User talk:Webapp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 WebApp 2 Copyright issue with WebAPP 3 Conflict of Interest 4 Don't do that again 5 Changing your Username whilst blocked

[edit] WebApp

Please don't remove boxes until someone else can look at them, or until you've made a substantial edit to your articles so they don't read like advertisements. Thanks! --JudahBlaze 00:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.--JudahBlaze 00:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your guidance, please note that despite all the help I got from you and other sysops, the article was deleted due to a misunderstanding and ego fights. Anyway thanks. Webapp 13:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright issue with WebAPP

Hello. Concerning your contribution, WebAPP, we 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.web-app.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=about. As a copyright violation, WebAPP appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. WebAPP 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:WebAPP. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at WebAPP, 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. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 04:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

If I have a permission from the owner of the article? I wrote the article MYSELF. So there is no copyrights violation, and besides I have only took one sentence from my other article! You did manage to create a confussion now, and I don't know if you are aware of it, but most of the sysops voted to delete this article because of this confussion and frustartion this created.Webapp 13:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The best way to demonstrate that the content is available for use on Wikipedia is to display a GFDL license on that page. We disagree about how much was taken from that web page: when I compared the versions there was substantial correlation between the two. In the end, the article was deleted because no reliable third-party sources were found to establish notability of the software. The process was hastened because of the inapropriate behavior of its defenders. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 14:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

ref: "inapropriate behavior of its defenders." The defenders were very frustarted that important information was hidden from the "decision makers" despite of repeated requests to provide this information and that links section was deleted repeatedly without and dicussion or qulified reason (see apology by the admin that deleted these links). The defenders also felt that the very unusall "ballot tag" was only added in order to create an "impression" for those decision makers who did not know what the case was all about, in other words stampling the defender as a "trouble maker" from start certainly did not lead to any constructive discussion. I think that both the offenders and the defenders can take selv criticks here. The bottom line is that it is Wikipedia that loses an important article about the best flat database cms out there, as far as I can see WP hasn't got any article about such cms. If I had the time and the interest to go through another such frustartion I might have cosnidered adding a generall article about such cms scripts. Webapp 11:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

In a discussion about deleting an article I'm learning that it is best for both sides to focus the applicable policies and guidelines. In this case, verifying the notability of the software according to the guidelines. Administrators and experienced users particularly should be setting a good example with their conduct. If you do go on to edit other articles, you will likely find less frustration than with this article. Biographies, companies and software are some of the hardest types of articles to successfully create because so many people have abused Wikipedia in the past and editors are particularly vigilant about these types of articles. I see you are having trouble changing your username; I'll put in a word for you and see if a bureaucrat (they have more tools than an admin) will come take a look at your request. Since you are block is for two reasons, they may decline. I don't know. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 02:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Conflict of Interest

It appears that there is a conflict of interest problem with your edits related to WebAPP. In cases like this, you should disclose your affiliation to WebAPP on your user page, refrain from editing any article in a way that is directly related to WebAPP and refrain from editing any competitor's article. You may, however, suggest changes on the talk pages of articles. Feel free to edit articles that are not related to WebAPP. This conflict of interest guideline is an important part of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 04:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

WebAPP has over 5000 users, it is an organization with a democratic system, it has not started by me and it does not belong to me or anyone else except its users, very much like Wikipedia, would you suggest that you being in a similliar way attouched to Wikipedia should have no rights to submit anything about wikipedia? Webapp 13:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I see what your saying. Then it is a matter of the individual deciding what subjects are too close to allow objective editing. I, for example, do not edit about my employer or my family's business. I do, however, occasionally edit things related to the county I live in. If you feel you are too close to a topic, the way to handle it is to make suggestions on the talk page for other neutral to consider. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 14:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't do that again

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. --Guinnog 22:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) (Review me!) 20:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

We don't put messages like this on articles. That's what the talk page is for. Neither do we throw the word vandalism around like that. If you add this again I will block you. --Guinnog 22:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked you for 3 hours. --Guinnog 22:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I pooped the links you were trying to add back onto the article as I didn't notice they were part of the revert, which was my mistake. Sorry. I will unblock you if you tell me you will not add messages to articles or abuse the term vandalism again. --Guinnog 22:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I see. I accept your appology for this mistake, no one is perfect we all do mistakes and besides the links were in the bottom of the page and hard to see, but I do not understand why despite of that you are saying you are sorry, de facto you insisted on deleting these links until the last moment.

I understand that the group dynamics are very important, and sysops/admins help eachother often more than helping guests, but what does these group dynamics worth if it compermises dignity and human values of others. The webapp article was started because it was requested by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_application they meant that since they used the Webapp redirect link that we should start WebAPP you can read about it in the discussion page there. The first article was not perfect but it went through evaluation by several sysops and survived for 2 months! Until one sysop dsicovered that one sentence was barrowed from www.web-app.net site, he meant it was copyvio, but latter he changed his mind as it was not copyvio! I wrote the original article myself in www.web-app.net and I can not violate any copyvio by copying once sentence from it myself! Besides it did not justify instant delete. I am not interested in having wars with teh sysops but I know that injustice was made here and the requests that came later for notability was just an excuse to satisfy one or another, there were written 3 articles about webapp and there are several reviews about this script, Rofer Moore ( http://www.roger-moore.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=ver ) and his work for children (unicef), Tony Curtis and 5000 other sites are using this script for free. I \You know that such a script "deserves" an article, but you made your choice, making one or two sysops happy was more important.

No hard feelings on my side, have fun. On :) Webapp 13:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't help with unblocking, but have a couple of comments. The blocking admin noted that you were blocked for advertising and inappropriate user name. There are certain names you cannot use (see Wikipedia:Username) and the name of a business or product is one such category. You are unlikely to be unblocked ever because of that rule. To work around that, you can ask for your username to be changed to something else of your choosing. However, you are unlikely to be unblocked unless you promise not to edit anything related to WebApp until you get more experience editing on Wikipedia. Finally, speculating on the motives of others—admins in this case—is not helpful. Sometimes its better to leave some things unsaid; express your frustration more directly. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 14:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. I trust wisdom more than justice in this case and have no problem whatever to stay out of flamings etc. There are approx. 5000 sites using this free open source script (as you can see from the members list and the posts in our support forums in www.web-app.net), multiply this 5000 by an average of 100 users per site and then you are talking about 1/2 million users that use the script, and this is an unfair estimation, as you see here: http://www.thecommitted.net/ (she had 5000 members and recently trimmed the list there )and many other places that have several thousands users. I think that it should be wikipedia own interest to write an article about it, and again it was not me or anyone else tha suggested writing the article at the first place, it was the editors in web_application that meant that there was a need for it. Webapp 18:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changing your Username whilst blocked

If you wish to change your username whilst blocked (although an administrator may still deny you the chance because of the vandalism in your contributions) you can place {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your User talk page, and someone will see to it that you are unblocked for 15 minutes so you can edit WP:CHU, although as I said, if you were blocked more because of the advertising / vandalism then the inappropriate username, then the unblock req will be denied. — Deon555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 02:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I will try it, please note that I was clocked twice: 1.) For 3 hours because of a misunderstanding, please view my talk page and see the apology by the admin whom blocked me. 2.) Because of an "advertizing and inappropriate username". Bottom line, I am no sheep. And yes I did some mistakes, I promise to do my best not to repeat any of the mistakes. Cetianly I am not going to absue the chance if I get unblocked, I would use it to change my username, if my intention here was to abuse or cheat I would start a new account withot telling.

Kind regards On Elpeleg Webapp 23:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. You've been unblocked now. I've forwarded your request to Wikipedia:Changing username on your behalf. --  Netsnipe  ►  14:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! Webapp 21:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)