Sheboygan hasn't had WACY at all on cable so I have nothing on tape for the WACY era, though I do have the first Ace logo in JPG form. Nate 23:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your edits to Life Alert

I hate it when shady IPs set up advertisement-articles. I tried to help Life Alert, but I know so little about it. Thanks for chopping it up a bit. BrokenSegue 23:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I have also noticed that that anon is spamming Life Alert on to other pages. We should both keep an eye on this guy. BrokenSegue 23:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Even admins can't check to see if the two users are one and the same. Such power is given to very few and is used sparingly. Let's try to settle this through discussion and reverts. I left the spam template on the anon's talk page. BrokenSegue 02:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JFK

I'm curious to know what your take on the JFK assassination is, since I didn't see any of your edits offhand. I was intrigued by the various conspiracy theories at one time, but over the decades I have pretty well concluded that Oswald was definitely in on it and possibly the only one in on it. I was pretty sure he was guilty of something at the time, just because of his flippant demeanor about the whole subject. But as with the Lincoln conspiracy, we will probably never know the facts for certain. Wahkeenah 06:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note. You're right, too much time has passed for us to ever likely know the full story for sure, barring the appearance of some sensational, as-yet-undiscovered evidence. You don't say how old you are. I was a young teen in 1963, and it was an unbelievable shock. I tell the younger generation that whatever they felt on 9/11/01 is kind of like how it felt on 11/22/63. (In some ways 9/11 was worse, because we had to sit through the footage ad nauseum. The film footage of JFK's shooting was not made public for 10 years.) I think part of our generation's obsessiveness with it has to do with "therapy"... if they can just somehow find the truth, they can feel vindicated. But as you said, there's no getting around the fact that he was killed. However, there is no limit to conspiracist looniness. Someone, years ago, actually posed the theory that JFK was still alive but in some sort of vegetative state. I think the relatively recent release of the autopsy photos pretty well put that theory to rest. Anyway, thanks for your note and your contributions. :) Wahkeenah 02:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sports Illustrated Magazine Covers

They are fair use for pictures. A lot of the sports articles have them as pictures for the person being represented. So, therefore it is fair use. How is what I'm doing different than what anyone else is doing? I am just using them as pictures for the person. The same as everybody else. CubsFan2006 20:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SNIyer12 RfC

I’m just curious, how did you come across the SNIyer12 RfC? I almost asked you to help with it, originally, but I looked at the histories and thought s/he had given up making stubborn edits to the 9/11 pages( that was May 21st, his/her recent edit to the Aftermath page didn’t come until the 23rd), so I commented out the stuff I had about those pages, and left you alone. If this goes to Mediation or Arbitration( as I suspect it will, given SNIyer12’s tendency to ignore users who take issue with him/her), you should definitely be involved, if you want. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] September 11, 2001 attacks timeline for the day of the attacks

10AM is back. *sigh* vandals -- MrDolomite 05:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pets.com

I edited your article for the facts, not what press clippings you appeared to use. I was a senior executive at the company and therefore know what happened and am aware what was reported to have happened. Your article had significant errors in almost every paragraph, starting with the first sentence. The company did not file for bankruptcy. It closed its doors with a net positive worth to give money back to shareholders. I am assuming that you just picked up articles that had invalid facts in them and your article did not include intentional misrepresentations of the facts. ---Betty and Lou

This discussion was taken to the pets.com talk page. Skybunny 22:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pat Neshek Image

If this image is being questioned, you need to look at the other Minnesota Twins player images used on other articles. Just don't want to feel I'm being singled out, which I believe is the case right now. --RyguyMN 01:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Source for Brett Favre Image

Skybunny - I'm not entirely sure where the image came from as I've had it on my computer and simply decided to upload it when I noticed that that Brett's article didn't have an image. I still am pretty sure that it is in fair use, but I'll try to find another one I can determine the source for, possibly from [1] or from a sports news site such as [2]. - Mike (Trick or treat) 23:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand that freely licenced images are ideal, but aren't there some situations where using a fair use image from a site such as ESPN.com would be appropriate? See the FA Calvin and Hobbes for example. It uses some panels from comic strips to illustrate the subject of the article so that the reader can better understand it. Sorry if I'm a little ignorant here, and please correct me if I'm wrong :-). - Mike (Trick or treat) 19:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I will try to locate a freely licenced image if I can, and I'll certainly give WP:FAIR another read. - Mike (Trick or treat) 19:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Pets-com-sock-puppet.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Pets-com-sock-puppet.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.

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. howcheng {chat} 22:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Asked for speedy delete of this image; someone has found a free image of the subject (so fair use isn't needed). Skybunny 01:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] wwv

Hello and thank you for your help with Radio Station WWV. I have new documentation that I posted in the discussion page for the article that will show we are all in error. The voice of WWV is Lee Rodgers. Note it is dated 2005, the documentation from the tv station was 2003. Erager 19:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:WGBA1986.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:WGBA1986.gif. 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 02:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TWA 800

Skybunny, I saw your plea for "NPOV writing and avoiding alternate theory evidence flooding" in the TWA 800 article. That request went unheeded. Besides those problems, the article has few, if any, references, poorly structured and written, and many factual inaccuracies. It is an embarrassment. I've been working alot on the Alaska Airlines Flight 261 article, and have alot of ideas about structure that can be carried over to the TWA 800 article. Also, I think that the alternative conspiracy theories can (and should) be discussed and presented in a respectful and NPOV manner. I'd like to start working on that article next week, but might come crying to you for help (if you would be willing to do so). Lipsticked Pig 00:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

You Da Man Skybunny Lipsticked Pig 19:39, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3ABN

Hey, any more input help or additions you could give at the 3ABN article would be most welcomed. I'd like to see that article improved and expanded beyond stub status. Cheers! --Maniwar (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Favre

By the way, I meant to thank you for your continued patience with Barry... He's learning and it's good that he isn't getting bitten while this process is happening. Thanks!--Isotope23 talk 19:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:800 Home Runs

I saw you reverted him before at Brett Favre, what this guy's deal? He's making edits and comments that don't make sense.►Chris Nelson 23:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

What's this girls deal, revert it back the way you want, I don't care, I'm moving on —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 800 Home Runs (talk • contribs) 23:11, August 21, 2007 (UTC).
That's what's called a personal attack.►Chris Nelson 23:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
No, I'm correcting you, get it, I'm a girl, gosh —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 800 Home Runs (talk • contribs) 23:15, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

The things I miss when I'm away for a few hours. This is Starwars1955, or one of the several dozen sockpuppets they've created. They were community banned after disruption of the article Brett Favre, sockpuppeting, impersonation, and so forth. After several months (while still occasionally creating sockpuppets to hit the Brett Favre article), the user attempted to come back with the moniker BarryBonds800HomeRuns, and the request to be reinstated was denied with no consensus. Therefore, the editor is still banned.

The editor has a history of making repeated demands and personal attacks regarding editing of this article, as can be reviewed at the links above regarding the community ban. The user has a distinctive methodology and tends to ask for or do the same edits over and over again, often peppered with personal attacks, and it is my understanding that edits by them or any sockpuppets are to be:

  • Removed from an article (invariably Brett Favre) without comment
  • Reverted on the basis that the user is community banned, regardless of merit of the edit itself (which is to say that even if an edit by them is valid, it should still be removed on the grounds of the editor ban)

In other words, the assumption as I understand it is that this editor has no standing on Wikipedia whatsoever unless they are released from the community ban by the arbitration committee. Skybunny 23:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brett Favre

I blocked the latest Starwars1955 socks. I'm not around much right now so I'd suggest opening a request for checkuser to see if there are any sleeper accounts (listing Aulepp (talk · contribs) & PackersMania (talk · contribs) as well as requesting the checkusers look into a rangeblock if SW1955 is using his usual 4.245.XXX.XXX IP range... you could also request page protection, but SW1955 likes to age his socks so it isn't the most effective way to deal with him (but it would filter out all the other crap happening there).--Isotope23 talk 15:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Good job trying to keep up with all of Starwars1955's socks. He gets on a tear on Sunday nights, it seems. Great job, hang in there. Snowfire51 21:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree with User:Isotope23 and think a checkuser and rangeblock and semi-protection is in order. It would help out immensely. Oh yeah, good job watching out for him, I have found a couple that I thought were his socks and marked them accordingly.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 23:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I think I may have found a new sockpuppet for Starwars1955, User:September 6, 1984. Only contributions are to Brett Favre and a fairly complete understanding of Wiki formatting, I didnt go so far as placing a tag on the User page. What do you think?
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks I figured it was him, but wasn't 100%, thanks for the quick response!! I will continue to watch the page for the rest for the season, and I hope we can keep the semi-pro on for the rest of the season.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Ill keep on watching, keep me posted!
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 18:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a new batch of sockpuppets making the rounds at Brett Favre, fair warning. You've been nominated (in a fairly hilarious discussion) for WP:3RR. Snowfire51 04:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Glad to help. Now there's a flood of sockpuppets coming after me, too. Take care! Snowfire51 05:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I responded to the amazingly funny (it seriously made me chuckle aloud) 3RR case. Just thought you would like to know, and if you need any help or you need me to state an opinion (since he/she is now blaming me) just ask. Thanks.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email

If you get any more password requests, send me the IPs via email (which will require you to enter an email account here... suggest setting up a gmail just for Wikipedia). I'll deal with it.--Isotope23 talk 13:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem... those requests are quite possibly the stupidest thing he could possibly do. It shows you his IP, which you can tell to me, and I can rangeblock for a very, very long time.--Isotope23 talk 13:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I also got this email and have the IP address, who should I send it to?
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 21:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Does he have an email I can send it to, or should I just do it on his talk page.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 21:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser?

Whatever happened with the checkuser request for User:Starwars1955? Ive found a new sock, User:Jurassic Park 1993; tagged and reverted edits.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 04:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

It is still pending. I added his latest socks.--Isotope23 talk 12:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
By the way, the checkuser was closed as unnecessary because I had an IP check in that resulted in more range blocks. On a side note, I noticed your comments at the RFCU about someone letting the individual know in no uncertain terms that he is banned... I've done that on 3 separate occasions now. He understands the situation, he just chooses to ignore that fact.--Isotope23 talk 12:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Sockpuppets

It seems there's new sockpuppets of Starwars1955, same writing style, same syntax problems, exact same edits. He's at User talk:Packers1992, User talk:71.129.234.151, and User talk:Packerslove. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Snowfire51 04:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

(Banned user)

This editor admits to using three different accounts/IP addresses, and has no other legit edits other than to Brett Favre. He has used multiple accounts to make back-to-back edits on other pages to give the illusion of productive change. Snowfire51 06:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm looking into it.--Isotope23 talk 15:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I blocked the accounts per the duck test. Looks like an old friend got a new ISP.--Isotope23 talk 15:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Our sockpuppet friend is back at User talk:Packerslove (not banned yet for some reason), User talk:Flashback1990, and possibly at Special:Contributions/70.17.232.198.

As for Favre, I think only the top stats for Favre should be shown on his page. His numbers are so great that they threaten to overwhelm the entire article, and wikipedia is not just for stats and lists. I'd suppor cutting it down to the top 6-8 stats, whatever seems right, and just dropping the others. His legacy won't be his stats. Snowfire51 05:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Per this love letter, User:Flashback1990 is SW55. 70.17.232.198 however is probably not; it's on the completely opposite coast from where SW55 operates from.--Isotope23 talk 14:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
By the way, I know how he is back editing and I'm exploring an option for dealing with this.--Isotope23 talk 14:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Work!!

What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
The Brett Favre page looks awesome!! You made it look professional and sooo much cleaner. Good job!!!
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 06:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another sock

Here is the newest one User:Glenn Aulepp.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 20:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another Sock, New Tactic

We appear to have another sock at User talk:Teri Aulepp, and also at User_talk:71.129.234.151. Instead of changing the Brett Favre page, they're working at a new page, List_of_career_achievements_by_Brett_Favre. What do you guys think? Snowfire51 01:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair warning, you've had a sock named after you. Check out User_talk:Skybumny. Snowfire51 02:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 1)

Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 1), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 1) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 1) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 1) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Collectonian (talk) 03:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 2)

Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 2), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 2) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 2) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 2) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Collectonian (talk) 03:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 3)

Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 3), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 3) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 3) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes (Season 3) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Collectonian (talk) 03:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Green Bay Packers WikiProject!

Lambeau Field Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject Green Bay Packers is looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on America's favorite small-town team, the Green Bay Packers! If you want to help, you can your name to our list of participants, check out our to-do list, and most importantly, improve the articles!


Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 01:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:BobBrownKaituma.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BobBrownKaituma.png. 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. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


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

Thank you for uploading Image:BobBrownKaituma.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) 09:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)