User talk:Super48

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

Notice

If you notice my IP switching, it's because at some times, I'll be logged in at school, and sometimes at home. However, my home IP is the same as blocked user 98E. If you see my using the same IP as him, don't mistake me for a sockpuppet, I'm his younger brother. - Super48 13:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

How old does my account have to be to edit semi-protected pages? - Super48 15:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

4 days. --ais523 15:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! - Super48 15:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Pork Lo mein

I have deleted the recipes you added to Pork Lo mein according to this policy. Nothing personal. :) Maybe you can add them to Wikibooks. - TwoOars (T | C) 18:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)\

That's okay. We'll just keep them as external links. - Super48 18:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Image:Upload.PNG

Just so you know, that edit was sort of wrong. Why? Because:

  1. It's not a fair use image, Wikipedia screenshots are free.
  2. It's not orphaned, it's on my page.
  3. And it doesn't need 2 copyright tags.

Not to be mean or anything, though. - Super48 18:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, only the web page itself is free. Internet Explorer and the Windows taskbar are not. I could crop the browser and taskbar out of the picture, but I didn't think it was worth it. If you'd really like to keep the screenshot, though, I can do that for you. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay, crop it, and then re-upload it. - Super48 20:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I just re-took the screenshot with Firefox. The screenshot you took was of Internet Explorer 6, which does not display most transparent images properly. You need to upgrade to Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox to view transparent images properly. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Image use policy

Please urgently take a moment to read up on WP:F and WP:IUP. After Image:Lloydbanks.PNG (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs), I also had to delete

Please note: Works found on the Internet are (almost) always copyrighted and we must respect that copyright. Persistent copyright violators will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thanks, Sandstein 15:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't upload Sarge.GIF, damn it! And how can an image of LO mein be copyrighted? - Super48 15:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I now see that you didn't upload Sarge.GIF. On the contrary, you correctly tagged it as {{PUIdisputed}}. Sorry.
As to Lo mein, under US law every photograph is copyrighted, unless it meets the narrow exception of Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. (mere reproduction of a public domain two-dimensional work of art). Sandstein 16:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
But I didn't copy it, I edited it. - Super48 16:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Even if you edited this image before uploading it to Wikipedia, you created a derivative work and thereby violated the copyright on the original image. Sandstein 16:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
But I had permission from the site. - Super48 16:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you show that permission to us, please? Sandstein 16:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I have no clue what you mean. - Super48 16:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
We must be able to prove that the image has indeed been released into the public domain, or that it has been licenced under a free licence. Can you reproduce an e-mail or other exchange with the legitimate rights holder that states this? Sandstein 17:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use orphaned template

The template that says an image has a fair use rationale but is orphaned is {{Orphaned fairuse not replaced}} — iridescenti (talk to me!) 20:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Sailor Mouth

Please use reliable sources. TV.com is not a reliable source. Besides the issue of the mention of this word has been HEAVILY discussed on it's talk page. It is not critical to the episode to exactly know what word is used, it is not actually confirmable from the episode itself, and there is no reliable source from the production team that can confirm that this is the word used. We do not use lip-reading, and other speculation in an animation. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 20:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Check your talk page, there's a difference between TV-Tome and tv.com. - Super48 20:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Guideline

What, other than breaking the transparency in IE6, do you seek to accomplish by switching from the custom-tweaked PNG to an SVG that gets converted to an inferior PNG for display? —David Levy 21:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't break the transparency in my IE6. - Super48 21:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Look again. The background is white instead of grey. And again, what do you believe that we stand to gain via this change? —David Levy 21:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not in my IE6. Also, another thing is that SVG should be used over PNG. - Super48 21:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
In my IE6, the background is transparent. Here is proof; open an image editing program, zoom in on the image, and you will see the background is transparent. - Super48 21:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
1. Are you certain that you're using IE6? What is the full version number?
2. SVGs have advantages over PNGs, but none of them apply to this particular situation.
MediaWiki (the software on which this wiki is based) does not display SVGs. An image stored in this format is converted to a 24-bit PNG (exactly the same format as the image that you've removed) before it appears on-screen. IE6 (at least, every version with which I'm familiar) is incapable of displaying 24-bit PNG transparencies, but it does use the file's bKGD attribute (if one is specified). MediaWiki automatically inserts a bKGD attribute of 255,255,255 (white), so that's the background color that the image assumes in IE6. The custom-tweaked PNG file contains a bKGD attribute of 249,249,249 (the shade of grey used in the template). Therefore, it appears correctly in IE6. Otherwise, it's identical to the PNG generated from the SVG by MediaWiki (except for the shade of blue). I should know, given the fact that I uploaded both the PNG and the SVG.
In other words, your edit accomplishes nothing other than changing the shade of blue and breaking the transparency in IE6. Even if this problem doesn't affect you, it certainly affects many other people. Please revert to the PNG. —David Levy 21:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I'm not sockpuppet, you should read the above, I'm 98E's borther. - Super48 21:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "Sorry, I'm not buying it. This account was set up very shortly after 98E was blocked indefinitely and has edited a similar set of articles. — Yamla 21:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Indef blocked

This account has been blocked as it is being used by 98E to avoid his indefinite block. Picaroon (Talk) 21:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't, read the aobve. The only thing I have to with 98E is the fact that I'm his brother. - Super48 21:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh?

Why is my request being ignored? If you read the above, you would know that I'm not a sockpuppet. - Super48 21:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Be patient, it takes time. --24.136.230.38 21:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please...

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I can explain this. The fact that we made similar contrib's is because we like the same things. It runs in the family. For example, since I like South Park, my kids probably will too. And the fact that I registered shortly after 98E's block is just a coincidence. And have I vandalized at all? No. I'm a good Wikipedian, I promise that I'm not 98E. If I were 98E, I'd probably be raging about this block. But I'm remaining calm. Though 98E continued to abuse {{unblock}}, I'm not gonna abuse it since I've explained this all. I am hoping you will unblock me now that you know the truth. - Super48 21:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "Nup, like Yamla, not buying it. The timing of this account creation gives me sufficient inclination to believe that I can't assume good faith in this situation. Register an email address in special preferences (WP:EMAIL), and contact the blocking administrator, because they made the initial call, to which I (and Yamla, above) believe was appropriate within administrator discretion. Daniel Bryant 12:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

E-mail the blocking administrator. --Deskana (AFK 47) 19:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't have an e-mail address. The {{unblock}} template is my only hope. I don't see why (and this is just a comment, not a threat) you didn't answer my request, seeing as you're an admin. However, you guys can take your time, I have all the time in the world, and I'm sure you admins must be very busy. - Super48 21:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment about me answering the request: I did, my answer was e-mail the blocking admin. Typically the blocking administrator is consulted before unblocks are carried out unless it's something like an autoblock that is straight forward. I'm somewhat puzzled as to why you can't register an e-mail account. I myself have like twenty. There are plenty of free providers: hotmail.com for instace. However, I will contact the blocking administrator for you to explain himself here. --Deskana (AFK 47) 23:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, okay, thanks. I'm sure s/he'll understand. - Super48 00:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

E-mail

Where can I findt the page to e-mail a user? - Super48 21:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)}}

which user are you looking to email? Andytalk 21:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Nvm, I did it already. - Super48 21:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't see what you want to email you about. You were recognized as a sockpuppet based on your behavior alone. I was merely fulfilling my duties as a sysop by blocking you. Then, a checkuser request confirmed it that you were a sock, and your IP was blocked to put an end to it. There is nothing more to say. Picaroon (Talk) 02:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes there is. I'm not a sock and you know it. Trying to deny that I'm 98E's brother is only abusing your sysop privileges. Please unblock because you're wrong that I'm a sock. - Super48 21:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Eric.svg

Hello, Super48. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Eric.svg) was found at the following location: User:Super48/Sandbox. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I have told you admins quite clearly that I'm just 98E's brother, and that I made similar contrib's because I like similar things. Please unblock because otherwise you're abusing sysop privileges. - Super48 21:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "Putting this as delicately as possible, a lot of people have claimed to be brothers, or claim to have had their brothers abuse their accounts, and other such tales about roommates, teachers, classmates, parents, friends, or even pets. Nine times out of ten, these stories are fabricated. Evidence currently is that you're using the same IP address and exhibiting the same behavior as a recently blocked user. Simple application of the duck test. It's not perfect, but this isn't a court of law, either -- we're not saying you're guilty, innocent, or whatever, only that we're very concerned by circumstances, and that we're not necessarily willing to take a leap of faith based on your word alone. Sorry. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Please... I'm ruined if I'm blocked, when I registered, Wikipedia became my life, and now you're ruining it by blocking me... please... unblock... I... don't.. . think... I'll... make... it... much... longer... - Super48 21:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "Wikipedia became your life for those whole two days you were editing? I think not. Denied. — IrishGuy talk 22:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Well, it is because of how good Wiki is. But if you refuse to unblock me, you are denying that I am a legitimate editor. - Super48 22:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "You have had four admins decide not to unblock you. Stop abusing the unblock template or I will protect this talk page. — IrishGuy talk 22:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Fine. Deny the truth if you wanna be an asshole, you son of a bitch. Fuck you. - Super48 22:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
That is certainly pleasant. Being uncivil isn't going to get anyone to unblock you. IrishGuy talk 22:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I've protected this talk page for one week, since this conversation didn't seem to be going anywhere. Your available appeal options are limited to emailing administrators, contacting unblock-en-l, and waiting for protection to expire. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Denying the truth

I simply have no clue why you're denying the truth by calling me a sockpuppet. Such lying is only going to turn this into a flame war. I've emailed the blocking admin, but do I get a reply? No. That pretty much ticks me off. If the blocking admin is seeing this: Get a god damn life other then framing people for misunderstandings! - Super48 23:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)