User talk:WhereAmI

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, WhereAmI, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  HollyAm 02:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your Article

I just wanted you to know that you are one of the very few Wikipedians that responded in such a nice and thoughtout manner when I nominated your article for deletion. It really was a pleasure working with you. I will see what I can do for your article, I will try to clean it up tomorrow. Yours, Philip Gronowski Contribs 04:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bobsmith319

Please do not post rude comments about other users. That was uncalled for to say "yay" because you thought I was banned from Wikipedia. I never sign with a link. Please DO NOT put such uncivil comments like that on Wikipedia again. Thanks, bobsmith319.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WhereAmI"

So you were not banned? Oh, I see. I should put you back on my watch page then. I also took the liberty of fixing my wiki page so it did not seem like you were talking about the section "Your article." I gave you your own section.--WhereAmI 04:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patrick Stewart

I agree, but have no admin privileges. List at WP:AIV. -- cmhTC 03:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Listed at WP:RPP which is a better place anyway. -- cmhTC 03:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] eh?

I don't use any IM services. Why? Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 07:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

It was User:Earthofsprit. They edited Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 15 with deceptive edit summaries. No loopholes involved (other than that page not being protected, last time they'll make that mistake). Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 07:11, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 4chan

I see you were there when they started posting the threads about this... Do you think they did it, or were just very interested spectators? gεиεяαιnonsensecomic 07:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Playstation 3 & the games

I will be keeping a close eye on the articles regarding PS3, please leave your hate here.

Can you lock the page then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.185.215 (talk)

I am working on it, its done.--WhereAmI 01:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Old School 2

Sure does. Click here. Or here. - crz crztalk 05:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't bite newcomers

Your message to User talk:69.181.229.140 was quite rude, and rather uncalled for. The user clearly hasn't read Wikipedia policies on NPOV and original research, but that doesn't give you the right to abuse him. Please read Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers, and in the future, try to be a bit nicer to what are clearly newbies. In addition, see Wikipedia:Vandalism for more civil ways to respond to good-willed vandalism. Chairman S. Talk Contribs 06:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

"AHSS selection of teachers is very poor, they choose anyone who will accept a low pay and this has affected the students a lot. An example would be the Chemistry teacher who currently teaches in AHSS grades 9 to 12, she is sexist, plays favorites, discriminates, puts her students down and makes the students feel stupid for asking questions. Some teachers can't even speak, let alone spell proper English while they teach in the SAT or IGSE streams. This school was one of the best and now its reputation is ruined and the school administration is crippled. A bad choice for your daughter or son."
Quit obviously, that is good willed vandalism.--WhereAmI 06:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Good-willed probably wasn't the best term to use, however, judging by his edit summary ("As a current graduate of the school I've updated the school reputation and the inside scoop of how the school has been running, hiring inexperienced and deranged teachers."), the user is probably fairly young, and was not deliberately meaning to ruin the credibility of Wikipedia. Instead, he/she seems to simply not understand that the material they wrote was unsuitable for an encylopaedia. Thus, one should assume good faith, and explain to the user the relevant policies, and how to contribute to Wikipedia constructively, instead of simply attacking them as you did. Chairman S. Talk Contribs 06:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I never judge by the summary until after I read the changes. To me, that summary is a duck down way of trying to get through the users and have the page permanent. They knew what they were doing.--WhereAmI 06:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers:

"Remember Hanlon's Razor. Behavior that appears malicious to experienced Wikipedians is more likely due to ignorance of our expectations and rules. Even if you're 100% sure that someone is a worthless, no-good, internet troll, a vandal, or worse, conduct yourself as if they're not. By being calm, interested, and respectful, your dignity is augmented, and you further our project."

My point is this: the user was not a known vandal. From the evidence at hand, it simply appeared that he/she did not understand Wikipolicy. You should not have made the assumption that he/she was a malicious vandal, and until you knew better, you should have treated him/her with a measure of civility or politesse. Of course you should have warned him/her, but you should have used a template from Wikipedia:Vandalism. Notice how none of those templates resort to personal attacks? Chairman S. Talk Contribs 07:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Timbaland

The Timbaland page is now semi-protected, so IPs cannot contribute. If something like this happens in the future, you can request semi-protection for the page at WP:RFPP, or report the vandal to WP:AIV (if they've continued to vandalise after they've been given a final warning). ... discospinster talk 18:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The Timabland article is completely verified by the youtube video.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebeeson (talk • contribs)

No, it is not.--WhereAmI 08:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with WhereAmI - the youtube video does not verify that plagarism took place. All we can say with certainty is that it is being reported. - O^O 22:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment on my talk page.

You recently left a comment on my talk page. Unfortuantely, I am not sure what you are talking about. Please reply so I may give you an informed answer. --Адам12901 Talk 08:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I have responded to the comment you left on my talk page. You may view it by clicking here. Thank you. --Адам12901 Talk 08:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Long absence from Wikipedia and I come across this warning from User:FG90 Help Me clear why this showed up.--WhereAmI 04:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

All I can say to that is... "huh." At this time, I don't see any reason this warning would apply to you, so I wouldn't worry too much. Let's see what the user who left it has to say for himself. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Update: User:FG90 admitted to just vandalizing on his talk page and I was hoping to get this "warning" transferred over to him.--WhereAmI 23:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Removed the fake warning and added FG90 (talk • contribs) to my watchlist. Don't worry about it.  :) ➪HiDrNick! 23:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bobsmith319

I've filed a RfC against him (I caught him removing the image again, and when I left a note on his talk page he became very hostile, but then, you know how that goes). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Bobsmith319 if you would come comment, that'd be appreciated. Kuronue 20:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused. Why did you endorse the "I don't see why there should be nude images in the article" viewpoint after going to the talk page and agreeing with the consensus that there should be a nude image? Was this a typo, or has your mind changed? I mean, you can endorse whatever you want, I'm just utterly confused here. Kuronue 23:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
That's alright. Basically you sign below the statement you most agree with; I signed in the section affirming that I've dealt with this guy in the past and he's a problem. Kuronue 20:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:AlMSNBC.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:AlMSNBC.JPG. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. 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.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow an image I uploaded in late 2006 goes unchanged for a year and a half and it gets deleted within 16 days because someone had a hissy fit with it?--WhereAmI (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Microsoft Home" series

I noticed your edit to Microsoft Home and want to ask more on the topic. :-) Can you email me? My email is the same as my username on Wikipedia and the domain is live.in - xpclient Talk 08:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)