Sept - Dec 2004

Clarifying the zone system darkroom section

Good clarification of the darkroom portion of the Zone system, Duk. I'd planned to work that over again. It still needs some help, as it implies that selenium toner is necessarily "subtle," when in fact it can radically change the color of a print. Have a look at my re-revision. --NathanHawking 00:40, 2004 Sep 29 (UTC)

Yes, looks good, I wanted to specify the selenium toner with regards to the zone system. Duk 15:54, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Vandal/Troll

Hiya.. I've spelled things out on User talk:Chuck F and Talk:Exxon Mobil - if he continues his behaviour without engaging in discussion, I'll move on to reverts, warnings and if necessary a block. —Stormie 22:57, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

I have an RFC pretty much written for Chuck F. Basically, he's circumvented 3RR by editing from two IPs and his account. He changed votes on VfD, and changed my article content dispute on the RFC page. If he comes back with any more 3RR violations or changing other people's comments, I will post the RFC. I don't think this is justified yet, although if you want to see it I'll post it on a temp page. Thanks for helping Duk and Stormie. Rhobite 02:44, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

Oh, this is also him: (203.112.19.195 | 203.112.19.195 | 203.112.19.195) Rhobite 02:46, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

The 66 IP is probably NOT Chuck. Chuck's two IPs are in Japan, the 66 one is in Ohio. Chuck has made many edits which would be considered right-wing, the 66 IP has made edits that suggest a left-wing bias. Rhobite 02:54, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

After his recent activity on Michael Badnarik, I listed Chuck on WP:RFC. The request is at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chuck F. If you think it's justified, I'd appreciate if you certified it. Thanks. Rhobite 01:04, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

Pud

Hey - you're the same guy !! Wizzy 23:33, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

the last time we talked you suggested that the brayton cycle page be moved to the gas turbine page,

Haven't we talked since then ? I read my comments again only after I had posted to Talk: .. I thought it was a good idea then - you now own the page(s). Wikipedia says - be bold. Just make sure the same thing is not being re-hashed on both pages. Wizzy 00:12, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

ISRO

Hi Duk - copyvios are usually listed for around two weeks (plus or minus a couple of days, depending on how busy the sysops looking after the page are). It's just on two weeks now, so I'd say expect it to be acted upon any day now. It looks like they're a little behind just at the moment - copyvios from September 23 still haven't been processed. --Rlandmann 23:20, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

RfC re: Chuck F

Hi Duk, I was reviewing the current RfC requests and noticed that you endorsed the action against Chuck F, but I couldn't find the evidence that you had contacted him to try to resolve the issue, as required for a certification. Would you please do that, or have someone else who did do that certify? Otherwise the RfC may have to be removed after 48 hours. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 18:47, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

203.10.121.89

Thanks for telling me. He'll be banned if he does anything more. - Evil saltine 23:54, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Trangia Image

Hi, I have a Trangia stove including wind shield and pots and could take a photo of its components or assembled if it would be of any use. Though for the section you have used the image in I guess just the burner is most apropriate. Martyman 04:30, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

PVDF

It looked like it was messed up. That is, I'm not a chemics, but I'm pretty sure there's supposed to be a symbol for an element at the end of every bond our double-bond and it looked like the ]n part was a messed up element. And I couldn't find the real formula or contact the original author. So, rather than misinform people or confuse them, I deleted it. If you know the actual diagram, or you know I am wrong and being dumb, please put it in. :P --flyhighplato 14:56, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC) (reposted from my talk page, for your convenience)

Three Gorges Dam

I couldn't find the original article where i got that information, but here's portion from a different one: Controlling sedimentation is a very uncertain process. As Luna B. Leopold states, "The sedimentation conditions at various times during the first 100 years of operation have been forecast by use of mathematical models and physical analogues that involve many assumptions of unverified reliability." This was the reason why one of China's largest dams, the Banqiao Dam, collapsed in 1975. Dam officials could not open the sluice gates because they were blocked by heavy layers of sediment (Topping, 1996). This dam was part of a major disaster when it collapsed in August, 1975, with sixty-one other dams. An estimated 86,000 to 230,000 people died and an estimated 11 million were stricken by disease and famine.

Another possible cause for the destruction of dams is earthquakes. Seismologists claim the reservoir will be over a seismically active fault line and the enormous weight of the reservoir could cause an earthquake which could possibly destroy the dam (Topping, 1996).

This article can be found at {http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~sustain/global/sensem/tyaa97.htm The Damming of the Yangtze River].

If that article isn't sufficient, tell me, and I'll try to find a better one. Thanks. Cyrloc 16:12, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Great! I don't think I'll be able to write that article into the Three Gorges Dam page for a bit, would you mind doing it? If I happen to have time before you finish, I'll be glad to do it. Thanks.

Cyrloc 21:27, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Your addition looks good. I think that basically covers everything i wanted to add before. Thanks!

Cyrloc 19:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Jimbo more like Angela

I've just had a good laugh looking at Image:Jimbo_more_like_Angela.jpg. Thanks for creating it! :) BACbKA 22:26, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

yup

That's what happens when I'm bored (because my fiance is playing hours' worth of GTA:Vice City) and patrolling recent changes. :) [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 02:31, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Did you know has been updated

And your article Mel Lewis is now on the Main Page. Enjoy! [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 19:45, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Banqiao Dam

Thanks for this article. I had heard of this disaster, but didn't have any details. As for the dangers of energy production, it makes Chernobyl look minor by comparison. pstudier 05:53, 2004 Nov 30 (UTC)

I've removed your dam-article and put the revised version back on the talk page. There were too many people waiting to have an older article featured. And since 72 hours is the maximum for inclusion, I think older articles should get their chance and be first. Your article will probably be up with the next update (after a minimum of a 6 hour wait). Hope that's okay with you. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 09:07, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Well, technically speaking the talk page isn't a waiting list, but with recent influx of suggestions it has become one. And unless the influx of requests becomes unwieldy, I'd like to give everyone (especially the newbies) their 6 hours of fame. Feel free to update, just check the rules outlined on talk and you'll be fine. :-)

With my last change at 9 UTC this morning the earliest time for the next refreshment will be at 15:00 UTC. You're invited to try and do that update if you like. :-)[[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 11:14, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Just a heads-up. It's in there now... [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 20:23, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Ringouselsm.JPG is 1905, so pub domain

Widow's peak

Yeah, I would -- at least a whole picture. Maybe I can provide you with a close up or something. I'll see if I can get one and then upload it and leave you a note. CryptoDerk 19:32, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long.. I actually thought it's been longer than 3 days. Anyway, usually when I mess with my hair I can't see it, so I just let my hair hang out for a day. I took 4 pictures and uploaded the best one at Image:widpeak.jpg. Feel free to include it in the article — I wouldn't feel totally right adding it myself. CryptoDerk 00:00, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

No controversy or insult

I am sorry that you interpreted my message like that. If you read what I wrote you will see that I did not say you called me a dunce.

My usage of quotes was perhaps a bad choice. What I meant was to illustrate a one interpretation of the mindset I found in the FAC discussion... a kind of mindset I myself found disturbing. If I look at what you quoted, you did not participate in the discussion other than one post in the beginning and therefore there is no reason for you to feel targeted personally by what I wrote, quite simply because you weren't. --J-Star 15:29, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)

Adminship

I'm wondering if you'd be interested in me nominating you for adminship. I've taken a pretty good look at your edit history and I think you'd have use for adminship tools, use them appropriately, and would make a good admin as a whole. I think perhaps a couple of comments on talk pages have been a bit harsh, but I can also see that you've apologized in some cases (such as the one above), which says a lot. I'd be sure to point all this out, and more positives, in your nomination. Although I haven't looked at every single edit to talk pages, etc., if you feel you'd like to point anything of relevance out to me, let me know. CryptoDerk 03:07, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Done. CryptoDerk 14:53, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Ho ho ho. CryptoDerk 19:30, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Congrats

Your Soda can stove article made front page. Great work! - Ta bu shi da yu 15:00, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations, Duk!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 18:13, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dec 2004 - Apr 2005

head (hydraulic)

Thanks for getting in touch. Well my impetus was to make sure that when somebody typed head they'd most likely get what they were looking for, and in the meantime I noticed lots of links to the disambiguation and tried my best to fix them. As I don't know a lot about hydraulics and steam I'd be happy to leave the details of that area to you. I've just got through editing about eight pages of links so I'm in need of a rest. Thanks. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:57, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

DYN

Gear pumps is on the Did You Know now. -- user:zanimum

Re: copyright status of Image:Blackburn rovers crest.png

It was originally used on the Blackburn Rovers football team page. Now it's an orphaned image and can be deleted. Motor 15:57, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

RobertATaft

I clearly indicated on the Image page where it came from, not only the image itself but the page it came from. Rick K 09:28, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Greenhouse gas

And thank you for maintaining consistency in supporting the policy, rather than supporting a view, in light of new information. I respect this. — Cortonin | Talk 19:36, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

30-06

Nice, and you even fixed the dimensions! iMeowbot~Mw 00:13, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Return of the Untagged Image project

You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Linkage (mechanical)

Really nice article, well done! Only problem - under Grueblers equation (should be Gruebler's, I've changed it) there is inconsistency between the labels on the diagrams and that given in the formula. I don't know which is the more standard labelling but it ought to be sorted out. I've left a note on the article talk page. Thanks! --VivaEmilyDavies 17:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for replying - I have left a comment on the talk page for you --VivaEmilyDavies 18:18, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Did you know has been updated and a fact from the article Linkage (mechanical), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

Warofdreams 11:20, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Jimbo/Angela

You didn't blend the background on Jimbo's head to the black in your version, and there are cutout areas visible. I can't see and green in the face at all. Anyway - just trying to help, but it was your idea, so do what you like, I'm not really bothered. ed g2s • talk 04:58, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Same edit, you might not be able to see it on your monitor but if you increase the brightness on the image you'll see what I'm talking about. ed g2s • talk 16:17, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User:Vaoverland - administrator

Thank you for supporting my appointment as an administrator. I appreciate the pat on the back this represents. It felt nice to read the comments during the voting. Please let me know if you see something I should be doing as admin, as I intend to be fairly passive unless it is clear I should do otherwise. Thanks. Mark in Richmond. Vaoverland 20:06, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for doing some of the image deletion! – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 19:30, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

There's actually no difference anymore. If you delete an image, the image description page goes as well. And if you delete an image description page, the image is deleted as well. It doesn't say this anywhere in the help. Perhaps it should - it's useful information to know. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 19:50, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Chicago Skyline at Sunset.jpg

Stitched per your request. This image is slightly lower resolution than Image:Chicago Skyline at Sunset.png. Were the pre-stitched files you uploaded the same ones used to make the .png panorama? Duk 10:10, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes they were. Do you think you can try for a higher res version? It looks perfect and I would nominate it for a Featured Picture but only if it was a better res. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:17, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It seems very grainy. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I tried the autostitcher. Works very nice. I uploaded a new version of the png to the Commons. Thanks again. -- AllyUnion (talk) 13:16, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, it is being well received at Featured picture candidates. Thanks again! -- AllyUnion (talk) 22:52, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Z machine.jpg

Fine by me. Thanks. -- BRIAN0918 16:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism by VANdal

Hi. We both blocked this new vandal at the same time. My block had an expiry of 24 hours, so I thought that you'd like to know that, just in case it does actually expire in 24 hours (I'm not sure which block has precedence when this happens, the most recent or the shortest). The spurious articles are prime candidates for speedy deletion, but unfortunately I have to leave soon, tearing myself away from Wikipedia yet again. Cheers, Fire Star 15:05, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As we found out on nl wikipedia recently the shortest .... Waerth 04:50, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That image

Well, some people are of the opinion that the site doesn't actually own the copyright on the image, even though they claim to. There are probably a lot of people who have put a lot of effort into defending the image, so they are hesitant to believe it really is a copyright violation after all. There are some pointed emotions about the whole affair, as you have no-doubt noticed. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:48, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Viscounts of Arbuthnott

Oops! Okay, I took care of these now. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 12:49, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

Unverified orphans.

Well that depends. If it's obviously only available under fair use, I'd list it on WP:IFD as a "fair use but no use" image to get deleted after a week. If you're pretty sure it's a snapshot taken by the uploader but not tagged, then you could tag it {{GFDL-presumed}} if you wanted. Otherwise, I've been listing these on WP:PUI, and I think that's the best place for them. It gives everyone a month, and it deals with the central issue. Thanks, – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 11:25, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Laminar shear flow.PNG

Picture was just intended to illustrate definitions of rate of strain and shear stress. It's not any particular geometry. Hope that helps Cutler 10:26, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for supporting my adminship — I vow to use my super powers for good not evil. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:23, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for the vote at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Henrygb2. It has made my week. --Henrygb 01:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio matter

I'm looking for an admin (or other) who is knowledgeable about wikipedia copyright violation issues. The situation is that user:DickClarkMises posted text to Stephan Kinsella and marked the edit (dump of auto-bio from stephankinsella.com). The referenced website has a copyright notice (since amended) which appears to me to be at odds with the GFDL. The subject of the bio has appeared (he says he is not the original editor) and claims that the text, which he wrote, can be used by Wikipedia and he claims that his copyright is GFDL compatible. Furthermore, he has repeatedly removed the {copyvio} tag. There has been some impolite discussion at Talk:Stephan Kinsella, and I've started a new stub at Stephan Kinsella/Temp. Any suggestions for how to proceed? Or another admin to ask? Cheers, -Willmcw 23:37, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC) (also posted to User talk:Infrogmation, but he appears to be busy).

Thanks, I replied on my talk page, user_talk:Willmcw - , Willmcw 03:47, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, I don't think that either myself or the other editor actually violated the 3RR. Our fourth reverts came just over 24 hours after the first. Anyway, water under the bridge. Thanks again for your help. Cheers, -Willmcw 19:40, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but this had me laughing and I thought you might enjoy it too (well, at least you're the only editor who'd get it). The most unusual copyright statement I've ever seen. [1] Cheers, -Willmcw 22:25, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Autofellatio2

I would prefer that you didn't just remove my posting from ifd without at least trying to speak to me first. Also do you think you need to use such phrases as "you need to do some more homework"? I find that quite demeaning and a little aggresive. Perhaps something like "can you try to provide some further evidence" would be better. I will be reposting the image in due course, although not for Copyvio reasons. TigerShark 18:46, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Duk. Thanks for your response. No offence taken. Cheers. TigerShark 19:00, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Duk - Thanks for letting me know. I've provided links for future reference to the relisting and my comment. Demi ^T/_C 20:37, 2005 Apr 10 (UTC)

PUI

That's fine, I think. I wasn't sure of the correct place to file them, so I appreciate the help. Incidentally, how could I go about clearing the status of these images? It would be nice to have some guidelines as to what I can use from the Biographical Dictionary. Thanks for the indulgence. Yours, Meelar (talk) 01:00, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars copyvio images

Thank you for removing that image on Tatooine. I believe the anon is doing the same to various other articles, posting images that are copywrited or have no tags. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:05, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

I have posted the No Source code on most of his uploads. He/she is persistent in uploading low quality crap that has no source other than Google images. For the two I posted the Imagevio on, I stil have trouble getting the code to work right, to where it displays the URL in the box. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:35, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
- No worrys on the miswording of the code. I put copyvio down alot. I've fixed any that do read copyvio, however, and changed them to imagevio, plus applied the url= part. :D -- Riffsyphon1024 18:00, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Body Language

I wrote that piece such a long time ago. I don't know how someone wrote a piece that is very similar to my own because I understand that some sentences are either exactly the same or very close, so I don't want to have any disputes about the article. If it is so close to that other piece then please go ahead and delete it because I don't want to get into any disputes with the person who wrote the other website. --TracyRenee 12:43, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thx

Thanks for taking the effort to notify me. I am on foundation and wikipedia-l so I saw your comments. We will see what way it goes. I will not discuss to heavily though, am a littlebit tired of discussions. The nl.wikipedia is going through big growing pains, and am trying to convince people there that a good arbitration/negotiation process etc. is needed as we grow, instead of having these huge discussions all the time while the trolls run free. Waerth 17:42, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Carlos Martínez (actor)

Hi Quadell, you wrote a replacement stub at /Temp for this article. The article can't be deleted because of block compression. Is it alright to replace the main article with your re-write and leave the copyvio stuff in history? --Duk 17:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think that would be fine. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 18:56, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Changing the copyvio template

I've re-worked the copyvio template to address some problems users have mentioned to me. Please take a look at User:Feco/Templates/copyvioDRAFT and tell me what you think. I also posted more detailed info to Template talk:Copyvio Feco 21:24, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Next time, when you welcome new contributors who still have a anonymous IP address instead of a user name, please type {{subst:anon}}. Thanks. Zzyzx11 | Talk 00:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{subst:welcome}} is designed for new users who have just created a username. The major difference with {{anon}} is that it basically invites new contributors without a user name to create a new account. Zzyzx11 | Talk 01:05, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Death Cab

Oh, OK. I thought we weren't allowed to have copyvios in the history. Thanks again, Meelar (talk) 16:12, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

Eugen Dühring

Why are you going to delete Eugen Dühring?? The Encyclopedia of marxism is copylefted, you can copy it as long as you give the source.

The page about marxists.org is all written by me; and August Willich is copied from them (also by me). --145.94.41.95 17:25, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your support on my RfA! I shall attempt to put the shiny new buttons to good use. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:15, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bowles Hall photo

I've gotten permission from the photo taker and put it back up. You can check it to make sure it complies with proper wiki copyright format. Thanks. [[2]] Wodan 18:33, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Apr - July 2005

Research project on wiki contributors

Hello-

I am aware that this is not the typical message usually posted, so I would like to apologize and ask for your kind understanding. I am a PhD student at Syracuse University School of Information Studies. My advisor and I are working on a research project on contributors to Wikis. This project received Institutional Review Board Approval number 05048. I would like to have a brief email dialog with you about your experience as a Wikipedia contributor. Please respond to this posting or send me an email at wikiresearch@hotmail.com, if you would be willing to answer a couple of quick questions. I would like to assure you that your comments will remain confidential.

Best regards, -Isabelle Fagnot

Diagnosis Murder

Permision was granted as you can see in talk the email is size +2. Please see Talk: Diagnosis Murder. This has been the second copy vio report. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 22:48, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How do you expect me to prove it? --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 22:51, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is a list of emails in chronological order. The copy vio notice told you which page this "copy vio" was from. Go to that page and you will see that the e-mail of the remote user is identical to the one provided. Feel free to e-mail her. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 22:53, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There were two web sites, the one presentted first gave me permission, the second one, I didnt bother asking, instead I rewrote the material from it. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 04:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello? --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 06:28, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I dont remeber the URL, it was on the Copy vio tag which is not even in history anymore. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 16:26, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio

Thanks for the heads-up. I found a Google match at [3]. I'm not sure if this is a mirror site, but there is a copyright notice at the bottom of their page. Again, thanks! Wikivacation resuming. :^) - Lucky 6.9 21:56, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:204.184.37.2

Hello - Your block on 204.184.37.2 isn't working. Whoever it is has a thing about the El Nino page and I getting real tired of reverting the vandalism. Sorry I'm in a bad mood. Can you do something about this person?

Thanks - Paul Reiser (PAR) PAR 17:50, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

22 or 21

Dear DUK, I also was thinking the number to be 22, then I found a reference of all the names, which, I am giving in the article who got Indian Order of Merit. Actually, I feel that this article has a lot of potentials - it can be developed to become a beautiful article. By the way, how you got in the topic. I was just roaming wikipedia by clicking "Random page" - and landed on this page. I am to edit the article further. We all should continue to research the correct number. What do you say? --Bhadani 17:24, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

- Yes sure, I had guessed about the copyvio part and certainly I understand that you must have put up a stub in a hurry, as topic is interesting. I shall continue to edit and expand for a day or two. The map portion or depending on time at your disposal, you may please do whatever is possible. Once, I finish, say by next 24 hours, you please revise the article, and reduce / expand, as may be required, of course, at your convenience and depending on the time at your disposal (as you are not free, being an admin, u have several things to do)- ok, bye now.--Bhadani 17:46, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Saragarhi

hello, though delayed, I could give some inputs to the article. I will do something more in a day or two. In case you find time, plz create a map, etc. thanks.--Bhadani 18:58, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Ramapough Mountain Indians

howdy! I have left you a msg about possible copyright infringement. The website where original doc was placed has open policy on copying source to other sites. pls see updated notes on page and remove copyright notice violation. Whomever submitted this as an infringement never read state of nj copyright policy posted on website. thank you.

steven User:68.37.88.71

Rubber Duk

Duk, what type of name is that to christen you offspring. I mean did you parents even have a hate for you? email me back ave_it99@hotmail.com

I'm new:)

Hi,I see the image you upload about pumped storage hydro,I want to write its Chinese edition .Could you tell me where I can get the raw images about hydroelectricity without any English annotate,please. --Super1 05:25, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Sure. Which image, what is the file name ??--Duk 05:32, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Copyright Question

I replied to your email as per your request, let me know if you have any questions or comments --NEWUSER 22:00, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:Eddie Schneider parents.jpg

So do you want me to remove who's collection it came from or do you want me to change that I am releasing it into the public domain? I don't understand your complaint about my image for "Eddie Schneider". Why do you want to delete it? The copyright notice says "This image has been released into the public domain by the copyright holder, its copyright has expired, or it is ineligible for copyright. This applies worldwide." Please let me know why you seem to belive that this copyright notice is invalid. Or show me that this image appears with a copyright notice elsewhere. I think the burden lies with you to prove my copyright notice is not legally valid.

Correct, its just a family photo, no implied or actual copyright, just from the FAMILY collection that belonged to Ralph, its not a copyrighted photo. By publishing it I am entering it into the public domain. See yesterdays New York Times for Britney Spears vs the man who wrote her music for updated public domain vs copyright fight. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 22:48, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Jacques Mesrine and Ruth Ellis Articles

Hey Duk, I was the one who had originally posted the copyright violation notices. I'll help with the re-write on Ruth Ellis if I can find some info...but right now I am in the middle of a bunch of school work. Thanks, Dbraceyrules 01:35, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Fair use

At my talk page you have posted a question about the free use decision tree. This decision tree was constructed for a talk page by another user, namely Zeimusu. I merely included it in the mainspace text and added several links to Wikipedia:Fair use on other pages. --Eleassar777 22:15, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

You have to go through the history of the "Wikipedia:Fair use talk page" - discussion page. --Eleassar777 22:26, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't remember anymore where I got it. Perhaps it was from meta - I'm just guessing. However, I am sure it was created by Zeimusu, as this is what I put in the <--! --> intertext when copying. Contact him and good luck! --Eleassar777 22:38, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it is exactly this. --Eleassar777 22:41, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Panko

I'd just found the source (I assume that you meant [4]), returned to the entry to add the details — and you'd beaten me to it. That's ten minutes of my lfe that I'll never get back... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:28, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Ramapough Mountain Indians

Duk, The info posted to the temp page is from my website. I am the web admin for the tribal website. If possible, I would like to explain why the info posted is offensive. the info listed is wrong. We do not, nor have we ever spoke Jersey Dutch. Our ancestors spoke Munsee and i'm sure they had to learn English and Dutch to communicate with the European invaders. The part that is really upsetting is many site derive their info from yours and it spreads the lies. In the temp folder is the correct info which is on our website written by our chief. Please, either post the correct info or delete us out of your site altogether. Thank you.

Steven (User:Ramapoughnative1)

Hi Steven, I understand that you are frustrated with this page and will try my best to help you fix it. New users are often frustrated by the wiki process, it takes a little time to see how things work here. Some tips;

In general, don't copy and paste text from other websites into wikipedia, it will likely be deleted on copyright violation grounds.
If you are the author, or have permission to use previously published material in wikipedia, then you need to state this on the article's talk page. Include contact information (for example, refer to your tribal website's contact information).
Offensive material- The best way to attack this is to make your case on the talk page. And then, slowly fix the article little by little. If a previous version of the article is deleted and replaced with your version, the editors who wrote the earlier version might get upset, even if they had some incorrect information.

If you have any more problems, don't hesitate to ask--Duk 15:46, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi Duk!

Thank you for understanding. For future reference, my email address is (see history). Thank you again and i'm sure i'll have more questions. (User:Ramapoughnative1)

Infectious salmon anemia

I think the use of the text is ok under the provisions of the of the MRC FoI scheme, I've asked on the copyvio talk for some more feedback--nixie 00:28, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Copyright violation. Help needed.

Hi there, I have a problem with a page I worked on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Peter_of_Bulgaria How do I fix this copyright violation. Please help. George

Hi George, The first sentence of the the first two paragraphs are from [5] (that's as far as I checked). In general, don't copy and paste copyrighted material into wikipedia (unless you can license the material per the GFDL to wikipedia). If you want to quote material, then enclose the quote in ''. Don't pass the words off as your own.

To fix this article, re-write at the link given on the copvio notice. Just be sure to use your own words.--Duk 16:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Semiconductor manufacturing

A discussion whose topic is

Semiconductor manufacturing

now appears on User talk:Jerzy/Semiconductor manufacturing; the following points describe the discussion:

2 msgs, 16:55 thru 20:45, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
1. 16:55, 19 May 2005 D
2. 20:45, 19 May 2005 J
2 participants: Jerzy~t~*; User:Duk~t~*.
general topic(s):

merck records

duk im not sure of the process for undoing the copyright notice, but if it has anything to do with you, i'd like you to take care of it Merck Records/Temp. Aghost 23:00, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Hey Duk, This is gabe koch, i run merck records, i updated and revised the bio info on the Merck Records page on the Temp Page, so you can remove the copyright infringement bit whenever you get a chance. thanks. -Gabe

Thanks, all taken care of. --Duk 04:36, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Can you find my entry?

Hi I want to create an entry for the Bulgarian Khan Sabin, but instead of it, when I click on the link, I am being taken to a disambiguation page. How do I fix that in the future and how to find my article if there is any ambiguety? What do I do so I can be given the chance to enter the information?

Hi, you need to edit List of Bulgarian monarchs and change the link from [[Sabin]] to [[kahn Sabin]] (or whatever the correct title for him was, I'm not sure what the naming convention is for Bulgarian leaders in the eighth century, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions). Once you've corrected the link on List of Bulgarian monarchs and saved the page, the link will turn red (assuming the article doesn't exist yet). You can then click on the red link and write the article.

Also, if you register an account with wikipedia (it only takes a few seconds) you will get a Watchlist that will automatically help you track the pages you work on, and will show you when someone else has edited any pages on your watchlist. Creating an account is easy and allows you to remain anonymous if you wish. I hope this helps. --Duk 04:32, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Hwy Duk, How do I contact a user by the name of EvilZak? He deleted my Khan Sabin entry from the disambiguation page and altogher. Regards,

Hi Georko, I set up the page you wanted at Khan Sabin and fixed the links at Sabin and List of Bulgarian monarchs. --Duk 06:29, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know has been updated

and a fact from the article Harvey Hubbell, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

Thank you

Hi Duk,

Thanks for helping out. I plan on reading the pages you posted in your reply.

Regards,

George

copyvio removal

Hello there. You removed the {{copyvio}} notices that I placed on Saint Regina and Sam Cobean. The first stated rm copyvio, PD Catholic Encyclopedia ({{catholic}}) and the second stated rm copyvio, biography.ms is a mirror that is failing to credit wikipedia.

Regarding both items, is there a list anywhere of legitimate places to use as source material? The only ones I am aware of are the ones I have seen mentioned in some articles, such as the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica.

For the latter item, how do you know that it is a mirror? Has it given credit in the past, or ...?

Thanks.

--TheParanoidOne 05:39, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out those resources. And no, it hasn't scared me off yet. ;-) --TheParanoidOne 08:26, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

ganguro

Yes, I was checking to see if the pic or the link was gone. I was going to contact SA myself (if they are even the original owner), but if you're doing it, then I'll leave it up to you. Stratton 20:41, May 29, 2005 (UTC)--

Moyer Factory copyright dispute

Thanks Duk. RJII 15:29, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

FTMME

I wasn't aware about the resolution, I thought it was an unilateral remove. I'll clear the copyvio tag drini ☎ 22:01, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

biography.ms

Hi Fibonacci, Did you receive any reply from the email you sent these people regarding their non-compliance with the GDFL? This site is starting to rank very high on Google searches, and people are still tagging Wikipedia articles as copyvios based on this site not crediting us. I'm wondering what more we can do.--Duk 15:19, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No answer yet - I'm starting to suspect the didn't even read my message. I don't want to wait for this problem to be magically solved, but I don't know what more to do. If there is something more I can do to help (to take this site down - it seems the only possible solution), please tell me - I'll be more than happy to help! --Fibonacci 02:53, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re: GAP Project

Hi there. You tagged GAP Project as a copyvio a while back, and deleted it later. What parts of this revision was a copyright violation, and why was the entire text removed? User:Coolcat said that (s)he wrote the entire article from scratch after the first copyvio. Thanks for your help. -Frazzydee|✍ 14:47, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Dark_Doktrines

Hello!

Thanks for the comment. I hastily reverted the aforementioned page. It seemed like the quickest way to fix the obviously spammed article. I'll follow protocol in the future.

FredrikM 21:55, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image tagging

Hello Duk

Not sure what you mean about only uploading images in the public domain. The photo removed was one I took in 1980 so I think I have the right to put it on the internet as the copyright belongs with me ... maybe you should check with me first before removing it.

Have read the copyright info and think I understand. I will reframe the text on all images, sorry about that.--Zed1 07:06, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Have read the copyright info and think I understand. I will redit the text on all images, sorry about that.--Zed1 07:08, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Duk

Thanks for your support on my Adminship request.

My RFA: Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:35, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Duk, thank you for your vote of confidence on my recent successful RFA, it was much appreciated. I will work to demonstrate that your trust was well-placed. Fawcett5 19:44, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thank you for voting on my RFA. Have some pie! I was pleasantly surprised by the sheer number of supporters (including several people that usually disagree with my opinion). I shall do my best with the proverbial mop. Yours, R adiant _>|< 08:14, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Huang Sheng Shyan - Article

Hi Duk,

the article I wrote about Huang Sheng Shyan got blocked for a possible copyright infringement from the source http://www.taijiquan.co.nz/journey.htm

Now, the site http://www.taijiquan.co.nz/ is maintained by Dean Cudmore (dean@taijiquan.co.nz) of the TAIJIQUAN SCHOOL OF CENTRAL EQUILIBRIUM, Auckland, New Zealand. I am a member of this taiji club and copied the above text from this site with full consent by the TAIJIQUAN SCHOOL OF CENTRAL EQUILIBRIUM.

So could you please put the page about Huang Sheng Shyan back online or tell me how to "proof" our rights in this copyright issue.

Cheers, Herbert Langsteiner User:Herbert Langsteiner

See your talk page or the articles talk page.--Duk 15:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

St. Thomas Aquinas High School

I believe I have provided a new article for this subject that does not violate any copyrights. It is all information that I know and am familiar with personally. Please review the new information and let me know if it is a problem. Nothing has been directly quoted from the school's official website. It seems to me that it is just as proper as another similar high school entry I found for St. Xavier High School in Cincinnati, OH and that entry was permitted.

Justin Dublikar jdublikar@bakerfirm.com User:24.123.47.122

Earnest Harmon reply

OK Thanks I will look at things over the weekend regarding the editing and copyright stuff

Wayne Author / Poet / Publisher HMS Press & CPA London Imprint: Electronic Bookstore http://www3.sympatico.ca/cpa Website: http://www.mirror.org/wayne.ray Canadian Poetry Association: http://www.canadianpoetryassoc.com

POB 340 Station B London Ontario N6A 4W1 cpa@sympatico.ca aphorysm@hotmail.com 519-680-3684 http://cpalondon.bravejournal.com/

Ernest Harmon Air Force Base revisions

I have revised and shortened the article on EHAFB. I could not locate the copyleft license I had see earlier and can put the license in later. I have put a notice inthe copyright infringement page as you requested. I have added the Bib list as well, I had forgotten it in the original

Wayne Ray

Thanks

Hi, thanks for reverting vandalism on my User Page. I feel some people like to vandalize user and other pages for plain fun (lol), and excitement. --Bhadani 00:50, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Canadian Poetry section

In Wikipedia there is a section called List of Canadian Poets. Is there an editor for this section. I am mainly interested in working in and editing in this section. Does it need a mentor editor etc.

Wayne Ray

Trench War mess up

Dear Duk, I am cpuwhiz11 who is currently being a historical advisor to TGTW (The Great Trench War) which is affiliated with Battlefield 1918. I posted this page with all the information on with permission from the TGTW's current leader Leonidas (email: trench_gamer@msn.com ). As stated at the bottom of the article a clear note indicated that almost all of the information was copied with permission from the TGTW website. I am deeply sorry this mess up has occured I am sure we can work it all out I know you might think I am lying to you if so feel free to contact Leonidas, anyone else associated with TGTW/BF1918 or make a post on our forum (http://www.battlefield1918.de/forum/74/) to confim my story. If you feel the need to contact me you can reach me at my email at dynamicpaul@msn.com or on MSN instant messenger as cpuwhiz11. Please try to clear up this as soon as possible I appreciate any thing you can do.

From, User:cpuwhiz11

Help!

Is there a human I can talk to on the phone. If my boss, who works in Entertainment and has sold over 5,000 copies of his movies and I add the biography that his publicist wrote and he pays for and owns, I do not understand why that is copyright infringement. He owns that copyright. Sorry, I am so confused and I would like to resolve this issue. You are the one that removed the article, so that is why I am coming to you. Thanks for your help on this.

Manchester, NH

Hi, I don't understand your revert on the Manchester, New Hampshire page. Someone needed to edit the portion with the comment that was added by an anon, but why did you revert the article so far back? Your comment says something aobut a copy-right violation, but a few quick google searches don't turn up anything (though I didn't have time to try too many). Probably I'm just missing something, but can you explain why did you do away with so much of the stuff on the page? Zarvok | Talk 17:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

def of soc copyright

Hey, I meant to put it back up when I got your first message. Forgot about it. I took it off because it had been there so long and couldn't get any answers on what the procedure was. So an admin has to do it. I see. By the way it's a ridiculous case. As if it's a copyright violation to quote a definition. Whatever. By the way, someone put the definitions of capitalism article back as well. You may want to take care of that. RJII 00:54, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Duk, I know this is overdue, but I want to thank you for supporting my RFA. Thanks to everyone who supported me, I am now an admin, and I have been using my powers to help further Wikipedia as a whole. Thank you! Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 23:52, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Definitions of capitalism

In response to your message on my talk page, I can't really agree with your point 1 on general principle. I will certainly remove copyright violation notices when they are placed improperly. In this case, I'm not sure if I did the right thing or not. It's true that no url is not a sufficient reason to remove one, but it would be good if you would describe your reasons for nominating it on the page itself, on the talk page, or at least in an edit summary. The problem is this case is that we had this page stuck in a limbo with no movement in either direction for a couple weeks, with the page blank, all the while linked to from the first sentence of capitalism, a prominent article. It seems irresponsible to leave things like that. Instead of trying to figure out what to do with Definitions of capitalism, I instead just removed the link from Capitalism, making it an orphan. - Nat Kraus e 07:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well deserved thanks

I'm awarding you this barnstar for tireless work on WP:CP Thanks. --nixie 10:27, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

material from other pages

Hi, I wrote the material on those pages, so I guess I gave permission for it to be used.

User:Stevemc

Asurion

Duk- Please delete this entry. You make this extremely difficult to update.

Not difficult at all, I'll even help you if you want. You just need to compose a few sentances for a new stub. Let me know if you'd like my help.--Duk 19:10, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There also is an entry in Nashville, TN back to Asurion. Please delete this as well.

No need to delete.--Duk 19:10, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

-Michael User:69.137.66.112

RfA thanks

Thanks for your support for my adminship. I'm looking forward to never typing "rv vandal" again. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:37, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

dominica

yes there is

Stepping Stones Lighthouse

Great picture, thanks for adding it! Did you take it yourself? --RoySmith 30 June 2005 11:26 (UTC)

Talking behind back...

I normaly would take that as an inulst. I am the author of the material GAP Project (orrignal verison) of which adiyamali.org used. I wrote it for the Turkish gov. If you actualy read adiyamanli.org it will sound like a burochure as it was and maybe still is. Turkish gov releases most of its information to PD. I cannot proove the red tape. It is just used on newspapers and publications freely. You cant copyright data anyways. Ataturk Dam will hold same amount of water (asuming calculated accurately) regardless of the source. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

Do you have any proof adiyamanli.org holds copyrights. 10 other pages use identical or portions of the material. I am makeing it a big deal only because you are makeing it a big deal. As for Diagnosis: Murder I gave you the copy of the author giving me the permission to use the material. You still fail to read the talk page. The email is there. Mail the person if you wish although she might have forgotten about the communication after months, then again she may remember. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

I rewote GAP project twice because of you. Its rather annoying. You cant mark something that is not on adiyamanli.org as a copy vio. Majority of the article is not. Even if some words or even sentences may match thats not a sufficiant reason to blank everything. You are required to remove only the copy vio statements. Every individual case. You are also required to actualy compare everything to the remote site. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

I don't like to be declared a "dishonest user" that for me is a personal attack. I'd rather wish you did not refer to me like that. You are welcome to NOT believe my story. I frankly dont care. I know who I am, I know what I wrote. I reccomend assuming good failth. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

Coolcat, I've processed about a thousand copyvios. I have never accepted anonymous permission to use previously published material. I held this page to the same standards as every other copyvio I've evaluated. How can you say you were unfairly treated?

You said that you re-wrote the history pages that I deleted, yet they contained at least a full paragraph of copied, previously published material. (let me know if you want me to email you the text in question, not being an administrator you won't be able to see the deleted history I'm talking about).

Finally, why don't you say to my face what you've been saying behind my back??--Duk 2 July 2005 00:47 (UTC)

I am not talking behind your back. I am not jumping from admin pages to another, filling RfC cases etc. I just ask people to compare the copy vio page and the alleged page. I tell them copy vio im MY pov is unaproporate. I have every right to do that. They compare and react. If a paragraph is indeed coppied from the site and is not on the canadian PD site, feel free to delete it. Just tell me exactly what you deleted so I can rewrite and re add knowlege back to the article. Please do not remove everything but only the copy vio material, just because a paragraph (Id love to know which) is violating "copyrights" (who owns copyrights?) doesnt mean you get to delete everything. All images on the article with the exeption of two are from the same US PD source. Just google image search for the image file names. The other two, one is fair use of areal picture of ataturk dam and other is a graph created by a felow wiki user which replaced the "bad" us gov graph. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 01:00 (UTC)

Finaly, I do think your judgement is unfair. You are in error, partialy if not completely. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 01:05 (UTC)

What was my error? Not taking anonymous granting of copyright licensing? Do you honestly believe that Wikipedia should accept anonymous granting of copyright licensing? And if you are really the author of the text in question, why didn't you note earlier that it was PD? --Duk 2 July 2005 01:17 (UTC)

You are talking about sending me an email, I haven't recieved any. Have you told me in my talk page that you mailed me something and I havent repplied to it. It might have been deleted among spam, who knows. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 11:42 (UTC)

You are welcome to send me every instance of what you think is a copy vio, preferably ones that arent on the canadian PD page. Oh and btw, please do not use the RfC page to discuss this matter, use the talk of same RfC page. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 12:55 (UTC)

The material you mailed me was not in the article on last delete. Note that I am not bothering to discuss on who wrote the older version of article and its copyright status because thats talking to the wall. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 15:04 (UTC)

A simmilar content existed however:

The primary objective of GAP is to normalise levels of development, income, and living standards between the southeastern region and other regions of Turkey. Creating economic and social opportunities and promoting business, GAP is transforming the region completely. Critical infrastructure, such as airports and highways, is being constructed to support the development of the region. GAP will provide jobs to an estimated 3.5 million people directly.

GAP will provide jobs. Airports and highways will be constructed. This isnt something adiyamanli.org made up. It was Turkish Gov's plans. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 15:07 (UTC)

Are Turkish Gov. plans PD? And did you note this when you first posted the article? Did you note this and provide a source when the copyvio was being evaluated? Or are you now, weeks later, trying to explain away you plagersim and copyright violations and paint yourself as a victim?--Duk 2 July 2005 15:12 (UTC)

This is ridiclous. You are calling names and making less sense each time. I ask you to stop calling me names in a civilised manner, I would hope to see a civilised reaction. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 18:18 (UTC)

I would have thought you would make sure material that apears to be copy vio is not in any PD sites so as not to clutter copy vio system. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 15:21 (UTC)

If you want to used previously published material in Wikipedia it's up to you to identify the source, its licence and to note all of this on the article's talk page. Do this BEFORE you copy, not weeks after the copyvio has been processed--Duk 2 July 2005 15:36 (UTC)

Right, for me I just copy pasted material in a TXT file in my hard drive. Later found an image on google image search. You obvioulsy dont believe me, or do not want to believe me (I do not rally care). We are discussing the latest version of the article not an elder version. I am not accepting violating copyights, I am not fighting for the elder version either. Just to satisfy you, or people like you (other copy vio people), I rewote the article. Not once but twice. Deleting the article only annoys me. Instead if you just told me whats violating copyrights (like your mail) I would have been more than happy to fix anything that supposively violating copyrights. This way everyone including me would be happy. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 18:18 (UTC)

Coolcat, its not the job of the administrators clearing copyright violations to re-write the articles, they revert or delete. See the instructions at WP:CP. You claim you re-wrote the version that I reverted, but before reverting I still found substantial copyright violations. This might have been an honest mistake on your part, but I explained my actions on the talk page, and many times since then. I want you to stop saying that reverting this page and deleting the history that contained copyright violations was a mistake. And I want you to remove #5 from your RFC. Stop lying.--Duk 2 July 2005 18:45 (UTC)

I tried to reason with you, but you are a wall. Keep calling names, its rather amusing. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 18:52 (UTC)

Coolcat, your re-write still contained copied text, thats why it was reverted, and the history pages deleted. It's not the duty of the administrators evaluating copyright violations to re-write articles.--Duk 2 July 2005 19:14 (UTC)

...

Because of you deleting the article I lost all my work. I had to beg admins to get the original text back so I could continue improving it. You should not be deleting an ENTIER page so as to remove a paragraph or 4 sentences. You sould be cooperating rather than fighting. Fighting will only annoy me and when you annoy me and when I react to that I am likely to annoy you, I rather evade conflict as much as I can. Dont get me wrong I am NOT accusing you of anything, you are trying to do your job. I am trying to write an article. I cant do that when its beeing deleted this frequently. I want to write an article. I want to make sure it stays. So I want to write an article no one will have anyway of complaining about copy vios and povs. I cant achieve that if I am just not told anything instead of my edits being removed. Copy vio? What is copy vio? You should have the time to do this. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 19:40 (UTC)

You do not want to damage wikipedia. You are trying to do the opposite, improve wiki by removing copy vios. I support that behavior. However do not ask me to accept insults such as me being a "lier", I oppose such behavior. I want to satisfy the issue with the article so that what apears as a copy vio will not be an issue. I cannot keep rewriting the article from scratch just to watch it get deleted. Please understand and acknowlege my stand as I am acknowleging your stand. I agree to rewrite what apears to be me copying material from adiyamanli.org so as to evade conflict. It is a waiste of time for me but this actualy improves the article. Also makes everyone happy. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 19:40 (UTC)

You mean you havent deleted the latest version? If so who did? --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 19:43 (UTC)

Oooook. Sorry for screaming and annoying you. GAP Project is being very stressfull for me. The stress I get from the people I discuss in RFC isnt helping either. Now, I am not trying to get the older version which you rightfully can mark as copy vio as identical material was on the alleged page. It was also on a PD page. If you, or some other copy vio warrior was investigating the article they would have seen the PD resource and never bother Copyvioing the page. Regardless... I did rewrite the page so I really don't want to discuss the older version(s). Just please don't mark me as a repetive offender as I don't believe I am one. My problem is not with you, but with the two people on RfC bothering me. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 21:02 (UTC)

You may also read the material I placed on discussion. I will cross out my comments regarding gap project as you requested. I am not acknowleging that "I am an offender" though by doing so. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 21:05 (UTC)

I'm sorry we had this confusion and I apologise for my strong language. --Duk 2 July 2005 21:24 (UTC)

It was my fault as well, I should have checked the delete logs. :( --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 2 July 2005 21:32 (UTC)

Problem with Khan Pagan

You have helped me before, so can you help again, or better yet teach me how to help myself? :-) Just like before with Khan Sabin a page I wrote about Khan Pagan has disappeared from the Wiki Universe. It points to the disambiguation pages but my article has disappeared.

Is it gone forever? How do I retrieve it back?

The Help documentation of Wiki is something I seam to not be able to follow. It points to each and every way and I can never find anything useful. I failed to understand how you fixed Sabin for me too.

Thanks,

George

Diagnosis: Murder

Since you asked... One web site had only one sentence coppied from it which I did reword. The other, had about a paragraph. The latter one is the one I asked permision from. I do not remember the urls. If you could post me the two urls as they apeared on the ex copy vio notice, I can easily tell you which one it is. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 04:16 (UTC)

Firstly, I don't enjoy to be screamed at. Like I told you, I do not care about the article. I was not in the know of copyright procedure at the time, I have a learning curve. I haven't denied for one second my approach to topic was flawed, I should have aquired and presented copyright info before "writing" the article. Do not bite newbies applies as I was a newbie back then. I asked her if I could use it. She said yes. No one told me how to ask for permission so I asked for it with best of my abilities and knowlege which is far from perfect. It doesn't create a positive enviorment when a bunch of people scream at you as "thief!" "thief!", rather than an explanation. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you, it wasn't intentional. I am a victim in the only sense that I didn't know how to ask for permission no one assisted me. I am not an arch-angel either. Sorry for all the trobble I caused you. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

I can't still explain you what website this came from becuase:

a) I do not have the text in question, us non admins cant access deleted material. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

b) I do not remember the urls either. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

I will NOT try another administrator. I do NOT care if it stays deleted or not. What part of this do you not understand? You asked to resolve the issue not me. You innitiated the discussion not me. I was wrong yes, I later made it right, or at least tried. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

I am not going to respond to the 3rd bullet. Frankly words are too strong for me to respond politely, so I wont. However, like I said above I apologise for causing you a mess. I would not want an apology in return as you haven't done anything wrong aside from biting the ex-newbie (at the time). Dealing with so many copy vio cases you just dont want to deal with newbies which is understandable, but still breaks my heart. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)

FYI, the reason I feal victimies is the lack of response I recieved to the email I pasted to the talk page of Dıagnosıs Murder. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 6 July 2005 12:39 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks, Duk, for your support of my RfA. I also appreciate your compliment on my work on welding. I'm glad that others find my contributions useful, and I hope I continue to be a helpful part of the community now that I'm an administrator. --Spangineer (háblame) July 4, 2005 02:43 (UTC)

You begrudge me defending myself?

Tony wrote on Talk:Coolcat;

This is utterly mind-boggling. A copied sentence, a copied paragraph? These are not matters for the copyright lawyers! --Tony Sidaway|Talk

It's not a matter of a simple copyvio, but rather, the non-stop complaining, for months afterwards, where Coolcat claims he's been mistreated. He hasn't been mistreated (with regards to Dianosis:Murder). Yet over and over Coolcat cites Diagnosis:Murder as evidence of his mistreatment, blaming the copyvio people who can't read size 28 text and misrepresenting the situation. Tony, do you begrudge me defending myself? I'm not the one who has kept this alive. --Duk 6 July 2005 00:11 (UTC)

In answer to your straight question: no, of course I don't begrudge you defending yourself. My point is that as far as I can tell you're going way OTT in your interpretation of copyright law. Now I really have no idea what his beef is with you or yours with him, but I think I do know a little bit about copyright law. ---Tony Sidaway|Talk 6 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

With regards to Coolcat, as I've told you before, I've done everything in my power to avoid him since dealing with his copyvios, the exception being when defending myself. My only beef with him is that he keeps claiming I mistreated him when resolving his copyvios. Oh, I should mention, more than once I have suggested to other administrators, who were looking into Coolcat's complaints, that I would step aside if they wanted to re-evaluate Coolcat's copyvios (Frazzydee and Ugen64). None have. I'd like to pass the same suggestion to you, although this should go without saying, being a wiki and all.

With regards to copyvios, I think your ideas are a little out of line; an uncited sentence or paragraph length copyvio isn't acceptable, especially when it makes a significant portion of the article. But I'm not going to argue with you about this any more. I suggest you take it up on the mailing list, or at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems instead of arguing with me. There are lots of people at those places that probably know more than both of us :) --Duk 6 July 2005 01:00 (UTC)

July - Sept 2005

User talk:Coolcat/GAP temp

Hi Coolcat, I'll restore this version per the discussion on the article's talk page. But there is still some material that is copied from the previously published text (leftover from your refactoring); for example, The range of new products under cultivation is also expanding appears at [6].

I'm going to leave sentences like these out, just so there is no more controversy. The information can be re-written and added later. Please wait till I'm done restoring (I'll do it in parts) and be very carefull not to add any more previously published text by accident. --Duk 19:54, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

PS. I'll strike out text on User talk:Coolcat/GAP temp that still needs to be re-written.--Duk 19:59, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

OK, its done--Duk 23:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I understand, I wont be touching the article untill you are done. I tried to rewrite the sections you marked, check if it works. Here: [7] --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 12:43, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Johnny Song

what's the Johnny song a possible violation of? (unsigned User: 60.229.228.56)

Hi, posting song lyrics is a copyright violation (in most cases). In this case the article identifies the song as a recent composition of Morgan Campbell. So the article vioates Morgan Campbell's copyrights.

If you are Morgan Campbell then your submission is ok and licencened per the GFDL by virtue of your submitting it. Or, if you can document that these lyrics are PD or GFDL then they are ok to post. If any of these are true then you need to note this on the article's talk page (and its listing at WP:CP). --Duk 15:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Morgan Campbell gave us permission to post lyrics on here, do you want his email to contact him?

Please note this at WP:CP (Johnny Song is listed in the July 19 section) and on the article talk page.--Duk 13:56, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

This page has been deleted. You noted earlier that permission was granted to publish these lyrics, but we can't take anonymous grants of copyrights. Also, you didn't make the permission notes on the article's talk page and at WP:CP as I asked.

If you can demonstrate that permission has been granted then please contact me and I will un-delete the page (this will only take a minute). The best way to do this (if Morgan Campbell has a website) is to send an email from the site's contact address granting GFDL permission. Best regards--Duk 15:27, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Processing copyvios

I'd like to help with the workload of clearing the Wikipedia:Copyright problems page. Leaving aside for now the ones with complications, is there anything special to know? Here's what I'm assuming: Entries older than 7 days (and no clarifying discussion) should be removed. Double check to make sure the copyright claim seems correct. Create new article with /Temp version if there is one. Leave redlinks in other articles to encourage re-creation (hopefully not copyvio). Anything else? Thanks, -Willmcw 21:17, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to write all of that out. I'll start out slow, but hope to contribute to the janitorial work more. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:52, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

WP:CP House Ordos...

I'm looking through Copyright Problems, trying to clean out the ones I can, but I'm puzzled by this one. What is the current status on this? Does [version] contain the copyvios from the three sites listed at WP:CP? What about the House Ordos/Temp version? Can we just replace it with that? Is there a behaviour problem with any editors of the page? Generally, I want to either resolve it, or figure out what to put when I move it to Older the 7 days? Thanks for all your work on Wikipedia! JesseW 23:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Carlos Mencia

Hi. I noticed you'd been patrolling Carlos Mencia. I just re-wrote it from scratch. This should eliminate further copyvio problems, though one never knows. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:56, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Re: Your note: Thanks! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:42, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

House Ordos

What makes you think that that there are copyright infringements? The Ordos page didn't copy even remotely from the page that you cited. So don't ruin other peoples hard work, and please revert the page to normal, thank you. User:Jesse Mulkey

House Ordos

The speaker was refered to as a hideous creature in the game diaolgue on the official westwood website and in the in-game movies, not originaly by a random forumer, that piece of dialogue is copyright Westwood Studios and is open content.

House Ordos

Westwood Studios are dead, so any information of their games is now under fair use.

RFA, The GAP project

Hi Coolcat, on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek you state; Davenbelle marked GAP project a copy vio. Material was PD and is used on 11 websites of which two are PD. Copyvio people deleted the page anyway as copy vio people if they are marking pages as a copy vio make sure material is not on a PD source.

Could you please cite your source and identify the PD publication, or remove the claim that this material is PD.

I'm the Copyvio people deleted the page anyway and there was no evidence persented at the time showing that this material is PD. If you can demonstrate that this material is PD then please do and I'll reconsider, otherwise stop claiming that it was improperly deleted. --Duk 23:38, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Why are you bothering me with this? It is old argument which we discussed. You are a bit to defensive and this is starting to bother me. The stuff you are throwing me is coppied from the RfC. GEEEZ! --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 02:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't think he's trying to harass you, Coolcat. If you feel that Davenbelle unfairly or inaccurately marked the article as a copyvio, then it would help if you made more information available about the source of the material. Without evidence to back up the assertion that the material is public domain, Duk had no choice to but to delete it as a copyright violation. He's bringing it up because you mentioned it in your RfArb case, and is hoping to clarify if you still believe the material to be public domain. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:20, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I can prove copyrights by sacrificing my identity, which I do not want to do. From his (duks) prespective what he did is right even though I wasn't violating copyrights but as he pointed out it would be retarded to accept "annonymous" copyrights. Since I can't/don't want to proove copyright status I had rested my case earlier on. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 12:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

The rfc entry was about the same material appearing on a Canadian PD source of which a Copy vio expert like duk would notice when checking for copy vios. That would be a proper "assume good faith" enviorment. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 12:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I am just mad I see duk "defending" himself again as I havent suggested/pushed the copyrights to arbcom evidence. The material on arbcom was coppied from the RfC which duk and several others discussed this matter to death. This was coppied to Arbcom listing, then was coppied to where it is now by an arbcom member as that is the porper procedure. So I am being yelled at by duk yet again. :( --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 12:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Coolcat, I'm more than happy to let this drop. But every time you claim this copyvio was mis-handled I will defend myself. The problem with your making a false claim like this, over and over again for months on end, is that people start to believe it, even if it isn't true. I'm not the one keeping this alive. --Duk 14:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

It is the copy fo RFC on Arbcom request page. I was not the one copinging it nor do I feel it matters. Why the hell would I insist on something that I have rewritten better than the older version? --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 14:56, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

OK, then please remove item number 5 under the Statement by Coolcat section at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek. --Duk 15:01, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

IT IS A GOD DAMN COPY OF RFC. Which was coppied to requests for Arbcom before your involvement in the RFC. And was coppied to Requests for "arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek" but NOT by me. I encourage you to start reading what I am posting you more carefully. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 15:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Wonderfull, then please remove the incorrect information. Striking it out would work too :) --Duk 15:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Done, please do not waiste my time on this anymore. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 16:46, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Sig

I noticed your sig links to User:Duk which redirects to User talk:Duk. You may want to modify it so that it links directly to your talk page. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 16:46, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

User spamming Copyvio

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=12.28.194.168

Several of us have Copyvio'd the pages but there's a ton of them. Is there a way you can help? RasputinAXP 05:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

diaphragm seal

Your picture for diaphragm seal is great! We need more like this.ike9898 11:14, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Public Domain Catholic Encyclopedia (Sistine Chapel Choir)

Text from the Catholic Encyclopedia has passed into the public domain. Articles which use text from the Catholic encyclopedia should have the the {{Catholic}} template added at the bottom. The online site is copyrighted, but that doesn't apply to the 1913 text (read Catholic Encyclopedia). You can safely put back the material you've removed which originated from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

See also, Category:Based on Catholic Encyclopedia --Duk 01:13, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm I guess that was a false alert, thanks for the heads up. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 11:18, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Re:Tougaloo College Copyright violation

Hi Dbraceyrules, a lot of the History section of this article looks like a copyright violation from various websites [6]. Can you please refactor a little more. --Duk 15:22, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Oops, I was under the impression that I was able to use this via the "fair use" policy. Sorry about that. Thanks for the alert. Dbraceyrules 15:42, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Gas Turbine

My bad, I was thinking of the F machines. I have worked on 6 installed H units, you would think I would know better. TDC 18:05, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

An LM6000 GTG, being worked on. Basiclay the LM6000 is a 747 engine with an expanded turbine section to convert thrust into shaft power and reworked controls packages for power generation.

This is a picture I took of the inside of a boiler I was working on. Very hot, about 2800deg F.

A 15 year old GE Frame H STG.

I will try and get some more pictures for you. TDC 14:45, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

I dont know how many gas turbine model articles have been written, but after the output and efficiency are given, this should be thrown in: at ISO conditions. TDC 17:48, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

GDFL

oops, sorry, my wording was a little bad that day, I will correct the message to say that "you can never retract it and it will be in the public domain and will be editted " which IMO is basically like having to copyright... thanks for noting that and happy editing. Sasquatch↔讲↔看 05:41, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

picky picky picky =P it is estentially available to the public and in the domain of the public for lack of a better word, feel free to reword my messages, but you get the idea =) i'm just gonna stay out of this as i seem to be making a fool of meself. Anyways, happy editing! Sasquatch↔讲↔看 05:58, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Lower bandwidth option for navigation popups

Hi, I noticed that you tried out my popups and then disabled it, commenting about the bandwidth. I've added an option to not use any bandwidth - if you add the line

 simplePopups=true;

to your user javascript file, then you should just see the list of links in the popups, and no downloading should happen at all. L upin 12:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Concerning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pengo#RIFE

Hi, I'm the original copyright holder, Pengo has full permission from me to paste this text here.

Best regards,

Geert

I've sent an email requesting confirmation and will restore the article as soon as you answer. -Duk 01:53, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

RIFE

Please see WP:VFU. It was uniformly suggested to undelete there. I'm afraid the undeletion log doesn't allow for edit summaries. R adiant _>|< 23:37, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Paul Erdös.jpeg

This image has been tagged as a copyright violation (by User:Bemoeial). You noted that it was recently moved from commons, but the link to the commons image was dead. Can you update with copyright information? It's listed under the July 30 section at WP:CP. Thanks --Duk 02:42, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It's fixed now. Thanks for leaving a note here. I would never have noticed otherwise. I commented more at WP:CP. dbenbenn | talk 03:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

RIFE reply

Hi Duk,

thanks for the message, I replied and confirmed the license permission.

Best regards.

Removal of Images

Thank you for deleting the images, as requested, which were originally uploaded with permission for use, though regrettably this was later withdrawn.

This image still remains on the list which is also none PD.

File:76-0169C 1858 76th Regimental Sergeants.jpg

I have also put the source info on the following image, though not the copyright status, I don't know if it's classed as PD or not. It is a photo I took of the head and shoulders of the 1st Duke of Wellington, from an original painting, which is life size, on display in the Trustees Boardroom. It is on loan to the Regimental HQ from the National Gallery.

NB The only images I will be uploading from now on are ones I create personally. Thank you for your help. Richard Harvey 09:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Image:Field_Marshal_Arthur_Wellesley_KG_CCB_GCH_CoR_1st_Duke_of_Wellington.jpg. I took the photo and I'm quite happy to make it PD, I just needed to be sure I was not creating a problem by doing it.Thanks Richard Harvey 19:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Avalon map

I am the original author of this image. It was created several years ago for the Government of Newfoundland and as such has been distributed widely.

JcMurphy

copyvio vs. PUI

Heya, when you encounter images that might be copyvio's but you can't find a source or other evidence of their copyvioness, could you list them on WP:PUI instead of WP:CP? Thanks. --fvw * 22:07, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and it would appear that movie stills are allowed under fair use (in the proper context, of course). I'm clearing out the aug 14 section of WP:CP now and unmarking the movie stills you marked, if you want to dispute their copyvioness check the section for aug 14 in the page history. --fvw * 22:10, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Fvw, thanks for the note. You are right, images without a source should go to PUI. I had intended to look for the source (they are all obvious professional images) but didn't get them all.

Regarding the fair-useness of screenshots. I do and did object to these particular ones for specific reasons and explained why on the listing page. Did you miss this part? Anyway, some of the images that you put a fair use tag on are orphans (Image:Specmachine-a.jpg, for example). It's impossible to have a fair use rationale for orphans (I forgot to note this with the other reasons). Also a bunch are still tagged, did you want me to go and remove the tags? --Duk 23:57, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Oops no, I'd missed the reasons above, and they're very compelling (almost as compelling as the fact that if I didn't delete them for being copyvio's I'd have to IFD them). I've deleted the bulk of them apart from a few that are used in articles and are reasonable fair use. --fvw * 00:13, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. you are the guy doing the work clearing these, so I'm not really contesting. :) --Duk 00:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh please do. Anything to alleviate the tedium of WP:CP :) --fvw * 00:13, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

a mistake...

Sirs, You have a mistake on the diagram of the 30-06 the width of a 30-06 is .308 thew .338-06 is the nearest bullet I can find to .340.

Ralph

(PS see this link: http://stevespages.com/jpg/cd3006.jpg)

Thanks for the note Ralph. I think my illustration is correct; the .308 dimension is the casing ID (not shown on my drawing) and the .340 dimension is the casing OD (shown on both my drawing, and the drawing you reference as the .3397 dimension). --Duk 17:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Hi Duk, just a quick note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was pleased to see so much support, especially from people such as you who I do not know very well, if at all. Now that I am an administrator I will do my best to please the community’s expectations. Best regards, Sam Hocevar 17:00, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for watching out for my page & talk - I've blocked the pest for a month this time. jimfbleak 19:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

A barnstar for work on WP:CP

		An Award
		I, JesseW, the juggling janitor, award you, User:Duk, this Working Man's Barnstar for your dedicated work listing and closing items on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. We shall clear out the backlog, eventually!

Enjoy it. JesseW, the juggling janitor 21:21, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I endorse this barnstar - it's well-deserved. -Willmcw 22:01, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I thank you for your support for my RfA, We shall surely interact more. I am certain that our association shall grow. --Bhadani 10:37, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

DuPont article

Sorry about that...I just realized, I was thinking of the wrong meaning of the word found. Brian1979 11:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

User 204.184.37.2

Left you a message at: User_talk:204.184.37.2 WikiDon 20:42, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks WikiDon

copyright image

Hi, Would it be possible for you to delete the image below, uploaded by hammersfan, to replace one from the list you previously removed after a copyright issue? or do I need to put it up on the copyvio page.?

He has put it up as the Cap Badge of the Regiment, which it is not, it is the combined badge of the Regimental Association.

File:DWR.jpg

I can tell from the colours used, lions tail shape, lettering within the scroll, design on the blanket below the houda and the fact that part of the original red background is still showing through the scroll upturns that this is a poor copy of a design I did, used on the Regimental Website, as part of my work for the Regimental Headquarters. Hammersfan has no authority to use this design. Richard Harvey 09:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi Richard. I can't delete this image without it first being listed at either Wikipedia:Copyright problems or Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation.

I am also allowed to delete the image if the uploader requests it, and the image is unused. (It looks like you notified the uploader and asked that he do this).

Since you are the creator and copyright holder, and assuming that the uploader doesn't request its removal, I would list it at Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation. You need to explain the different versions that were uploaded, there seem to be two in history, are they both copyright violations? And you need to explain that one or both are derivative works.

Also, the uploader has claimed fair use for the image, so some people might object to its removal on those grounds. However, if the image is technically incorrect as you say, and therefore unused, then there is no fair use rationale. If this is the case then menti

on it. --Duk 16:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi DUK. Thanks for the info regarding two images in the history. It appears hammersfan has uploaded a second image over the top of the imagevio item. The Imagevio item is the one using the Redlion Rampant over the Circular Hindoostan with crest below. The poor quality, childish, image now on the page, with a grey lion is the newly uploaded item. Which only incorporates part of the copyright infringed image, ie the scroll & the unfurled Banner. Incidentally this is still not the Cap Badge of the Duke of Wellington's Regiment. That can be seen Here[8] As hammersfan has altered the image I will amend my entry on the image page. Richard Harvey 00:52, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio

There appears to be the same problem again at William_Wegman_(photographer). See discussion. - Wgsimon 22:36, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

DWR.jpg

By all means delete this image, as I have uploaded it to a different file name. Also, please inform Richard Harvey, that if he wants to create and upload an image of the cap badge himself, then he is more than welcome to do so, it makes no difference to me, otherwise stop being so petty. Hammersfan 11:15, 21 September 2005

Duk; Thanks for the deletion. I think the reason Hammersfan is not interested about it being removed is because he has now downloaded the cap badge from the Duke of Wellington's Website, removed the background and enhanced the image to darken it. Then uploaded it to Wiki, with a different name, again without permission from the site administrator. See: File:DWR1.jpg Richard Harvey 19:33, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello Duk; I feel Hammersfan has taken the image from the source provided by Richard Harvey, after the initial complaint, altered it then uploaded the image over the original image he uploaded. Check the image history and timings of each Image uploaded. If he had the item originally he would have uploaded that and provided the source, not the two previous images. ImageEditor 00:31, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Duk, I Got your message. I've had a look back at the images in my files. I feel you will find the image is one from the list that you previously deleted a few weeks ago ie:- Image:DWR_Cap_Badge_small.jpg. If you check the history of the image you will find it to be identical to that. Richard Harvey 01:45, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I have put the source of the image above onto the image's page - I also object to people insinuating and making allegations without bothering to check their facts. Hammersfan 12:05, 22 September 2005

As always, your advice is measured and helpful. Thank you for being a calm voice of reason. Hammersfan 16:20, 22 September 2005

Malta maps

Thanks a lot Duk for your help - they are in fact identical (and annotated in English which is better). I did in fact tag the image as being unkown because I wanted to check out its origins. I stumbled on those pictures in the mt.wiki (they aren't tagged there either), but when I tried to contact the Wikipedian who uploaded them I got no reply. --Roderick Mallia 19:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Seasat image

Why was it necessary to delete the image of Seasat?

The image lacked source and copyright information. Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion was recently changed to address these images. Please see the notes above every image submission window; Images uploaded without source or licensing information will also be deleted if this information is not supplied within seven days. --Duk 23:09, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Nosey & Derivative

Duk, Please delete both images, these were sent to me by a friend in Scotland who advised he had created them. Also thanks for the intro to the Sad at the Clinic website. I was unaware of it and will now take my friend to task at the weekend. ImageEditor 14:42, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

DWR1.jpg

Duk, Thanks for the info. But I must admit to being a little confused now! I went to the www.slaidburn.org.uk website and couldn't find the cap badge image displayed anywhere on it, it appears to be a site about sheep farming and a village in Lancashire, UK. So how did hammersfan find the image to download, let alone know it was on there? If he had he would have uploaded it previously, not the prior offerings. I also note that the website owner claims all images as copyright and should be attributed to him; see www.slaidburn.org.uk/copyright_terms.htm . Richard Harvey 15:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've updated the imagevio notice and the listing at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2005 September 21 --Duk 16:04, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

concerming article; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Cold_Blood

Dear DUK.

Concerning the In Cold Blood pictures: Both have the following copyright:

I'm not sure if I have to load this information on or if you do. Let me know.

Regards sgurtd@yahoo.com

Photos

Younghoward and Billhayden are clearly tagged as "fair use", and this tagging has been approved by J Wales (see his Talk page). I have now tagged Youngcostello PD. The rest you can delete. Adam 02:10, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:DWR1.jpg

The badge image, right down to the angles & shading, looks remarkably like the one located halfway down this website page at www.regiments.org:- [9] where it's copyright is marked up as MoD (UK Ministry of Defence). Perhaps the webmaster can tell you where he got it from?. 86.2.137.185 09:19, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Images

Let me save you a lot of work. The 800-plus images I have uploaded fall into three categories

Those I have taken myself, which I think are all tagged accordingly. I may have forgotten about a few but I think I have tagged all of them.
The images of Australian politicians and Gobvernors-General, which I will defend on fair use grounds, as well as permission-to-use grounds, and which should all be tagged in the same way as younghoward if they are not so tagged already.
All others, which can be deleted without consultation if you so determine.

Adam 15:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

OK I will go through all the PMs and GGs and tag them. Adam 00:13, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Possible Image copyright infringements

Could you take a look at this article. It seems to contain a large amount of images downloaded from other websites, which do not seem to have copyright permission given.
[[10]] 86.2.137.185 14:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

There are a lot of images on that page with Fair use claimed. If you disagree with the rationale given for the fair use claim on any individual image, or on their combined use in the article as a whole, you need to list it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Fair_use_claims_needing_a_second_opinion --Duk 16:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio cleanup

First, I owe you an apology for reverting your application of a copyvio tag on the Winter Soldier Investigation article. I had assumed you were negligent (or being sneaky) when you tagged the article without listing it at WP:CP as required. I didn't realize at the time that the article had already been listed there weeks prior, and you therefor didn't need to list it.

Second, I've re-written much of the article on a /Temp page as suggested at WP:CP, and after discussing it here. Rather than try to rewrite the copyvio paragraph to your satisfaction, I've simply left it out. I was also careful to avoid including anything that would be construed as derivative of the copyvio material. 165.247.204.51 11:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

I can't review your re-write because 1) no time, and 2) I'm not going down the path of approving someone elses writing (but if I happen to see something that looks accidentally copied I'll say something). As long as you write with your own words you shouldn't need to worry about copyright violations, and my only interest in that page is to keep it free of copyvios. Also, since the page has already been reverted and the copyvio resolved, can I suggest that you update the article bit by bit with your re-write, instead of replacing the entire article at once (this is just a suggestion, it will allow discussion on the talk page in case there are disagreements over the rewrite) ? --Duk 14:16, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Opps, looks like you already replaced the article. Oh well, forget my bit by bit advice above. --Duk 14:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Oct 2005 - Nov 2005

Wikipedia:Article rescue contest

I'm writing to tell you the contest has begun and will take 3 weeks. Since you've shown interest, I thought you'd like to know. You'll be pleased to know copyvio rewrites will be included. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:08, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

205.222.240.2

205.222.240.2 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)

Hi Duk!

I'm a bit concerned that blocking a shared IP for six months might be a bit... drastic. Sometimes shared IPs are used by a number of legitimate users who have created accounts and such blocks affect them as well. Any thoughts? Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:09, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

You are right, this is a little drastic. Check the block log and contribution history for more information. If you would like to revise this block, go ahead - I won't mind. --Duk 14:16, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, from the block log I see that Shanes blocked it for 48 hours first, and when that one expires the IP will be unblocked, even the six month one. I know, vandals using shared IPs are a real pain. Who invented shared IPs in the first place? Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

VVAW

Thanks for the thorough explanation. TDC has been known to use copyvio to fudge his POV, for example at the WSI article, which I sorted out simply by removing the exised points. I disagree with the notion that any post-vio edits constitute a "derivative work" particularly if such is in areas not directly in question. But I understand that limiting such is good policy and forces attention on the vio issue. After looking at the history, this should have been a WP:RFAR / WP:3RR, and if TDC was simply and properly removing the copyvio sections, then the page should have been protected, and the WP:DR process instituted. This is all the more true, IMHO, if as you say nobodys wanted to touch it. -St|eve 19:52, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I have not been using Copyvio as a way to “fudge” my pov. The specific copyvio’ of this anon have been addressed by several other users, including myself to no avail. This was not a grey case, as I documented in talk the copyvio’s were blatant and constituted large sections of the article.

And speaking of which, this is the new version compared to the one just before the Copyvio tag was put up. [11]. TDC 14:25, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I've merged the text from the /Temp page into the main article space. Thank you for your attention to the matter. 165.247.200.208 19:16, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Dear Duk,

Thankyou very much with your message. Looking at it with more consideration I totaly agree with you, thanks for bringing it to my attention about RipRap, as at the time I didn't think of it other uses. Also thanks for picking up on the spelling.

However, what is the purpose of a image tag and how do I categorise my articles?

Many Thanks, Josh

Steven Chu

It looks like the article was first deleted without any discussion. Would this be accurate? If it was copied under GNU as the history suggests, there was no copyright violation.

There sure was discussion- on [[WP:CP]. The article was copied from a source that was marked GFDL, but Encyclopedia Britannica had published the identical article several years earlier (copyrighted, non-GFDL). The discussion on WP:CP had links to both pages. --Duk 14:33, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Pheasant

Thanks for reverting this. The perpetrator insists on Americanising this, despite the fact that all species of pheasant are native to only the Old World, and the article was written in British English. If this persists, would you consider protecting the page, I'm too directly involved to do so myself. jimfbleak 05:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again, Jim

reply from user: 195.131.172.165

Please be carefull adding external links to articles. Adding excessive external links (like your edits to viscosity) might be reverted as spam. Probably a single link would be better. --Duk 17:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Duke,

This 4 links are to 4 different converters/conversion tables since viscosity itself breaks into dynamic and kinematic... --User with static IP of 195.131.172.165 :)

Re-usability of Falcon V

Per the payload user guide, the second stage is not reusable. I've pulled an edit that suggested it was. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:27, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

You are confusing the Falcon I with the Falcon 5. SpaceX says both stages od the Falcon 5 are designed to be reusable, see[12].--Duk 23:06, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Whoops! You're right, I did. Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio and derivatives, in Winter Soldier Article

Please have a look when you get a minute or two.[13] TDC 19:52, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

While you are at it, could you please take a look at the article General Intelligence Directorate? Please note in this version of the wiki-article from August, there appears the line:

"Technical Support Division, responsible for production of false documents, communications systems supporting clandestine operations, and development of clandestine message capabilities."

Does it look similar to this content from this copyright protected website here?

"The Technical Support Division is responsible for production of false documents, communications systems supporting clandestine operations, and development of clandestine message capabilities."

In fact, it seems quite a bit of the content in the article is directly derived from this website. The edit history shows that the article was tagged as a possible Copyvio last month, but TDC swapped a few words around and reinstated the article. Does this seem proper to you?

Also while you are at it, could you please take a look at the article Massacre at Hue? Please note there appears the following paragraphs in this wiki-article:

"In November 1974, when a documentary film produced by South Vietnamese reporters about the Tet Offensive was shown to an American audience of more than 200 US Army officers in Fort Benning, Georgia, almost no one in the audience had ever heard of the full details of the atrocity. Many afterwards said that had they known the savage slaughter at the time, they would have acted differently while serving in Vietnam."

"Since April 1975, the Vietnamese Communist government has moved many families related to the victims out of Hue City. Some people in the city, however, still commemorate them every year. Because the people are mingling the rites with Tet celebrations, Communist local authorities have no reason to forbid them."

With the exception of a few words shuffled around, do they not look strikingly similar to these lines from the copyright protected website here?

"When a Tet Offensive documentary film by South Vietnamese reporters was shown to the American audience of more than 200 US Army officers in Fort Benning, Ga. in November 1974, almost 90 percent of them hadn't been informed of the facts. Many even said that had they known the savage slaughter at the time, they would have acted differently while serving in Vietnam."

"Since April 1975, the Vietnamese Communist regime deliberately moved many families of the 68-massacre victims out of Hue City. People in the city however, still commemorate them every year. Because the people are mingling the rites with Tet celebrations, Communist local authorities have no reason to forbid them."

I could cite many similar instances. Should these articles be blanked because of these cut-n-paste transgressions by TDC? Do they constitute copyright violations in their present form? Since you've been dealing with copyvios lately, I figured I'd ask your opinion. 165.247.213.210 09:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC) Before I post them, and other similar examples, on WP:CP I mean. If there is a way to retain valuable information while avoiding the blanking of whole articles, that would be great. I'd rather not add to your case load if at all possible. 165.247.221.190 20:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi again

Hi, sorry to go off the handle with you--I jump to conclusions and am often wrong--sorry--it comes from being marginalized--I appreciate the info on the copyright argument

In regards to "talking behind your back" I will tell you everything I say to anyone to your face. This is what really bothers me about Americans, and I try as much as socially possible not to do the same. Travb 22:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Copywrite and fair use

Fair use says "Fair use makes copyrighted work available to the public as raw material without the need for permission or clearance, so long as such free usage serves the purpose of copyright law, which the U.S. Constitution defines as the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (I.1.8), better than the legal enforcement of claims of infringement."

See [14] for further information.

"RULES OF THUMB FOR COURSEPACKS

The Classroom Guidelines that were negotiated in 1976 can provide helpful guidance and we recommend that you read them. 1. Limit coursepack materials to

single chapters
single articles from a journal issue
several charts, graphs or illustrations
other similarly small parts of a work. "

from [15] illustrates the principle of extracting part of a work being covered by fair use.

The New York Times itself quotes others.

"Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work." [16] therefore a quote that essentially lists facts isn't even covered by copywrite in the first place.

Wikipedia primary servers are in the US.

While it would be nice to have no legal complications, the rich in this world are seeking to own everything including math equations (which is what software patents are).

Don't help memes that block the free flow of information. Help memes that promote freedom. Fair use is one such doctrine, law and meme. WAS 4.250 00:48, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Was, I'm glad to see someone is reading up on fair use. You should also read wikipedia's fair use policy (WP:FU). It is a litte more restrictive, and specific to our uses, than the stuff you quoted. Among other things, attribution is required. --Duk 01:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Duk, I argue that instead of deleting things, we find the source of things and add footnotes to the items, as I did in the Winter Soldier Investigation, and at H5N1. TDK spent a good amount of time finding the source of these articles, just to (what appears) to delete it. (Please mention this to TDK, if you feel)Travb 01:44, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

you are a gentleman

You are teaching me how to be a gentleman Duk.Travb 01:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

See link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Travb#copyvio_argument

How to lose friends and alienate people

You are not going to like my comments. I hammered you on the winter soldier talk page, and got chastized by WAS 4.250 for it. WAS 4.250 had some really good points.

I am going to lay off of wikipedia for a couple of weeks maybe.

When I first started to use wikipedia, about a month ago, I thought it was the most wonderful thing ever created, but since then I realize that their two types of people I simply can't get along with:

People like TDC who destroy information because it does not fit their ideology
People like yourself and Splash who actively destroy information of all types, for whatever reason.

(again, please let the whole world know about this message if you wish)

Trashing your work

Hi. I am a professional software developer. I'm probably one of the best in the world - or at least in the top 3%. One of the things I've learned is that the best thing you can do for your project sometimes is to delete the whole thing and start over!

What took a week to write, can be rewritten from scratch in half a day, usually. And it's often twice as good as what was lost - like if you didn't make back-ups and your hard drive crashed.

I'm not saying we should go around Wikipedia randomly deleting articles, just that in the case of WSI it probably will be no loss if we do just that: start fresh, with no disputed passages, no POV violations, no "copyvios". Start from a core version that everyone can agree with, and move on from there.

I'd even like to see the 4 paragraphs I left this afternoon trimmed even smaller, if you like. But let's get a tiny, indisputably OKAY core version hammered out by Sunday, okay? Uncle Ed 01:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Read...

Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation#Removing_content_versus_fixing_content as well as Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation#Fair_use before you revert mass chunks again. If you find a copyvio sentence, delete that sentence and that sentence ALONE. Honestly, Wikipedia's position on this cannot be more clear of copyvios. The only reason to delete an entire article is iff the entire thing is a copyvio. Thanks Sasquatcht|c 04:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

You are flat out wrong. Read the instructions for dealing with copyright violations on WP:CP. Articles get reverted to the pre-copyvio verstion, not only the remove the copied text but to remove the possiblity of derivative work that occurred to, and in relation to, the copied text. --Duk 04:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I believe that is refering to large chunks of copyrighted text. Right now, you're only pointing out a few sentences that can easily be reworded without too much trouble. In fact, find those sentences for me and I'll do it myself. I'll even footnote if you want it that bad. If you read Wikipedia:Copyrights carefull you will not that "If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed". Followed by "If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there." which makes it clear the you only list on CP when there are large chunks that are copied. Please do reconsider calling me "flat out wrong" before re-examining evidence. Sasquatcht|c 04:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Also see m:Avoid Copyright Paranoia. Sasquatcht|c 04:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

And there's one comment I don't quite understand, that being "remove the possiblity of derivative work that occurred to[sic]". It is perfectly fine to base judgements off copyrighted work (i.e. to derive stuff from it). So there's absolutely no problem in basing a section off a copyrighted page as a summary of that page or an analysis of that page. Could you clarify that? Sasquatcht|c 04:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, now your getting a tad rude my friend. Saying "I am flat out wrong" is not very nice at all. Frankly, if you opened your mind a little and read that stuff, you can see all the evidence supporting my evidence. And don't patronise me on Wikipedia policy thank you very much. Again, reconsider the stuff i wrote and add a rebuttal. I quoted from Wikipedia:Copyrights directly which is actually the master page in dealing with copyright issues. Again, all you've cited is one page while I cited the ACTUAL policy page as well as a meta page discussing it. Sasquatcht|c 05:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I did look at your comments and all you asked were more questions. While copyright law clearly states that using a few sentences is okay (although I prefer to reference them). Again, Wikipedia:Copyrights says... well, i've quoted it above. so why are you asserting that I have a problem with the policy when you seem to disagree with it too. Sasquatcht|c 05:18, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Derivative works

Okay, so what is a derivative work? I read a bit about it and basing a movie off a book would be a derivative. But how is taking facts and restating them really derivative? If your more familiar clarify what constitutes a derivative and what doesn't on Wikipedia. It would be absurd to require all the stuff on Wikipedia to be completely original as they have occurred elsewhere. Also, there is the whole issue of fair use but I won't dig into that. Sasquatcht|c 05:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

sigh* alright, I'm going to start rewriting. Are all the problems mentioned on the talk page? Sasquatcht|c 05:42, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Redux 1

I have rehashed the offending section that I am aware of. If you know of any more problems, make note of them on the talk page and I will fix them. Sasquatcht|c 06:10, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair Use on Jimbo's Talk page

Just wanted to let you know that I moved the entire Fair Use discussion from Jimbo's Talk page to the Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems page.

Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 16:41, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

What Happens to History

What happens to an article's history, i.e. WSI, when it gets rolled it back? There is, yet again, another argument over what went where and when [17]. TDC 21:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

(answered on TDC's page)

Specs

The ASTM specs. are partially inapplicable to that table. The table is ISO 898-1 and SAE J429. I think it would be good if you or I remove the ASTM specifications. --Simian, 2005-10-28, 00:14 Z

(OK, i did)

"Pickles"

In one placement on my talk page you said you noticed that I put "Pickles" on the List of nicknames used by George W. Bush, I didn't do that so you're confusing me with somebody else I have never been on that article before. Patricknoddy 6:59 AM October 30, 2005 EDT

Wow, your talking about a note I left on your page fourteen months ago? (did you think the note was only two months old?). And, yes, you did edit that page [18]. Best regards, Duk 16:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I think that you didn't look at the user name correctly. Patricknoddy 4:00 PM November 1, 2005 EDT

Uploaded New Image

Hi Duk; not been on for a while. I have just uploaded a scanned image of a personal item, from my own collection:-

Please could you check to see if I have put on the correct copyright info, so as to stave off any comeback or copyvio claims. I would also appreciate your 'experienced' feedback on this new website:- [19].Richard Harvey 17:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Duk; Yes! I own the badge, the scanner and have a Licenced copy of the software used to do it with. The badge wasn't photographed, with a camera it was put on the scanner direct. I scanned it myself then edited it to enhance the image. So I guess I own the copyright which I release as per the tag I put on it. I will add the extra info as advised.

As for the Website, It took a lot of work, a lot of time and the regiment, or I, own the images. I tried to keep all the gallery images low in size but high in quality to speed up loading, especially the audio and video clips. Thanks: Richard Harvey 18:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Admin nomination

Hi there. I certainly appreciate your offer, and your kind words. Having seen some recent votes on WP:RFA, I'm suspecting I won't get the votes given the current standards, but I'm willing to risk it (and it's no big deal if I don't get it.) So if you'd like to nominate me, I'll certainly accept. Thank you! --Bob Mellish 01:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I've added my acceptance and answers to my RFA. Thanks once again! --Bob Mellish 04:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi again. Well, as you know I got through, so perhaps I was being too pesimistic above. Thanks for nominating me, keeping an eye on things, and that well-timed email to WikiEN-L. Cheers! --Bob Mellish 19:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again! ALKIVAR™ 07:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

I just wanted to thank you for your support of my RfA which finally passed! I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 04:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio baloney

I looked at those links and I'm not seeing any obvious copyright violations -- unless you're claiming use of individual words violates copyrights. No, your knee-jerk blanking and paper-thin excuse told me all I needed to know about the intellectual honesty -- or lack thereof -- of TDC and your "copywrite violation" [sic] campaign battle.

I'll try to remember to pass along your note to Ed Poor, though: I'm sure he'll appreciate your calling him a liar. --Calton | Talk 01:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Carlton, I'm sorry you left such an angry note on my talk page. I hope we can talk this through.

First, can you show me where Ed claims I tagged as a copyvio an article he re-wrote from scratch. If he really said this I'd like to talk to him about it, because it's not true.

All right, I misremembered the "from scratch" part, for which I apologize. On the other hand, you blanked the ENTIRE page, despite, as Ed Poor put it in his very next edit, The first 4 paragraphs, having been written largely by me, can not posibly be considered a copyright violation. So I stand by my "knee-jerk" characterization.*

Ed_Poors words: "The first 4 paragraphs, having been written largely by me, can not posibly be considered a copyright violation."[20] "having been written largely by me" is not "from scratch" but "almost from scratch"

And the paragraphs that he didn't write were riddled with copyvios that are still showing up to this day. --Duk 14:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The page languished for over a year with huge amounts of copyvio material because nobody would do anything about it. The copyvios weren't removed until I steeped in and got serious. When a copyvio showed up I tagged the dam page until someone fixed it. It's that simple. --Duk 16:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

It is much funner to be the editing cop then the editor huh?

As I've said before, I've only edited this page to deal with copyvios. --Duk 14:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Sasqatch: "Oh.. My.. god... go fix it... you're really good at complaining about problems, I get it. But please do try to fix some of the problems... I mean.. that's all I ask of you.. really.. that's it. Thanks."

Sasqatch didn't even know that derivative works were copyvios until I explained it to him. --Duk 14:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Second, I gave an example of the copyvio that you said didn't exist on requests for arbitration. The example I gave is one of many you can find if you take a good look at the article's talk page and archived talk pages.

No, you gave a link to a diff on my Talk page and made the sweeping claim that this diff was a priori evidence of a copyvio. To be ACTUAL evidence of a copyvio, there should be, at minimum, some text to compare or reference to the thing being copied, so one can see if it's so. You did no such thing, merely presenting a diff and waving your hands wildly, crying "See? See?"

please re-read my response above, the example I gave was on requests for arbitration. Also, if you carefully read through the talk pages and archive you will find many, many more. --Duk 16:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Finally, you've all but accused me of a political agenda here. Carlton, I've resolved thousands of copyvios, but have almost no politically oriented edits (if you'd care to look). Politics aren't my thing, they don't interest me. I assure you that I have no political agenda whatsoever regarding this article.--Duk 03:11, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Walks like duck, etc. Your unflagging nitpicking of copyright issues on this particular article -- and your out-of-policy complete blankings for many, at worst, minor violations, makes me think otherwise.

That's right, thousands of resolved copyvios and pretty much no political edits, that's the kind of duck I am. As far as nitpicking and page blanking with a copyviotag, this page was an exceptional problem for over a year because nobody would do anything about it until I stepped in. The unpleasant characters and name calling probably had something to do with scaring away anyone interested in cleaning up the mess.

As far as out-of-policy actions; read the instructions on WP:CP for resolving copyvios. Pages are supposed to be reverted to the pre-copyvio version (this eliminates the possibility of derivative work copyvios). I did not enforce this during the last few times a copyvio was found, instead letting people just edit the copyvio out. This was lax on my part, the opposite of nitpicking and kneejerking. However, none of the editors on this page would do _even that_ until they realized that the alternative was a copyvio tag. Again, this page was a copyvio disaster for over a year, and nobody would do anything about it until I started enforcing the copyvio tagging. --Duk 16:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Of course, if you don't have a political agenda, maybe it's just that you're not very good at what you're trying to do.

Other way around, I'm very good at resolving copyvios. This page is, for the most part, copyvio free for the first time in over a year :-) --Duk 16:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

*Oh, and speaking of lack attention to detail, might I point out that my name is, and has always been, Calton, not "Carlton"? just like it says in my sig, just like it says at the top of my User Page in big bold letters, just like it says in the header on the Arbitration page. No "r" in the name. None. See over to the right, there? ---> --Calton | Talk 07:57, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

sorry, this was not intentional --Duk 16:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Against my better judgement, but out of courtesy, which I promised to you before, I wanted to mention that I mentioned your name again on my talk page. Travb 02:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Because of my better judgement, I have decided, a half hour later, to remove you from the arbitration. I don't agree with your copyvio, but you do it in such a way that it is within current copyvio rules.Travb 03:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I need to apologize to you

As you know, I have been digging deep these past two days for evidence about the arbitration. I found that I was wrong, that you seem to be apolitical in this revert war. I still disagree with your copyright zeal and how you apply the copyrights in a heavy hand way to the winter soldier page. That is my opinion, and I would rather not discuss it anymore. But I don't think you have a political motivation. I believe your statment now:

i've no interest in this article other than trying to resolve old copyvios [21]

I apologize for my accusation otherwise.

When I came to wikipedia just over a month ago, it was from frontpagemag.com, and I was used to insults etc. More than anyone, you have made me become more civil here. For that I thank you.

We will probably butt heads again, but I felt like I owed you an apology.Travb 06:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Duk 23:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Some advice

I'd appreciate some advice on The Kinks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). In January, Painbearer (talk · contribs) inserted a large amount of material plagiarized from their AMG biography. This went unnoticed until about two weeks ago, when it was listed on WP:CP. While the article has since been edited such that I can't find any phrases of more than a half dozen or so words that are still exactly replicated from AMG, a close read shows that much of the article is still a directly derived work.

Bgruber reverted to the pre-copyvio revision, per the guidelines on WP:CP, when he listed it there; Painbearer immediately reverted back. When I started working the copyvio backlog, I also reverted to the pre-copyvio version, and Painbearer again reverted back, and pledges to continue doing so.

My specific questions are:

Is this amount of infringement worth worrying about?
If so, how would you suggest dealing with this user? I don't care if he ends up hating me, but I'd rather not have to deal with this every day for weeks on end.

If you reply, I'd prefer that you did so only here, instead of on my talk page where he's (more) likely to see it. —Cryptic (talk) 00:01, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice in this matter, and especially for the backup. It wasn't my intention to drag you into the situation, too. —Cryptic (talk) 17:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok

I will change the copyvio information in the article with other words, so that there is no problem with the copyied info anymore and no problem with any kind of guides or thinks. I don't think that "much of the article" is "exactly derived work" and I think that you are exaggerating this, to nail me down. Nevertheless, I assure you that when the final output is on, there won't be no problems with copyvio anynmore.

Best regards: Painbearer 08:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Just wanted to drop by and thank you for taking the time to respond to my RfA. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 16:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Halibutt

Since you have supported me during my RfA, I wonder if you could review and comment on the RfA for Halibutt, the first person I have nominated myself. There seem to be a heated debate and votes of experienced, unbiased editors would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:12, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 08:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Nov 2005 - Feb 2006

Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Evidence. You may make proposals and comments at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Workshop. Fred Bauder 20:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Expansion Fleet

Hello,

Several months ago, if not longer, I added a page called "Expansion Fleet". I saw in the deletion log a link to another URL, and wondering why my page was deleted, I checked out that URL... To my amazement, I discovered the text of "what the game is about" exactly copied from my website at http://www.expansionfleet.com/ ! I, rather than the other website, am the one who wrote that text, and while I'm not having a problem with others using the same text, I don't feel it's fair that my article should be deleted on charge of violating copyright when I'm the one who wrote it to begin with.

You can contact me about this at masterphoenix@skynet.be Thank you.

Hi Masterphoenix, I'm sorry your article Expansion Fleet was deleted. I can un-delete it if you give explicit GFDL permission for Wikipedia to use the text, and verify that you are the copyright owner (see my email for more details). --Duk 15:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

MONGO RfA

I appreciate your support on my RfA. Let me know if I can do anything for you! Happy editing!--MONGO 03:50, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Thanks for chipping in on dyk- I was away for part of the week. It'd be great if you keep helping out- there are enough suggestions to update the template a few times a day at the moment. Everything looks fine, two minor things- you need to update the date and time for the next update at the top of the suggestion page, and mgm (when he worked on the page) and I prefer to archive the template after it has appeared on the main page- that way any useful grammar edits or disambigs that happen while the template is on the main page are preserved in the archive.Thanks again. --nixie 01:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Shari Lewis: oops!

I usually get my own images from PD sources. Missed that angle on this one. I'll seek a PD image, or let it go without one. SBTC (Sorry 'bout that, Chief!) Thanks for catching it. Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia Vaoverland 18:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Cheers

I just wanted to drop a line to say thanks for your support on my RfA. There were a lot of names I didn't recognise, yours amongst them, so I look forward to working with you in the future. Thanks, Hiding talk 10:02, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge of Proby Thomas Cautley into Proby Cautley

I have merged Proby Thomas Cautley into Proby Cautley, as you suggested. Please check it out. Thanks.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 07:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Hi, Duk. I just want to thank you very much for supporting my RfA, and to say also that I hope I'll make a good job of it. I'm supposed to be working on an assignment at the moment, and had been reducing my Wikipedia activity, so delayed thanking people, but I'm finding the new rollback button so easy to use that I'm just keeping Wikipedia open on my browser while working on other things, and I thought I'd like to thank at least a few of those who supported me while I'm here. Cheers. AnnH ^(talk) 22:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Did you know archives (Recent additions)

Well... thank you for trying to maintain the page, unfortunately, you've made it worse for me in attempting to fix everything. --AllyUnion (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Recent additions

I am begging you to stop archiving the information of Template talk:Did you know, and place them into a holding cell. I plan to overwrite all the content in anything numbered with Wikipedia:Recent additions #. Further archiving and additions just keep preventing me from fully fixing the archives. Furthermore, it is apparent that the archive process has gone astray ever since the bot went offline. This means that there are missing items in the archive that I don't know about, and at 10 days running trying to check over the archives, I don't care anymore. Furthermore, to add to my frustration, people keep changing the archive making it difficult for me to finalize and process all the text in the format it should be. --AllyUnion (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Your name mentioned on my talk page

Your name was mentioned on my talk page, but I moved the discussion to Winter Soldier Investigation. Travb 14:38, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Mark's RfA

G'day Duk,

thanks for your support on my RfA. I hereby pledge to use these new buttons for mostly good, and only occasionally evil. If you've any comments, questions, angry exclamations, etc. about my behaviour as an admin, please don't hesitate to let me know. Advice is always good, too. Thanks again, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 14:42, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Hey Duk, I can't believe the irony. TDC has a few sentences which he copied verbatium from an article that anon found. Sources Lets see how impartial you really are about copyright violations, and lets see TDC argue fair use now. I will sit back and laugh at the whole absurdity. Travb 23:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Travb, thanks for the note.

Are you talking about the first indented paragraph in the Sources section of the talk page? The one that starts out ..some of the most gruesome? If so I can't find it in the article. Has it been removed, or did I miss it? Let me know if it is still there.

If fair use is claimed then it has to be attributed and can't be passed off as a wikipedian's GFDL submission. --Duk 00:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

The copyvio paragraphs containing the ..some of the most gruesome text have indeed been deleted, not because they were in violation, but because they were also non-factual. They are no longer an issue. 165.247.222.110 21:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

You know the thing I like about you Duk, is that you are SMART--you play within the rules and cover your own ass. I respect that cunning. Nevermind about the copyright violation, I think it has been moved somewhere else--as you know, I don't agree with your copyright violation philosophy, and so lets just drop it. I have no problem with the sentence being in the article.

I mentioned your name in the [[22]] page, you can mention once again how you followed protocol in your actions (i.e. covered your ass)

Just so I am clear, but not that it matters: I still don't think you have a POV on this topic.Travb 00:24, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Other copyvios

the following was moved here from Travb's page by an anon

Full info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Duk#Copyright_violation

I'd appreciate an answer to my question. Again, has the text been removed already? Or is it still there (i can't seem to find it)?

If you come to my page complaining about a copyvio I will address it the same way I would for TDC, or any other editor. I'll go look for the copied text, look at the place it was copied from and then act accordingly. --Duk 01:33, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Suuuuuure you will. [23] 165.247.222.110 21:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

(replying to anon) If you were a registered user I would have left you a note to list it at WP:CP, that's how copyvios get resolved and that's how I came to work on WSI. --Duk 21:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

So instead of, "If you come to my page complaining about a copyvio I will address it the same way I would for TDC, or any other editor. I'll go look for the copied text, look at the place it was copied from and then act accordingly."

You really meant to say, "If you come to my page complaining about a copyvio I will address it the same way I would for TDC, or any other editor. I'll tell the person to go list it at WP:CP." Glad we're finally on the same page. Also, FYI I am registered. Just not logged in. And not being logged in has ZERO bearing on your ability to communicate with me if you are so inclined, as evidenced here. Perhaps you can find a more suitable excuse. Finally, as to your advice to list the violations at WP:CP, I have done so with little effect, and even tagged the article per your example. I don't have the admin tools you have to enforce the copyvio remedies, so the tag was removed. 165.247.214.235 01:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Anon, I think you misunderstand me; I was working WSI in the course of clearing the others section at WP:CP. If you go look at the history of that page you'll see that I spent four weeks working the section and was responsible for clearing a third of the listings there, including WSI. I did not start working on the page because Travb or TDC asked me.

If someone comes and complains about a page that I'm working on, that's one thing. But complaining about a copyvio on a page that wasn't even listed is a no-brainer, just tag the page and list it. Also, I generally ignore anons who intentionally insert copyright violations under a dynamic ip to avoid getting caught, unless they are unfairly maligning me. The fact that you are now doing this behind my back speaks volumes.--Duk 01:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't believe I've misunderstood you. Perhaps you stated your intent inaccurately? How many ways can you interpret this: "If you come to my page complaining about a copyvio I will address it the same way I would for TDC, or any other editor. I'll go look for the copied text, look at the place it was copied from and then act accordingly." It appears clear enough to me. As for unfairly maligning you behind your back, you'll have to conjure up a more valid cry for sympathy. You and Travb were having a conversation here, and I joined it -- AND I directly addressed you with my comments. Go apply your imagined larceny elsewhere, please. And I agree, your suggestion is a "no-brainer" alright. For someone with a history of neo-con POV, and abuse of Admin powers, you sure don't make much of an effort to conceal your efforts. 165.247.214.235 02:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Anon, you really don't understand. If Travb or TDC asks for help on a copyvio I'm involved in, I'll jump. If an anon, who edits anonomouslty for the purpose of inserting copyright violations into Wikipedia, asks me to do something that s/he knows damn well how to do themselves, and is just pestering me, I'll ignore them. --Duk 05:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand what you wrote. If you would like to amend it to include "copyvio I'm involved in," that's fine, if that was what you really intended to write. Forgive me for understanding what you wrote, and not what you meant to write. Now may I ask you why you insist on "pestering me" with comments like,

intentionally insert copyright violations under a dynamic ip to avoid getting caught
edits anonomouslty for the purpose of inserting copyright violations

We've been over this several times. The content you've brought into question was not originally added to those articles by me. I thought I was quite cooperative in assisting in the removal of content you specified as in violation (unlike some other editors that would rather drag you through a lengthy argument about what constitutes copyvio versus Fair Use, etc.). Any copyvio material that reappeared in the articles after they were re-written did so because you didn't initially cite it as being in violation. It was discovered later. So please quit accusing me of intentionally inserting and/or re-inserting copyvio material when I have done no such thing. You are just trying to push my buttons. And everyone knows you can't "avoid getting caught" by using a dynamic IP, nor do you need to "edit anonomouslty for the purpose of inserting copyright violations." You can do that perfectly well while logged in, as TDC has demonstrated. I refrain from logging in when editing controversial articles to avoid wikistalkers, pure and simple, and for no other reason. I hope that finally clears up any misunderstandings. 165.247.214.235 10:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Of course the material was added by you. This has been clearly documented. TDC 19:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

TDC, what you've documented is edits made by various Earthlink and Mindspring IPs, including some by me and some not by me, nothing more. Perhaps Kelly can reiterate that for you in clearer terms. As I've stated before, I don't intentionally submit copyright protected content. Just think for a moment -- had I been the original contributor, it would be no big deal for me to pull a TDC and claim, "I was still new and didn't know any better." Since the content has already been removed or rewritten, problem solved, and we can move on. (Am I correct, Duk, that all known violations to date have been addressed? Or are there still outstanding issues?) So there is no reason for me to lie. But if you two want to carry on with the pestering accusations, please yourselves. 165.247.214.230 22:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Am I correct, Duk, that all known violations to date have been addressed?. Unfortunately no, there are still copyright problems with the page, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_User:Duk. --Duk 23:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Duk, can you revisit the page to see if problems still exist? I've examined the "Dewey Canyon Revealed" section, and am satisfied that no copied content (except exact quotes, which is expected) remains in the article, nor does content that can be mistaken as "derivative" exist in the article. However, I need your approval before I take this issue off my "to do list." I've recently made minor modifications to that section to clarify an issue with TDC, but all copyvio matters seem to have already been addressed through a series of previous edits. I'd rather not let this problem fester any longer than necessary. Also, at the link you provided above, you state: "This is just one of many examples." Could I impose upon you to briefly indicate any remaining examples, so that I can address them? It would be greatly appreciated. I hope your holidays have been enjoyable. 165.247.214.71 00:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Answered in the new section below --Duk 02:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You can obfuscate this issue all you like, but the evidence is rather overwhelming. An anon IP has been contributing large amounts of material to VVAW related articles since July of 2004. The anon IP all comes from the same Earthlink/Mindspring (they are one in the same) local proxy server located in Oakland Ca, not just the main national server. All contributions from the anon behave in a similar manner, contribute similar material, and have similar discussion styles. They all come from a dial up user, meaning this is not a public portal found at a library or school, as these institutions no longer use dial up connections. Your denial is rather transparent when one looks at the evidence as a whole. TDC 23:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

...as these institutions no longer use dial up connections. Help me out and inform the administrators of this. As for the rest of your babble, see above: "But if you two want to carry on with the pestering accusations, please yourselves." 165.247.214.71 00:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Well then, why not simply provide us the name of the institution you are using? I am sure that can be easily verified. TDC 20:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Your CheckUser request

I'm not sure what you're asking for me to do with that request. Can you be more specific? Kelly Martin (talk) 06:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Electroslag welding

That's a great image you added to electroslag welding. I know they take awhile to draw up, but do you accept image requests for other welding methods? =). --Spangineer^es (háblame) 23:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

The only problem I see is that sometimes, the guide tube is non-consumable (and note; just one m). "Electrode guide tube" might be better. I don't have good image editing software on this computer, but unless you beat me to it I'll fix it soon in one of my university's computer labs. And incidentally, all I know about welding is what I read about it as well—my actual welding experience totals to less than a few hours, but my time spent reading welding textbooks and writing welding articles is dozens of times higher than that =). --Spangineer^es (háblame) 00:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Awesome! Now once I finish writing the article, I can nominate it for FAC. The only suggestions I can make are related to a couple of the captions—I'd replace "Shield gas" with "Shielding gas", and "Electrode, Tungston (non-consumable)" with "Tungsten electrode (nonconsumable)" or "Nonconsumable tungsten electrode" (note the e in Tungsten). And sorry about my inconsistency in the use of non-consumable vs. nonconsumable—my sources seem to suggest that no dash is better, despite my earlier message. Thanks so much! --Spangineer^es (háblame) 19:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

malo's RfA

Thank you!

Duk, thanks for your support on my RFA. I was rather suprised at the overwhelming support I received. Thank you for your confidence in me. I hope that I'll live up to your expectations in the future as well. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 05:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Wishes

I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. --Bhadani 14:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Conde McCullough

I can't figure out what happened to the page history for Conde McCullough. I wrote the article in 2004, but the first edit on the history is yours at 21:23, August 4, 2005 with some mention of a copyright violation. As I wrote everything with very little outside help, I can't image where the copyright issue was. Please explain, there is nothing on the talk page regarding this matter. Cacophony 20:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_User:Duk

Anon's recent question from Other Copyvios section above;

Duk, can you revisit the page to see if problems still exist? I've examined the "Dewey Canyon Revealed" section, and am satisfied that no copied content (except exact quotes, which is expected) remains in the article, nor does content that can be mistaken as "derivative" exist in the article. However, I need your approval before I take this issue off my "to do list." I've recently made minor modifications to that section to clarify an issue with TDC, but all copyvio matters seem to have already been addressed through a series of previous edits. I'd rather not let this problem fester any longer than necessary. Also, at the link you provided above, you state: "This is just one of many examples." Could I impose upon you to briefly indicate any remaining examples, so that I can address them? It would be greatly appreciated. I hope your holidays have been enjoyable. 165.247.214.71 00:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Anon, thanks for the holiday greeting, same to you.

About the Dewey Canyon Revealed section, I don't think any copied text remains. But, as explained in the evidence section above, it doesn't matter. The section started as a straight cut and paste copyright violation, and the current writing was derived from the copied text. Since copyrights extend to derivative works, the current section was still a problem the last time I looked at it.

P.S. I have no intentions of looking at the latest edits, see below. --Duk 03:14, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia's instructions for handling copyright violations is to revert the article to a non-copyvio version, or to delete the text in question, not to edit it until it is no longer the same. This copyright violation was never properly resolved the second time it showed up and remains a problem.

As far as my involvement in the article, I'm done. I'm sick of being vilified and called names by other administrators and long time editors who are idiots, who don't bother to read and understand Wikipedia's instructions for clearing copyright violations, who are too lazy to look at the Fucking diffs for themselves, and who believe whatever their sychophants tell them, instead of doing the work of reading the evidence and thinking for themselves. --Duk 03:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand the Wikipedia instructions to revert to a pre-vio version, or delete the text in question, and while I may view it as a formality rather than a necessity, I made sure to completely delete that section prior to inserting my rewrites anyway. Just trying to cover all the bases, so to speak.

I can appreciate the frustration you feel at the name calling and unjust accusations, and I'd like to apologize for my part in that. I was expressing my own frustration at being accused of making edits a year and a half ago (because I shared an ISP provider and similar POV with earlier editors), or intentionally inserting copyvio content into articles. I retaliated by returning equally baseless accusations that you were abusing your admin powers to remove content and whole articles that didn't fit your POV. Of course I didn't believe that, but I was in tit-for-tat mode, and that was wrong of me. I've seen the extensive work you've done on cleaning up copyvios, and it speaks for itself. 165.247.214.16 13:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I made sure to completely delete that section prior to inserting my rewrites anyway. Just trying to cover all the bases, so to speak.

Ummm, no you didn’t. [24]

Ummm, yes I did. [25] 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You changed or added a few words here and there, there is not substantial difference between what you started with and what you finished with. And I apologize if your pleas that all the copyvio have been removed, because you have made statements every time this issue is raised.

You are correct about my modifications being minor. In fact, I described them above by saying, "I've recently made minor modifications to that section..." I am glad that we are in agreement. Your apology is accepted. 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You claimed it was fixed on October 14, 2004 [26], it wasn’t.

You claimed they did not exist on February 5, 2005 [27] but they did.

Wrongo, TDC. Accuracy not so EZ? You've provided links to discussions between "Rob" and "Sewilco," not me. And you can save your prattling on about "Same ISP!!!" etc., because it is getting old. It's not likely you'll be arguing with "Rob" through these systems again unless he returns as a TA, so get used to it. I did find Rob's old talk notes extremely helpful several times recently, like when you started inserting what you thought was damning information from that political stooge Pitkin. Good times. After early next year, you can wave goodbye to us also and start breaking in a new set of wiki-editors, some of whom will no doubt butt heads with your "efforts" here as I and others have. 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

And then again on August 9, 2005, you claimed all the copyvio material was removed [28], but once again it wasn’t.

It sure looks removed to me. Oh, and was that me? Or an evil henchman? 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

And then on September 26, 2005 [29] you claimed none existed, and then you went so far as to question Duk’s motivations for his actions.

Apparently here you have mistakenly provided the wrong link. Try again? What you linked was discussion about a minor mis-quote Duk made, a minor oversight of like 1 or two words which he corrected and immediately apologized for, and we moved on. And we've gone over the "question his motivations" bit above (see: my reasons why, and my apology). Get with the scene here, TDC, you seem to be lagging several posts behind on everything lately. 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I am sorry if your credibility has sunk to such a low level, but you made your bed, now you get to sleep in it. TDC 21:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Again, your apology is accepted. 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

To: Duk -

I won't be clogging up your talk page further. I won't be offended one bit if you delete any of the above at your whim. TDC can look for it in the edit histories for all I care, and I won't be responding to him further here. The apologies as well as the best holiday wishes are sincere. Cheers, 165.247.219.222 06:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Solifugae edit added to BJAODN

I've added [30] to BJAODN. Good work in spotting that vandalism! Andjam 13:02, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Wishes

Hello, I wish you and your family a prosperous and happy New Year 2006! We shall surely remain actively involved in the Project Wikipedia. --Bhadani 17:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Socks (cat)

I'm glad you at least thought it was humorous. --malber 21:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for info Duk

Thanks for info Duk about being unblocked.Travb 22:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey Duk, what copyright bot do you use?

Is it python wikipediabot?. If so, would you care to tell me how the h@$% to install it on windows? I have another wikipage--unrelated to all of this, which I am trying to upload 1500 pics. Happy New Years. Travb 05:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Duk for the info. I knew I would eventually be blocked for my unruly behavior, which you saw personally yourself. I feel bad about accusing you of being a partisan hack, like others at WSI. I was wrong, as I have admitted before. My wikipage is not up yet, but here is one example that I have seen:

http://www.newmars.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page.

Happy New Year Travb 16:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Quadell's RfB

Sorry about reverting over your comment on the page! Good to see you put it back on there! That shifty vandal(s)! -- MicahMN | μ 23:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

My bureaucrat nomination

Thank you!

Thank you for your kind words on my nomination for bureaucrat. I'm disappointed with the results, but heartened by the support I received by so many fine Wikipedians. You're "one of the good-uns", as they say. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 08:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Bandsaw page - Resaw

Hi Duk. Thanks for fixing up my stuff up on the resaw page. For some reason I read your "eigth inch" as "eighth inch", which I changed to 1/8". Something was telling me it was wrong but it was too early in the morning for the logic circuits to kick in. Are you a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Woodworking? It's flagging a bit lately so all help is welcome. Cheers. SilentC 23:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks from rogerd

File:Baseball (ball) closeup.jpg

Hi Duk- Thanks for your support on my RfA. If I can be of any service please leave me a message --rogerd 01:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: User:69.172.251.162

Thanks for dealing with the issue. I'll leave you a message if he does it again. VegaDark 07:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt revert and re-blocking. VegaDark 01:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Giovanni Cardinal Cavestri

Yeah looks like the original page was deleted. However, your temporary subpage doesn't seem to exist as well. But whatsowever, I'd think it'd always be better to rewrite an article and getting out of some copyright stuff that way instead of deleting the article. --Maxl 23:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Please Comment

I realize this is not your favorite topic to deal with, but your input is relevant to the outcome of the RfArb.

Namely, the anon continues to state that with regard to the Winter Soldier Investigation article you have certified it as copyvio clean [31] [32]. DTC 18:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Or more accurately, this anon continues to state that known copyvio issues have been addressed, as we've been working to clear up the copyios for several months now. I can't state with certainty that it is "copyvio clean," as we've both discovered new questionable material after we thought it was all cleared out. I can say that all known issues have been addressed thus far. I hope there are no additional violations lurking in the text, and I hope you would point them out if you knew of any. It would be great to finally lay that issue to rest. But TDC is right, perhaps a word from you on the Arb page would help move things along. 165.247.214.107 19:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It has been moved. [33] DTC 21:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Duk. I see you've dropped a note here and offered to participate. Would you mind giving a brief statement on the points I put forth in the links provided by TDC above (and also copied to here)? Primarily, your current understanding of the copyvio situation with the WSI article. The most appropriate place for the statement would be on the evidence page, I believe. Thanks again, 165.247.202.248 09:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi anon, I responded at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Proposed decision, since that is where the conversation was moved, but didn't comment on the article's current copyvio situation since I don't know what it is.

As far as removing copyvios from the article; I did it once, I did it right, and I'm not going to do it again. What I know is that afterwards, a bunch were re-added. I haven't been following the article very much since. --Duk 20:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Duk. Remember that anger you felt when everyone was piling bullshit on you and making baseless accusations about you? I'm feeling a bit of the same right now. I can already see this is going to get messier before it gets better. I'm moving this to Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Proposed decision... 165.247.202.116 05:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Dude, you're the one stalking this article and inserting copyright violations for going on two years now (I know I know, you insist you're the good anon, falsely accused. And the bad anon is someone else). Also, until now I thought you were serious; but I'm starting to wonder if you're really just a simple troll; pretending not to see the links given in evidence, giving me the runaround and having a good time at my expense. --Duk 06:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

You can't be serious. I see the links you have provided. (Many of which link to now-deleted versions, btw.) I know we're both looking at the same thing, so that isn't the problem. I think the big sticking point here is "intent." My intent is to see the article stabilized as a factual, balanced, neutral and copyvio-free document. I doubt it would ever be "Featured Article" material because of low subject-matter interest, but I'd like to see it have the quality of a featured article anyway. Please tell me how I can possibly meet that goal by "intentionally" inserting copyvio material. That is preposterous. It is illogical. It is counter-productive. Hundreds or thousands of people visit Wikipedia every day, so it stands to reason that copied or plagerized material is eventually going to be spotted and yanked. So how does that serve my purpose to insert copied text when it takes very little effort to read the text, digest it, and formulate my own way of presenting it in non-copyvio form? Your constant accusations just make no sense at all. Now you know my intent, so what what is with this made-up intent you keep trying to apply to me? You keep painting me as a grade-school kid trying to see which articles I can corrupt and destroy by sneakily inserting copyvio content, like a ticking timebomb, when no one is looking. Give me a break. I'm a responsible, educated, married, working homeowner that is probably older than you.

Damnit, Duk... you wonder if I'm just a troll? I wonder the same thing about you! Good work with the "puppy eye" comment, by the way. I'm embarrassed that I took the bait, and responded in kind. I see that you didn't respond to my outline of what really happened with the copyvios. There are no good times here, Duk, in fact this is really draining on me. It's not like we can sit down over a beer and hash this out, but I'm actually tempted to do the next best thing... do you think a phone call would accomplish anything? It would be faster, and at least hopefully show that you are dealing with a human being and not a troll. Neither of us wants copyvios in the article. Neither of us likes being dragged through this Arb process. Neither of us likes being misrepresented or unjustly accused. We shouldn't be at odds like this. How about you suggest something? 165.247.212.88 22:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

A phone call?!? Wow, the desperation is getting deep. Ten Dead Chickens 23:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Anon, problems like the WSI RFA are solved by discussion and evidence in an open form, where a group of people eventually come to some kind of shared perception of reality. How can I maintain an assumption of good faith on your part when you do the opposite; refuse to participate in the RFA and start up personal conversations with the arbitrators on the side regarding the outcome of the case? I'll think on the phone call for a while--Duk 23:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"How can I maintain an assumption of good faith on your part when you do the opposite; refuse to participate in the RFA and start up personal conversations with the arbitrators on the side regarding the outcome of the case?"

I always assume good faith, until my assumptions are absolutely proven wrong. I've never refused to participate in the RFA. See this, please. As for personal conversations, I disagree with the characterization of them as "bad faith," they were not, but now that I think about it, you could certainly make a case they they were improper or outside of procedure. For that I apologize, and future Arb-related discussions will be kept on the Arb pages. I'll find a suitable place to apologize to the Arbitrators as well. And if I may make a suggestion: Please don't let TDC egg you on. 165.247.212.88 23:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

A ton of evidence against you, not a single word in reply. No evidence of your own, no explanation, nada, zilch, nothing. You and TDC were the topic of the whole RFA. I specifically tried to avoid the RFA because my role was ancillary, I still ended up contributing more than you.

Please don't bother me any more unless there is something constructive to be gained. --Duk 00:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Friendly Words of Advice

Be warned when tangling with Rob the anon, he will drag you in circles for weeks and hold up the entire arbitration process. With all the incriminating evidence against Rob, I doubt the arbiters wont be able to see past his lies and his latest attempt to stall this process. Ten Dead Chickens 21:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

You are right. But the arbcom case is almost done so I can't give up now, gotta answer everything, even if the anon is trolling me. --Duk 22:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Feb - June 2006

Copyvio handling

You wrote:

I have a (small) bone to pick with you over the way this copyright violation was resolved. You edited the copied text until it wasn't exactly the same. The resulting work is derived from the earlier copyvio. Copyrights extend to derived works. Please resolve copyvios by reverting to the pre-copyvio version (per WP:CP) or by deleting the offending text altogether (per WP:C). It isn't possible to edit out a copyright violation in the manner you tried. After the copyright violation is correctly resolved the article can be expanded.

I believe you need to be a little more familiar with WP:C yourself. I quote:

Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is perfectly legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate it in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia.

That's what I was attempting to do. The article probably could have used further editing (and I said so on the talk page). I am quite familiar with both WP:C and WP:CP, having cleared a ton of copyvios over the last few weeks. Note that reverting to a non-copyvio version or replacing the existing content with {{copyvio}} are not the only options. I quote from WP:CP:

In addition to nominating potential copyright infringements for deletion, you could:

Replace the article's text with new (re-written) content of your own.

Yes, in the context of WP:CP this is supposed to be on a temp page, but I believe you don't need to follow process blindly if you can just rewrite the darn thing enough to avoid any copyright violation in the first place. I'll leave Jill Craigie for you to revert to my version (or edit it some more) if you can be convinced of my position. One more quote for you, from User:Lanoitarus, who handles a lot of the requests on WP:RCV:

Unless the exact text of the article was stolen from you (that is, the wording, not the concept), there is no violation.

Regards, howch e ng {chat} 07:18, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. But you didn't address my point. Copyrights extend to dreivative works.

Also; you quoted:

In addition to nominating potential copyright infringements for deletion, you could:

* Replace the article's text with new (re-written) content of your own.

You didn't do this. You modified the copied text, somewhat.--Duk 15:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC) --Duk 15:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Which is why I said on the talk page to please do any more editing if anyone felt it was required. I believe we're working under different philosophies here. I'm not an inclusionist by any means, but it seems to me that it shouldn't take much effort to make this article usable here. Your choice of actions leads me to believe you've got an acute case of copyright paranoia; rather than working to keep the content, you'd prefer to take the easy route and just remove it. I'll take another stab at it and you can review it if you wish. Also, you should note that there were several paragraphs that did not come from the referenced page, so those can probably be restored (although it's entirely possible they're copyvioed from somewhere else -- I didn't check). Regards, howch e ng {chat} 16:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

It's my experience that when people start blatantly slapping pejorative labels around in a course of an argument, directly or indirectly, they don't have a case. When people who do this they are engaging in ad hominem attacks; to follow process blindly, you've got an acute case of copyright paranoia. Can we please be WP:CIVIL.

Which is why I said on the talk page to please do any more editing if anyone felt it was required

If you want to resolve copyvios then do so, but do it right. Don't leave the job half done. And don't be un-civil when people ask you to do it right. --Duk 17:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I did not intend those remarks to be uncivil and I apologize if you took them that way. I meant the term "copyright paranoia" as a reference to m:Avoid copyright paranoia (I figured as an administrator, you'd understand the reference) and "following process blindly" was a poor choice of words -- a better wording would have been "I believe you don't need to follow process precisely as it's prescribed; WP:IAR can be invoked when it's easy enough to do so."

Don't leave the job half done. And don't be un-civil when people ask you to do it right.

I understood the wiki way to be a collaborative effort. You could have completed the work, or you could have simply asked me to do it without reverting to the pre-copyvio version. WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF work both ways here and accusing me of ad hominem attacks only introduces rancor into the discussion where none was intended.

Let's get back to the point here. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what constitutes a "derivative work." My guess is that the line between "derivative" and "good enough to avoid a copyright violation" is fairly subjective. I've taken another stab at editing it and if you feel this is still too close, let me know (or as I said earlier, feel free to contribute). Thanks. howch e ng {chat} 17:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll concede your point. For Jill Craigie, we're really only talking about the second, third, and fourth paragraphs. The rest of it is from the second reference I added. I think I can just stub down the article some more and we can get to a point where we can agree the article is no longer even close to being derivative. howch e ng {chat} 19:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

Hi Duk, cheers for your comments on the above FAC, I hope I've addressed them now, I'd be grateful if you could have another look. Thanks again. --PopUpPirate 22:21, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking the same about Design and Australia! Done a movearound and edit to reflect this. UK section could indeed do with more, but not critical... will see what I can do unless someone gets there before me! --PopUpPirate 22:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Maps

Yes, you're right, the data on maps isn't copyrightable, although the creative components are. The copyrightable bits can include colors, the thickness of lines, choice of fonts, etc. So "tracing" is fine, so long as these creative bits aren't copied. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 11:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

re: Roxci Rhodes

Sorry. It's just that I don't know how to put it my own words. But maybe perhaps that it's best that anyone else make an article on Roxci Rhodes. Maybe you can do this, Okay?

Re: Copyright violations

Thanks for your comment. I just wanted to point out almost all of the contributions by User:Kiop have been copyright violations. What's more disturbing is that this user has recently started falsely claiming authorship of content to avoid being noticed for copyright violations (the first time I saw was on Image:Harbhajansingh.jpg). Mike Dillon 05:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you know if there is a procedure for reporting serial copyright violators? User:Kiop seems unwilling or unable to understand the problem Wikipedia has with contributing copyrighted material without it having been licensed. Since the problems with the aforementioned image, Kiop has uploaded more images that are probably imagevio's and has used more misleading licensing choices (read fraudulent); one example of the latter is at Image:200-1-.gif which uses {{PD-old}}, but is almost certainly a more recent image. Mike Dillon 01:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It looks like one of the copyvios that Kiop was involved in, Bhai Taru Singh was deleted and then recreated with the same copyvio content by User:Kalsi (possibly a Kiop sockpuppet). The page is still listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 February 5, but it doesn't seem to have been marked as closed (not sure if they do that on that page). Mike Dillon 16:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. I don't want to seem like I'm just dumping this situation on you, I just figured it was best to involve an admin who was already familiar with the situation. Mike Dillon 04:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Images by banned users

Duk, because of your comment at WP:IfD about Kiop I wanted to draw your attention to User:Catapult/Images, which is a bot-created list Freakofnurture set up for me to find images by banned users. I've been striking out the ones I've already looked at, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm comfortable with their status; if you see any names you know and have qualms about on the list, you might want to check them out. It will keep growing, although I don't think Freak runs it all the time. I'll look through the Kiop list by hand now, but I thought you might be interested in ours. Chick Bowen 16:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, those Kiop images are deeply problematic. I've listed a few at IfD; I have to go now but will finish up the list when I get home, probably around 03:00 or 04:00 UTC. Chick Bowen 17:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm doing a bunch right now. I also deleted one of his articles, Bhai Veer Singh (blatant copyvio, no permission stated). Chick Bowen 03:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I've created a page with suspected accounts and IP addresses being used by this user User:Mike Dillon/Kiop clones. Mike Dillon 16:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Why did you block me?

Hey, I've been autoblocked by you. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.50.32.67 (talk • contribs)

Sounds like collateral damage; sometimes when a problem user is blocked it affects other users too. Were you blocked under the same ip that you left this note with?

If you have any more trouble just email me and include the details from the block note. --Duk 17:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Kiop/Kalsi

Huh--which is the sockpuppet? I see that Kiop is still blocked. I'm not against a tentative unblocking, but I am concerned that this user does not understand our image copyright policies. I've deleted, tagged as copyvios, or listed at IfD virtually all of Kiop's images. Would he agree to a moratorium on images, perhaps? Let me know your thoughts. Chick Bowen 21:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, sounds good. I'll keep an eye on him too. Chick Bowen 22:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I've been autoblocked by you. Why?

Hey, I've been autoblocked by you. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wandering Star (talk • contribs)

My RfA

Thanks for your vote

My request for adminship passed with a final result of 78/2/0. Hopefully I will live up to everyone's expectations. Please ask if I can ever help out with anything in the future.
Martyman - 09:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

semi-protection

Hi. Thanks for the semi-protection. I don't mind leaving it in place. Really what reason do unregitered users have to edit another users page anyway? I am wondering what the wikipedia policy is on such things though... --Martyman-(talk) 02:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool, looks fine according to that. I might leave it on for a while then. Thanks. --Martyman-(talk) 03:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Bhai Himmat Singh copyvio

Hi Duk. After I tagged Bhai Himmat Singh copyvio, I decided to look into what seemed like its apparent source, SikhiWiki, and found that it was GDFL. Apparently I didn't notice that the text also appears on sikh-history.com. Thanks for catching that. Szyslak ( [ +t, +c, +m, +e ]) 08:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Advice on page deletion

Hi. I have a quesiton about the speedy deletion of an article that keeps getting re-created. I speedy deleted Charles Thun under A7 "Unremarkable people or groups". User:Spotthatby210 recreated the page multiple times and only now after I have given up deleting the page has entered into discussion about it. Another editor has since marked it as a CSD. I am not sure what to do in a case of a disputed speedy delete like this. Should I give up and instead list if for AfD or should the page be protected or the user blocked? --Martyman-(talk) 02:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Follow up on old vandal

On 26 October 2005, you left a message at User_talk:205.222.240.2 saying, "I've requested help from a Montgomerty Public School IT Security Officer. Email me of anyone wants more details." Do you remember the outcome of the incident, or is that too long ago? The IP was last blocked in November for 6 months, and there have been no comments since. I have recently discovered, though, that the IP address belongs to Robert Frost Middle School, which, as you said, is part of the Montgomery County Public Schools system. (FYI, I've had bad experiences with MCPS's IT staff in the past.) --M @th wiz 20 20 21:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Chew Valley Lake FAC

Hi, I've resubmitted Chew Valley Lake as a featured article candidate, because it didn't receive enough support last time.

As you have edited this page in the past I wondered if you would be willing to visit and comment/support on the nomination? Rod 20:25, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

How did you create this image?

image:Brayton cycle.svg Hi Duk. I'm looking for ways to create pv, ts diagrams, and the nice schematic you have on the left there. Can you tell me how to create the likes of this? Cheers Steveire 22:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I used to use Sodipodi. Now I use Inkscape. These are open source svg editors. --Duk 01:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Gas turbine copyvio

If I read it and then write it down it will only be knowledge I have asheved on my own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stian1979 (talk • contribs)

I'm not quite sure what your point is here. Basically anything published is protected by copyright, so we can't use anything in wikipedia that has been previously published, unless we get certain permission. Your edit to gas turbines was copied from [34]. --Duk 03:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

gas turbine

Please read it trough and if you don't find it good enough and feel it has to be erazed please save the text to a word document and give it to me later an I will try to rewrite it. Or leave it there and I will do changes later if you think it's neaded.

Regards

Wikipedia Policy on elements

Hi Nickshanks, don't change spelling from American to British on this article. Please go and change aluminium back to aluminum. See the WP:MOS. Cheers :) --Duk 15:41, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Where differences exist in in US/UK spellings, Wikipedia policy is to spell elements using their standardised IUPAC names: Aluminium (with two is) and Sulfur (with an f), regardless of whether the rest of the article is in UK or US English. If you see anyone changing the Falcon 1 article spelling back to aluminum please pass on this information and revert it. See the WP:MOS :P Thanks. — Nicholas (reply) @ 10:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

New wikipedian looking for guidance

Greetings, Duk. I wonder if I could trouble you to review a sampling of edits I've recently made and give me some feedback.

Trail braking Edited initial definition and added 'disputed' tag.
North Fair Oaks, California Reverted childish vandalism, but took no other action
Pulgas Water Temple Started a stub

There's so much to learn with the article standards and tag syntax, and I'm hoping to get more immediate guidance to keep me on the right track. Thank you. --Mud4t 03:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Fumari

No I didnt click the button but Gianfranco gave me CD with the pictures (which means I can do what ever I want). He is not making his pictures for copyright or money but for his pure joy. Luka Jačov 18:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Duk--Thanks for the help with the Prairie Restoration site. I wondered how to properly format the picture to fit inside a box and to the right. Thank you also for fixing the copyright problem. I'm so glad there's people like you keeping track of things to make the articles more professional, reliable and readable!--Jwilson4 20:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

A favor please

Hello friend, do you remember me? In the month of September 2005, your vote had made me an administrator. we all know that the life here is exciting and full of challenges. I would request you to please spare fem moments for me, and favor me with your comments and suggestions (here please) on my performance as a wikipedian. Let us continue to build the Better than the Best global encyclopedia. Thank you and regards. --Bhadani 10:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bhadani, yes I remember you. We first met when you re-wrote the Battle of Saragarhi after a copyvio deletion. I remember feeling happy that there was someone on the English Wikipedia from that part of the world who could write about it. You are a wonderfull editor and administrator and wikipedia is lucky to have you. Best wishes, and keep up the good work. --Duk 15:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Template:PD-CAGov

Thanks for inquiring about this. I've updated WP:PDOMG, where I keep track of various dubious PD templates. I've also replated the contents Template:PD-CAGov with Template:no license to better reflect our current state of knowledge. I think the best thing to do now is to re-tag all images in Category:California government images. (I started to do that, but the wiki has been rather slow, especially when loading images.) A number of the images can be kept under different rationales: I've changed the obvious logos (Template:logo) and seals (Template:coatofarms), and have tagged historial images that cannot easily be replaced or images of a promotional nature (state government officials) as "fair use". But a lot more work remains to be done. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Obviously, what we need to do know is get a ballot initiative going to change the law and release all state-owned images on state websites, and any that may be, into the public domain. Daniel Case 22:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Smile

-- Malber (talk • contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

User:Travb

I suggest that the unblocking was a mistake, until that user identifies all of the copyright violations in their editing. User:Gmaxwell/trouble is the beginning of the list. Jkelly 02:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure he can identify all his copyvios, but you can ask.

whether the unblocking is a mistake or not depends on his future actions, not his past actions. He promised to stop what got him in trouble. He has created a lot of content, presented a successful arbcom case and, yes, caused a lot of trouble with his fair use activism. If you read his apology/explanation/promise to stop statement you can see the reasoning behind his behavior, which has never been malicious. Blocks should be preventative, not punitive IMO.

I appreciate your feedback and hope my unblocking isn't a mistake, I'll certainly admit it if it is. I think we should always be looking for ways to accept serious contributers and turn them around when they cause trouble, instead of rejecting them and creating more enemies that go out and start wikipeida hate sites.--Duk 03:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism - semiprotection

Hi Duk, you have just semiprotected Hydropower because of a long history of vandalism. The same is happening to Hydroelectricity. Please can you also semiprotect that too (I am sick of rv v). Thanks. Sendervictorius 09:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

done--Duk 15:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Arch dam

I tend to agree with you on your sentiment that eventually all the types of dams should eventually have their own article. I just wanted to be sure that my creation of this separate article was not seen as problematic to others. Kukini 23:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Not problematic IMO, could go either way. Personally, I'd put my energy into expanding the Arch dam article instead of making it a re-direct. I was just looking for a good picture to add :)--Duk 00:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Great addition to the article!!! Kukini 03:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know we could do that

Cool...I had no idea we could lighten and I assume darken images...good show! [35]--MONGO 02:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On June 9, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Condit Hydroelectric Project, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

my 2a page

Thanks for your suggestion! Tony 09:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

How was coal made?

Hello my name is Xavia Leef, and I am here to talk about How was coal made and how it was invented.

Many millions of years ago, there lived dinosaurs. Days went by, and green fresh plants started to grow. More days went by, and fresh brown trees began to grow for the dinosaurs to eat. If there were no trees or plants for the dinosaurs to eat, the dinosaurs would die. Days went past and the sun came up. The trees began to fall down into swamps and go peat. Days went past and the dinosaurs were dying. The dinosaurs became soil. The sun madae the peat very hot and the swamps became layers of trees and plants. The dinosaurs became the layers too. The sun became even more hotter. It helped the peat to become coal. Coal looks like a black black rock. Ive seen coal before. Matua Boss bought some into Rm 14. When Manu toched it, he got black hands. Manu's a boy from my class. He's really naughty to. You should see him act like a baby. Yesturday when he wore loose pants, they fell off!

Well, gotta go have my kai. Chocya later!

Hi Xavia, that is a beautiful name! -- Duk 05:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:DSCF2839-sq.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DSCF2839-sq.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

copyright violations

Hey Duk, a user has started targeting me alone for "copyright violations" on my user page. User:CJK, User:Tjive, and User:Isprin were ignored completly.

Any suggestions on how to handle this?

Signed: Travb (talk) 21:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Given that you're mentoring this user, would you mind having a conversation with them about their behaviour. Beyond the above, see [36], [37] and [38]. Jkelly 22:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It is nice to be so popular. User:Jkelly was one of the editors that was so excited to see me booted indefinatly. Obviously, User:Jkelly has been watching many of my edits. This brings up the issue of wikistalking and harrassment.

I find it interesting that I have agree to stay away from any free use issues and all of the users involved, but User:Jkelly feels that it is completly acceptable to watch my page and collect edits on me to use against me.

The bottom line is that I erased the fair use items on my wikipage, despite others having collages just like me. In fact, I got the collage from two other users. Their photos are still on the page, mine are not. That is selective use and possible abuse of fair use, not to mention hypocricy and selective enforcement of wikipedia rules. Remember Duk how they selectively used copyright law and fair use on WSI to punish the other party and push their own partisan POV advantage? This is similar. User:Jkelly is using fair use to harrass me.

I will ask User:Jkelly to stop harrasing me and to unwatch my wikipage. I want to go seperate ways, and put the whole incident with User:Jkelly and other behind me. User:Jkelly obviously does not.

I continue to archive his comments, after I responded in full to his comments on his wikipage. He continues to revert this. This is the only requirment, that I am aware of as per Wikipedia:Talk_pages#Etiquette

I could start wikistalking User:JKelly as he appears to have done with me, and I could add his user page to my watchlist, but this will only escalate the fight and reopen new wounds, which I want to avoid. Travb (talk) 22:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It appears like the issue has blown over. I want to avoid any contact with User:Jkelly again. I asked him to stop watching my edits, and to unwatch my watch page. Hopefully this will difuse the situation permanently. Thanks for listening. Travb (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

July - Oct 2006

Your recent warning to me

Dear Duk,

Unlike the edits by 24.1.107.225, 67.91.118.71 and 75.11.244.150, I did not, as you put it, "speak for other people on their user pages" (I signed the notice with my own username), nor did I engage in mud slinging or embarrassment. I only reported, with a citation to a reliable source, that he was arrested for a serious crime (which might affect his ability to edit wikipedia, even though he's on bail) - I didn't even give an point of view on whether he was guilty or not.

I would appreciate it if you withdrew such accusations against me. Andjam 04:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC) (edited 04:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC))

Thanks. Andjam 03:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Pchas

Incovenient facts just disappear down the memory hole, not inconvenient facts, just irrelevant facts and thinly veiled harassment. Last warning, leave it alone. And don't bug me anymore--Duk 04:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Pchas, I see you're fiercely dedicated to making as big a muddy sling fest as possible over this topic. Really, why don't you just go have a beer instead :) --Duk 06:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle.jpg

see [39] --Duk 09:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that the URL is broken. I'm sure there are free pictures of this around. So perhaps you can replace the tag and get a working source. Or delete this and put one up with a working link. Cheers, John Smith's 18:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I've taken off the source vio. But what's the copyright tag? If you could supply the correct info that would help. John Smith's 10:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I have temporarily put a fair use tag in. If you could please update the page with more information that should help it along. Thanks, John Smith's 23:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyright concerns

Hi - I am still new to all this :) so I am not sure who to comment to but the page on espalier seems to have been taken in large part verbatim from http://www.mygarden.net.au/flex/espalier/122/1 - please advise. thanks!Mjkelley79 15:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

other way around, they copied from us. I recognize some of my writing there. Their claim of copyright is bogus and they are failing to credit the Wikipedia source as required by the GFDL.--Duk 02:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like they've added the attribution, or I missed it the first time around--Duk 21:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured picture promotion!

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, Image:Radial engine.gif, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution!

Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 22:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Maude Adams

de Acosta suggested they were lovers, and Frohman supposedly gave Maude an ulitmatum about her public relationships. I have not found any printed contemporary sources. are you aware of any? thanks. (User:Mmb3367)

No, I'm not aware of any. --Duk 22:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Gear pump design

Hi, I don't know if you made this gear pump model yourself, but in case you did, do you have any good reference(s) for the design of gear pumps? I would greatly appreciate your help because I have been looking around but I can't find any information on the subject. Thank you, Juan Carlos Santisteban San Jose, Costa Rica, juan.c.santisteban@gmail.com

Yes, see the article's external links. Or books like these for more information. --Duk 18:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Courteousy note

Out of courteousy I wanted to tell you that I mentioned your name here: User_talk:Thatcher131#Your_new_name.

Remember how you told me over a year ago to start doing this? I have since you mentioned it.

Thanks for the link in your email, I absolutly loved it BTW. Travb (talk) 17:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I dipped my toe in the water, seeing if it will be bit off

I dipped my toe in the water today, seeing if it will be bit off. [40] If this is a problem, or you see it as a problem, please let me know ASAP, and I will stop immediatly. just say the word...I just wanted to share my opinion on this page, with no spillover ot other pages.Travb (talk) 20:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

On second thought...

On second thought, I am going to stay out of the pool...sorry to bother you ;-). Travb (talk) 03:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

You always surprise me

A **public domain** photo of humble pie. Did I mention this picture is **public domain**? In case you don't recall, this means that this photo can stay on this user's talk page forever. And by forever, I *mean* forever. This picture of humble pie is not a bad picture like fair use pictures are. Fair use pictures are evil. They molest little children and chain smoke. If you ever see a fair use image, runaway, as fast as you can, because fair use pictures are E-V-I-L ;-) Did I mention this picture is **public domain**?

You didn't tell me that you replaced the photo with another photo, I wouldn't have been perturbed then. Thanks a lot. Now I am embarrased again. I don't know how much more humble pie I can eat. RWV 09:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I hope you liked the replacement :) --Duk 15:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I liked the replacement, but I liked the old one better. Because their was an inside joke behind me posting it. A liberal wikipedian was blowing me off after I e-mailed her. I would show you the whole joke, but then you would feel it was your sworn duty to erase those same Red Dawn pics too. Please, for the love of God, no lectures. :) RWV 17:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA!

Atlant 13:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Oct 2006 - May 2007

POTD notification

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Radial engine.gif is scheduled to be Picture of the day on November 20, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howch e ng {chat} 16:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The elephant in the room

Hey Duk. I am just wondering if too your knowledge, you know of anyone ever successfully arguing that someone is a partisan?

It seems like this is the "elephant in the room"--which everyone sees, but know one can mention. Certain editors will go around in groups (some people call them "cabals") and actively push their own narrow POV.

It is the worst when these groups of people put articles up for deletion. For example, certain editors will attempt to squelch 9/11 consipracy theories by putting these articles up for deletion--there voting record is clear--if an article is against their narrow POV, no matter how well written it is, it will be put up for deletion, and this little group will vote against it.

It is clear that certain editors are doing it because they are biased and slanted, but no wikieditor can actually bring this up. When another wikieditor brings it up, people scream WP:NPA.

Why is the word (insert title here) cabal so off limits? Why when anyone brings up the subject, they are heckled off the talk page?

What do you think? You can email me if you like. User:Travb AKA RWV 04:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Your first question, too your knowledge, you know of anyone ever successfully arguing that someone is a partisan. Sure, see [41].

About the elephant in the room and Why is the word (insert title here) cabal so off limits. It usually doesn't do any good to label people or groups as having a POV agenda. Slapping labels on people like this, even if correct, will be seen as personal attacks. Instead, argue the facts of the case and resist the temptation to label people or engage in ad hominems.

If an editor or a group of editors is pushing a narrow POV then follow the dispute resolution process. I know it's a lot of work, but going through the trouble of presenting a case with evidence and diffs is what's needed to rise above (possibly subjective) accusations of POV pushing.

--Duk 08:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Duk, I knew if anyone knew about this, you would. Happy editing. RWV 12:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

your welcome, see ya in irc. --Duk 19:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA (reprise)

Well, it's been a week now that I've been an administrator and I'd like to take this moment to once again thank everyone who supported my RfA, and to let you all know that I don't think I've screwed anything up yet so I hope I'm living up to everyone's expectations for me. But if I ever fall short of those expectations, I'd certainly welcome folks telling me about it!

Atlant 14:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

DumbBOT

Thanks! Actually, I wasn't aware someone were running such a script when I added the copyvio function to DumbBOT (it was then mentioned by User:Centrx on the bot approval discussion). Tizio, Caio, Sempronio 19:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:A little effort please

OK, I'll try to go a little slower in the future... Heimstern Läufer 07:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S.: I take some issue with your choice of heading on my talk page. My edit was a little effort: effort to make sure new pages are up to our standards. Of course, I get things wrong sometimes, we all do. I'm just suggesting you rethink what you say to others on their talk pages. Heimstern Läufer 07:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help

Thank you for your help on the Thermal death time article. It earned a DYK yesterday. I really appreciate it. Chris 14:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 05:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Radial/rotory

I think your radial engine modelling could be used to illustrate a rotary engine--not a Wankel, but rather the type used on some early aircraft. In short, you'd keep the crank steady and rotate the cylinder case (which itself was attached to the propeller, it seems).

Yah, some day I may get around to it :) --Duk 00:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion for Image:Radial engine.gif

Image:Radial engine.gif is great. If you could add the firing order of the cylnders that would be a nice improvement.

Thanks. I'm not planning to change it, but go ahead if you'd like to. I used Gimp + the animation package. It will let you modify the individual frames. --Duk 00:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Removing incomplete statement on article - Dow

I removed it because it was incomplete. I will add to instead, if you prefer.Jance 18:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Gear Pumps

Hiya, I noticed you've made lots of edits to the gear pump article and I wondered if you could help me with a question. My Dad's having trouble with a hydraulic gear pump that operates a four post lift in a garage. The pump is driven by an electric motor. The old pump broke (it was too old to get an exact replacement) and when he fitted a new pump the oil seal on the drive shaft burst with the hydraulic pressure and filled the electric motor with oil. Do you know what could have caused this to happen? Thank you :o) Jilly 18:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear lord! I hope he wasn't under the lift when it broke. --Duk 20:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

No, fortunately he wasn't - and neither was his car! His garage is covered in oil now though! Jilly 20:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks.

Oh yes. I surely did. But since you seem so shocked, I altered my statement. I cannot tell you how cynically amused I am that some personal attacks are okay while others are horrific. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 19:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

for the rest of this stimulating conversation...

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Kelly, I've tried to aid you in the past with feedback. It was met with hostility and disrespect. This was before the userbox war - the advice I gave was about how to get things done without pissing off the community and causing more harm than good. Only now, after losing your status are you claiming that you want feedback. I don't believe your motives are sincere and therefore choose not to participate. You can change my mind by putting aside your public spectacles and quietly writing an encyclopedia for a year or so. --Duk 18:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that you are unwilling to accept that I am acting in good faith. I shall not disturb you further. Kelly Martin (talk) 20:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment

"Hey Elaragirl, have you ever edited under a different screen name? --Duk 17:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)"

No. And if you want to make such an assertation, I strongly encourage you to make a request at RFCU. Correctly suggesting I might have been uncivil is one thing. Correctly pointing out that my statement on the ArbCom Election was a direct personal attack is also just fine. Vague accusations of editing under another username, however, is neither constructive, nor corrective. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 17:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Now, we can be nice again. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 17:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Elar a girl^Talk|Count has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

poke

I am confused. --Cat out 00:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, aren't we all ;) --Duk 05:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess

Dear Duk—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers. Tony 14:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Graphics Lab

I saw your name listed on Wikiproject Illustration or the list of graphic artists, and I thought I'd let you know that a Graphics Lab has been created on EN. Based on the highly successful French and German graphics labs, it seeks to better organise and coordinate our graphic design and photo-editing efforts. Up until now, there has been no common space on EN where users could ask for maps, charts and other SVG files to be created. What's more, the Graphics Lab has discussion boards, tips, tools and links; in sum, a good common workspace. Come help us out! The infrastucture is already in place, and now we need participants. :) --Zantastik talk 01:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Read your last message and I would tend to disagree.

I don't know the song but it appears the main part (better than half the song) appears in the article. I could citing one chorus but four choruses seem to be a bit much and a stretch of fair use. Ronbo76 05:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I've read fair use a number of times. . .

. . .even prior to your help. Usually when I ask for help, via helpme, I prefer a senior editor or admin type look at the page and edit appropriately. Since you said you can see both sides, maybe you could reestablish my helpme and ask for a second opinion on my talkpage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ronbo76 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC). And, I did read the talkpage. It seems the conversation seems to be dominated by the creator and one or two others. Ronbo76 05:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

No, the edit summary was not directed at you. I have absolutely no idea why you reverted the page and destroyed the content it included. I am not going to speculate on that and I'm certainly not going to try to find out whether you have any reason. If you write "because it wasn't sourced", I simply have nothing further to say about it. There are tons of articles that are not sourced and we accept that that is something that will eventually be put right. Because they are not controversial, and this article is not, it's not a pressing problem. In any case, this article is not being removed because of lack of sources. That is entirely spurious in this particular case.

As for WP:OWN, I explained on the talkpage that I was referring to the policy on banned users. One is directed not to reinstate their edits unless one is taking responsibility for them, so I stated that I was doing so. Because I would write "this is my edit" to make this clear, I wrote "this is my article" because the edit is a whole article. That is not exceptionable, Duk; I think you will see that when you think it through.

However, it seems clear to me that some of the editors involved -- I am not including you because as I say, I have no idea what motivated you and I'm not interested to find out -- are purely interested in conflict. In the case of Calton, I have a history and I daresay he intends to goad me by doing it. I am not interested though. I think it's a fairly good, interesting article, which no one involved would have any problem with at all were it written by a regular editor. But as so often in Wikipedia, that is not a consideration, and its being true cannot gain the day. All that will matter ultimately is that I am outnumbered. Sad but true. Grace Note 03:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Duk, if people fight to keep something out, eventually anyone who wants it in just gives up and the content is gone. Yes, I know it is technically not destroyed (the page is not deleted) but effectively it is gone. Thank you for finding sources. I genuinely believe it is an interesting article. If you wouldn't mind, and this article survives, could we reinstate the architecture one too, because I have inadvertently buried it and it should still be available, I think. I would do it myself but I'd rather stay away than be a focus of conflict for those who want it. Grace Note 03:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry, I was adding sources to the Coving article at exactly the same time as you when it came up with the 'edit conflict' screen asking me to edit again, which I did, though I forgot to include your reference or whatever you wrote. I'll try to find it and put it back in for you--Edchilvers 03:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Refs for coving

NYT [42]. HGTV [43] [44] is particularly good [45] not so good [46] San Diego Times [47] by one of Harrison's people but explains the development from "winding" and why you would try this approach [48] gives some detail on its use [49] a "coved" development [50] testimony that this concept is in use from someone who seems to have strong credentials

As for the architecture thing, it's a commonly used term in architecture. Google "coving" and you'll find plenty that you could choose from. Grace Note 04:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Duk, thanks for stepping up to the plate and fixing the article. Good work. -Will Beback · † · 08:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Pickles

I've never even heard of the nickname before you "lied" to me. - Patricknoddy 7:39am, January 13, 2007

Wow, happy new year to you too! OK, maybe you didn't make this edit 29 months ago :) --Duk 16:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Article 'Hydraulic system'

Hello Duk. The text versus imgages can be a problem some times but now it looks better. However there is more to come later next week. Could you please check the english wording/spelling that I have contributed with. Most of the article however is written by someone else. Regards, USER: Lidingo Sweden.

Sure, I'll check it as best I can. --Duk 16:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Test data on NRLMSISE-00

when you go to [[51]] just at the middle od the page it says:

You may also obtain direct MSIS model output (or test your codes) using the MSIS web interface found at NSSDC

so, it seems that they are using the NRLMSISE-00 model even it is identified as MSISE-90.

Anyhow, do you know how to access NRLMSISE-00 directly. Is there another page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JustToHelp (talk • contribs) 03:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

Thank you

Thanks for some very good research and valuable comments and links. I'm planning to say little more on the subject unless I'm attacked again. I have proved my point about the IRC admin channel, and many people (whose opinion matters to me) now seem to believe all I have ben saying was true. The channel is now thoroughly discredited and will never be a source of power again, and used by anyone of Wikipedian value - it is now basically finished - no one will ever believe a word that emanates from it again, no doubt a few little firecrackers will continue to pop on admins notice boards and such places but I think people can now evaluate such comments for themselves and see them for what they are dying embers of a former power base. Once again thanks for your support in this. I have appreciated it. Giano 10:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Duk 17:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ref desk thank you

Thank you for helping me with the hydroelectricity question. Unlike the others, you actually provided links to support your answers, which is an excellent quality in a ref desk person. Wowz, thanks!--JDitto 03:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Duk 17:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Duk

Long time no talk, do you think I should go to the next step, meditation on this case: User:Travb/m.

The user went around a page protection intending to orphan the protected page. I have already been on WP:Third opinion and the editor condemned User:Mobile 01. Afterwards I found out that Bridgestone had been actively deleting material from the Firestone page (Firestone was bought out by Bridgestone).

Any suggestions or comments?

(later) nevermind, the checkuser is conclusive. : )

Travb (talk) 11:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Trav, I'm not sure about the best course to follow here, you know more about the dispute resolution process than I do. I saw some of you earlier postings at the admin noticeboards. As for suggestions: the overview part of User:Travb/m is good - update it with a few links (Mobile 01 admitted openly that this was his strategy, for example) and with the checkuser results. The best way to get people's attention is with a concise hook, just like the intro you've made. Longer and disordered presentations won't be read unless you get people's attention first. Looks like you found another very interesting case. Good luck!

Sorry I can't help much. Going on a wikibreak :) Regards - Duk 17:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Your advice is always welcome and timely.

Heads up on this posting: User_talk:Cedars#I_hope_you_won.27t_leave. I was very careful in my wording about our relationship. If this statment is incorrect, or inflammatory in anyway, you can/I will change the statement, or you can/I will remove the statement. Always grateful and thankful.

I have watched your page, so please keep your comments here. Thanks. Travb (talk) 12:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

IRC invitations

I saw your comments on the enormous thread about IRC invitations, and I was prompted to wonder whether you actually know what that means? It's IRC jargon for the method used to get into certain channels: if the channel is in "invite-only" mode, you have to invite yourself onto it. This is because in order to get access to the admins channel, you must identify yourself to the channel operators: you cannot get in "anonymously". There's quite an arcane process for going about this, which I won't bore you with. My point is that any admin can request admittance to the channel, and there would have to be a very good reason to refuse them: the "invitation-only" bit is a red herring. There are a few people who are not admins on this wiki, but as far as I recall they are the equivalent from elsewhere, such as commons (which is necessary for dealing with images sometimes) and meta; some are developers, in case urgent action at a lower level is required. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 10:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I was prompted to wonder whether you actually know what that means? -- please don't be condescending.
you have to invite yourself -- No, you have to be allowed admittance, please don't spin this thing.
any admin can request admittance to the channel -- I'm an admin and don't want to be associated with the place; The channel owner failed to confirm when asked (but implied) that he is not accountable to the wikipedia community, hasn't edited significantly in months, and let the problem at hand fester for months - making it orders of magnitude worse.
There are a few people who are not admins on -- you got that right, including a former disgraced arbitrator/admin with op rights (last I heard) who has no business being there, much less running the place.

Phil, thank you for the note, it was clearly offered with honorable intentions. --Duk 11:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

PS. ref --Duk 11:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

[52] Thanks. Giano 19:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

you're welcome. --Duk 16:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Headlamp / Headlight

Hi, Duk. Thanks for your cleanup of the inappropriate move of Headlamp earlier today. I have gone through and reverted all the link changes he made to articles linking to Headlamp. I think the setup as it exists now is fine. Those looking for the caving variety of headlamp have their link right smack at the top of Headlamp; it seems to me a disambiguation page would be superfluous. If someone (such as PJBFlynn) feels strongly that there needs to be a disambiguation page, then certainly that would be a topic for discussion at talk:Headlamp, as it seems to me. --Scheinwerfermann 19:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome. I think there could be some better disambiguation and naming of related articles. --Duk 15:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 27 February, 2007, a fact from the article Ludlow Amendment, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani ^talk 22:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Woah Duk, that was you who nominated the article? I thought it was the other guy who was working on the article. Thanks man. There are two people in this world, people like myself, who talk about getting things done, and people like yourself, who go out and do it. Thanks a lot. Travb (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images

Comments to Mobile 01[53] I had warned her earlier about the image on her page. Travb (talk) 11:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey buddy, looks like you need a break. --Duk 22:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Pressured Tanks at Falcon 1

Ah, yeah, wow, that's what I call a talk page! Just want to say thanks for erasing my fault about the LOX tank (since it's not a pressured tank)! Good that there are some people out there that still have a bit more knowledge ;) ColdCase 18:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome ! --Duk 18:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if you misunderstood me...

...about the telescope thing. I don't have my copy of "Telescope optics" at hand and did not want to copy your proposed introduction without double-checking for accuracy (again, no distrust and no irony, it's just that I had long wanted to read it up myself). Your suggestion looks good to me and I would be pleased to read it in the article. Best wishes and happy editing, Kosebamse 18:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Your comment

Hello. I noticed your comment on Gene Nygaard's talk page. Please disregard Gene's ludicrous accusations that me and user Darwinek work in some kind of a team. Me and Darwinek have common disagreements with Gene, that's all. And although I have Darwinek in good consideration, I acknowledge that some of his actions merited the arbcom remedies. Best regards, Hús ö nd 23:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Húsönd, my comment wasn't meant to be an endorsement of Gene's claim. I have no view on this claim one way or another - haven't looked into it and don't plan to.

There was another event I had in mind when writing that note; a while back Gene was give a block that I though was improper and I advocated for him. (it didn't have anything to do with you or Darwinek). I just wanted to point out to Gene that even though unjust blocks happen from time to time, things get taken care of in the long run. --Duk 00:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Merkey

[[54]] [[55]] [[56]]

Some old, same old. Take a look back into the past regarding Jeff's wikipedia behavior. It's remarkably similar.

And [[57]]. Labeling someone a disruptive troll because they insist that articles be properly documented seems a bit of a violation of NPA. Color me shocked that this is happening.

Looks like Jeff's latest edits were the right thing to do - moving contested text to the talk page. To User:64.139.4.129, why don't you try to find something productive to do around here. --Duk 16:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Duk, could you please do me a favor and detail what rules you are concerned that I've broken and perhaps explain the difference between what I've done and how I should behave on wikipedia? Further, do you suppose that Jeff would have moved that material if someone hadn't pointed out that it was libelous? I understand that someone, not t, has forwarded the original page edits to Eric Schmidt (CEO of Google) and David C. Drummond (Chief Legal Officer of Google). If you go back over the history of Jeff's edits, you'll see that this is far from the first time that this has happened. I'll bow out and let others keep watch, but you should consider this far from uncommon.

[58] --Duk 21:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

May - June 2007

SVG Tiny

Hi,

I require an SVG Tiny 1.1/1.2 artist to design me some simple splash screens, waitscreens and menus for a mobile phone application. Can you help? User:80.218.245.156

Sorry, I don't know much about SVG Tiny 1.1/1.2. --Duk 04:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment on computer program

The Computer program article is in need of repair. Would you comment on any improvement suggestions? I joined the talk starting with the thread talk:computer program#Definition of a computer program. Timhowardriley 23:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Timhowardriley, I'm not the right person to ask about computer programming. --Duk 02:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Timhowardriley 15:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Merkey

Please review [59]. Thank you. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Hipocrite, I see the page has been protected. That's always preferable to blocking editors who are acting in good faith, which I think is the case here. Jeff is broaching contentious topics in a bold way - disputes are to be expected. Wikipedia will be better for it in the end, however it works out.

Since unblocking, I've concentrated on keeping the trolls at bay (not sure if you are familiar with the sordid history of this) and have avoided getting involved in the content disputes. I'm not planning to interfere with other admins in that area. However, if there is something specific you'd like me to do in that capacity, please ask.--Duk 18:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You could tell him to cease making baseless attacks against me. I am not involved in any content dispute, except to state that some website is not a reliable source. Bad behavior by trolls does not excuse bad behavior to trolls, but it certainly does not excuse bad behavior to me. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

left a note on the talk page. --Duk 19:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Stops now, or I pretty much promise someone will indef him. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I understand your frustration and hope that you can understand Jeff's. Wikipedia hasn't been very good about stopping the stalking and harassment of him, so it's understandable that Jeff is hypersensitive and might mistake long time editors with good intentions as trolls. I'm trying my best to address one side of the problem - stopping the harassment that originates from the SCOX message board. There isn't much I can do to help the other side. Can you try to start a discussion with him on his talk page or privately to ease his concerns, so you two can come to some agreement, or at least disagree respectfully? --Duk 17:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

As you appear to be attempting to lessen this conflict, I will refrain from taking action against Merkey for this atrocity, but unless he begins following WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL, I am reasonably confident that he will no longer be permitted editing privlidges. The ball is in your/his court.Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"Atrocity" is a rather extreme overstatement... the Mountain Meadows Massacre was an atrocity, while Merkey's accusing you of trolling was merely an act of incivility. Let's all try to keep things somewhat in proportion here. *Dan T.* 19:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at this edit. I consider removal of talk page comments then replacement a form of trolling and extreme dishonesty. I do not want to get into conflicts with folks, just edit, but I can see there are a lot of people with strong views and some with agendas. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMountain_Meadows_massacre&diff=132715824&oldid=132715763 Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 17:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Jeff, I don't think Hipocrite is a troll, you both are angry at the moment. I hope you two can come to some agreement, or at least disagree respectfully. --Duk 17:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll try to go and make peace with him. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 17:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You could start by not continuing to call me a troll. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Your block of Aim Here

I commented on User talk:Aim Here concerning your block, which I believe to be have been very unwarranted. If you have concerns about any user's actions, then please have the decency to discuss it with them directly. Don't covertly add them to some list of suspects. --MediaMangler 07:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

MediaMangler, stop trolling. It's disruptive. This is your only warning.

For the benefit of others reading this, the only thing out of line here is that after a year and a half of stalking and harassment of Merkey, trolls still aren't being blocked on site. This is going to change.

If you have concerns about any user's actions, then please have the decency to discuss it with them directly. ... see [60]

I've made some notes at User talk:Duk/SPTA for anyone interested. --Duk 15:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Article needs review

Following your suggestion, I will not edit the most flamming POV article I have ever seen by Merkey. Please consult this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cornsilk or http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Cornsilk&oldid=132867021 before another changed it and give it your unbiased opinion as an administrator please. --Kebron 10:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

One does not need to be an adminstrator to remove uncited and possibly defmatory information from biographies of living people. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I simply wished to make it clear "I" was not going to get into a mess AGAIN with Merkey. I want an Administrator's opinion on this first version and make it clear that "I" will not get in it with Merkey again. --Kebron 13:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kebron, I'm glad you aren't planning to edit that article, although you certainly aren't banned from it. Removing POV from an article is one thing. But following another editor around with the purpose of harassing them and making their life miserable is another. So how is an admin to tell the difference? Well, for starters when the editor dredges up completely unrelated documents, from an ancient court case outside of the wikipedia universe, and uses that to malign and "run down" another editor, that's a pretty good tell for administrators working the problem. --Duk 15:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Fine... now may I have you honest opinion on the first document that Merkey posted about David Cornsilk? Is this the work of an unbiased editor or the work of someone with a mission? --Kebron 16:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

And now, he is putting all back as if it never occured. --Kebron 16:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we all have our own biases and views, even if we don't recognize or acknowledge them. That's one of the reasons it is so important to include different editors from different cultures and backgrounds, and then work on ways to develop neutral articles. Do you see the difference here; we need to work on the material to get it neutral - not going out and stalking, harassing and abusing people who we disagree with. See Ad Hominem.

We also have to make a distinction between people intentionally violating the projects goals by pushing POV, and those who believe they are correcting existing POV in support of the projects goals. It would be so simple to get rid of people we disagree with, but then there wouldn't be any editors left. A healthy community needs to tolerate some dissension, it needs a few gadflys and it needs people of minority views. On the other hand, a healthy community cannot allow packs of bloodthirsty jackals to run wild mauling people they don't like. I've mentioned this before, but editors and their work will stand or fall on merit, given enough time and eyeballs, but a prerequisite is that they get treated fairly. If we can't provide a level playing field, even for editors we disagree with, the the project will suffer. Maybe things will work out here for Jeff, maybe they won't. But its not up to you to take matters into your own hands and harass and abuse him.

As for the article (looking at your stable link), I though it was very interesting and the illustrations unique enough to merit fair use (maybe only one is needed instead of two). I'd remove the "John Cornsilks Banned by Wikipedia Community" and trim a lot of the "Political Commentary" section, but maybe not as much as this version. I don't have an opinion on deletion. So, to answer your question, yes I think the article had a bias, but I wouldn't go so far as to say the editor had a "mission" and was intentionally violating the projects goals. --Duk 17:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm one of the ones you warned, and I did go a little over the line in my overzealousness; I tend to get a bit obsessive-compulsive. I'm trying hard to avoid playing any part in turning Wikipedia into a battleground now. However, I wonder if you're not possibly going beyond creating a level playing field (a noble goal) and, maybe, tilting the field a bit too much in Merkey's favor; he likes to label anybody who disagrees with him as "trolls" and "stalkers", and while this is sometimes true, it's also possible for it to be used as a bludgeon against all criticism and opposition he ever receives. Merkey deserves not to be incessantly hounded, and I apologize for sometimes being part of that; but he doesn't deserve to have all critics blocked or warned away to save his tender sensibilities either. *Dan T.* 17:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I'm going too far and tilting the playing field. I've removed some unsourced edits and disagreed with Jeff on some troll accusations, but mostly I've just reacted to blatant trolling. No, in most cases it's not productive to label people who disagree with you as "trolls" and "stalkers". But this is an extraordinary case - anyone who digs into it will find one of the most outrageous examples of long term abuse against any Wikipedian. Jimbo and some administrators have done a good job addressing it in the past and are still maintaining the JM article. I'm trying to work on current abuse, but the way wikipedia is structured makes it very hard to address. It doesn't surprise me that Jeff sees trolls everywhere, and that he is very often right. --Duk 18:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Your indefinite block of User:Aim Here might be seen as an overreaction on your part, and apparently was seen as such by the other admin who reversed your block soon afterward. *Dan T.* 19:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I offered to unblock him by email if he agreed to leave Jeff alone, he didn't respond. If he abuses Jeff again I'll reinstate the block without hesitation. I don't think I overreacted, time will tell (along with Alkivar's unblocking). Even if he does manage to behave, you should consider that maybe this block is the reason. --Duk 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary. I did respond via email (albeit unrepentantly), and explained every one of my Jeff-related edits that I had made since his unbanning, in a final effort to convince Duk that I had not been trolling or stalking. Maybe you didn't get the email. Might I suggest, in future, that for the purposes of clarity, you specify exactly what edits constitute wrongdoing, and why, (or URLS to off-wiki behaviour, if that's relevant) so as not to place editors in a Kafkaesque situation of trying to guess 'what exactly did I do wrong'? (Yes, you linked the single edit regarding my response to you on WP:AN/I but, to quote WP:BLOCK, "Blocks for disruptive behaviour should not typically be used in response to isolated instances of behaviour, but in response to persistent patterns of behaviour."). Anyways, I hope we can put this sordid mess behind us --Aim Here 20:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the "unrepentantly" was important, and I got your emails, but not a response to my offer. Also, on your talk page you said you wouldn't troll Jeff anymore, while in the same sentence claimed you would carry on editing Wikipedia as you have always done. Do you see the problem here? And I did explain "exactly what edits constitute wrongdoing". --Duk 20:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, but I still contend I have not been trolling or stalking. I still don't see the problem. And you still have not explained 'exactly what edits' constitute a 'persistent pattern' of disruption. You repeatedly state I have been trolling and stalking, and you also contend that I am guilty of disruptive off-wiki behavior, but I have yet to see a link, or a specific reference to one wiki edit, forum posting or anything I've said or done, prior to the WP:AN/I edit, that substantiates your accusations. That's what I mean by 'exactly what edits'. Show me the diffs. Give me an actual link that specifies one or more specific edits that I can explain, refute, or apologise for, as appropriate. 'Trolling' and 'stalking' and 'disruption' are conclusions. Anyone accused of such things needs to see actual specific evidence (wiki diffs, or URL links or whatever) that brings you to such a conclusion. --Aim Here 20:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure. look at your talk page. --Duk 20:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

That's a circular argument. I'm disruptive because I disagree with you threatening me and blocking me for disruption? You persistently and repetitively claim, as though it's self-evident, that I've been persistently 'trolling' and 'stalking' Jeff Merkey yet all you have to substantiate it is how I've reacted to YOU *AFTER* you accused me of trolling and stalking Merkey. I did say the words 'prior to the WP:AN/I edit too, there. The skirmish between you and me on my talk page happened afterwards, and as a consequence. Can you not see the double bind situation I'm in?--Aim Here 20:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on Aim Here. I'm not repeating myself anymore, or taking your bait for a wikilawyering argument. You were warned properly, trolled some more, got blocked, bitched some more and so on ... If you can manage to not abuse Jeff then you have nothing to worry about :) Did I say I'm not going to repeat myself anymore? --Duk 20:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll assume from your non-answer that you cannot or will not back up your accusations and I'll give up on you and this Alice in Wonderland gamesplaying of yours. I'll ask you to respect WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA and refrain from making baseless and unsubstantiated allegations of trolling and stalking unless and until you can actually provide some evidence of same. I'm done with you. --Aim Here 20:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, one more thing Aim Here. You might not believe this but I am actually hoping that you prove me wrong - that you aren't a troll and that you won't abuse Jeff anymore. That's the good thing about Alkivar's unblock, time will tell. --Duk 21:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Here we go again

I have not done ANYTING at all and here I am being accused of being a troll. Please consult here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_sanction_noticeboard#User:Hipocrite.2C_User:MediaMangler.2C_User:Vigilant.2C_User:Aim_Here.2C_User:Kebron.2C_User:Jerryg.2C_User:Pfagerburg and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey/trolls I am really losing my patience. With inaction, I am a troll. When I edit, I am a troll. What am I to do?--Kebron 18:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

If I were you, Kebron, and I wasn't a troll, I'd leave a note there explaining as much. I'd do it politely, and perhaps apologize for my previous edits that weren't very polite, and I sure as hell wouldn't dig up unrelated documents from ancient court cases to harass and run down another editor. --Duk 18:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The notice board is frozen, explain to me how I can voice anything?--Kebron 19:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

At the bottom of the box it reads ->Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.. However, I'd be inclined to just let it go for now. --Duk 20:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

What would you do if you were me? [61]. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I have been you, Hipocrite. I remember cleaning up two complicated copyright violations and getting yelled at and stalked for months by the new editors who were posting them - just horrible things were said about me. 1) I ignored it, the new editors calmed down over a series of months, and I became friends with one of them.

No contentious article debate is solved quicky at wikipedia. 2) You can lessen the drama by posting just once per day at the article and talk page. Rapid fire exchanges don't solve the problem quicker, the just get people mad and sometimes blocked.

New editors who are bold usually don't stay that way. They either calm down as they get more used to getting things done easier by working differently, or they get blocked, or they leave in disgust at not being able to do what they want. 3) wait.

So, that's what I would do, Hipocrite, 1), 2) and 3). --Duk 19:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

To the extent taking your advice does not damage the encyclopedia, I will do so. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

RFC

I invite your comment here. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Done! --Duk 18:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Monster Pig

Hello, I am the creator of the Wikipedia and Wikinews article on this topic, the editor User:Squeakbox deleted half the article before his stuck the afd +tag on the article. I reverted it back to the point where he did this, it would be to difficult for me to reconstruct due to the number of edits. I requested a Semi-Protect, which you did add to the article "pp-semi-protected|small=yes" Would you kindly replace the +tag and advise Squeakbox not to perform major edits like this without first discussion them on the article talk page to gain group consensus and prevent edit wars. Thank you in advance for your assistance and sorry for the inconvenience. PianoKeys 01:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Tag is back.

I happen to agree with Squeakbox's removal of off-topic stuff. Take it to the talk page. --Duk 01:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello, feral means the animal was once domesticated and is now living in the wild. I had this happen with a pet cat once, it is not uncommon. Monster Pig was once owned by someone then escaped and was living as a feral animal in the wild, then is was hunted and killed by Stone. PianoKeys 12:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you should go read the references again. And quit hogging the pig, dammit ;) --Duk 13:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

MfD Result Notice

Hi,

The MfD discussion of your user subpage closed as a "no consensus" result. However, noting your own remark on the page that you wished it deleted, I have speedy deleted it per CSD U1. Best wishes, Xoloz 16:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks --Duk 17:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

navbox collapsible

hey, thanks for the tip! I can't figure out how to do it though, i tried to put "collapsible" in there, but it didn't work. Cheers! Murderbike 17:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

cool! Murderbike 17:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Chew Stoke FAC

Hi, I've recently put Chew Stoke up as a Featured Article candidate. As you have edited this article in the past I wondered if you would like to make any comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chew Stoke?— Rod ^talk 07:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look :) --Duk 18:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Sky Dream Fukuoka

Name calling is so adult. Edit war would be your choice. But don't make an entry lack charm. - Sparky 01:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Re. Opinion requested

Hello Duk. Well, I guess I'm a well-known defender of diacritics... :-) For this article, I naturally support the current name, "Ångström". It's named after Anders Ångström and its symbol is Å so it can't be otherwise. In fact, I would recommend removing "or angstrom" in the first sentence of the article. It is not "angstrom", only miseducated or careless people would type so, and the fact that many do shouldn't be a reason for introducing a mistake in an encyclopedia. My opinion. Regards, Hús ö nd 16:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Sept - Dec 2004

Clarifying the zone system darkroom section

Vandal/Troll

Pud

ISRO

RfC re: Chuck F

203.10.121.89

Trangia Image

Three Gorges Dam

Jimbo more like Angela

yup

Did you know has been updated

Banqiao Dam

Article Licensing

Widow's peak

No controversy or insult

Adminship

Congrats

Congratulations, Duk!

Dec 2004 - Apr 2005

DYN

RobertATaft

Greenhouse gas

30-06

Return of the Untagged Image project

Linkage (mechanical)

Jimbo/Angela

User:Vaoverland - administrator

Thanks

Z machine.jpg

Vandalism by VANdal

That image

Viscounts of Arbuthnott

Unverified orphans.

Image:Laminar shear flow.PNG

Thank you

RfA thanks

Copyvio matter

Autofellatio2

PUI

Star Wars copyvio images

Body Language

Thx

Changing the copyvio template

{{Template:Welcome}}

Death Cab

Thank you

Bowles Hall photo

Apr - July 2005

Research project on wiki contributors

Copyvio

22 or 21

Rubber Duk

I'm new:)

Copyright Question

Jacques Mesrine and Ruth Ellis Articles

Fair use

Panko

Infectious salmon anemia

Copyright violation. Help needed.

Semiconductor manufacturing

merck records

Can you find my entry?

Did you know?

Thank you

copyvio removal

ganguro

Moyer Factory copyright dispute

FTMME

biography.ms

Re: GAP Project

Regarding Dark_Doktrines

Image tagging

Thanks Duk

My RFA: Thanks

My RFA

Thanks for your support

Huang Sheng Shyan - Article

Earnest Harmon reply

Ernest Harmon Air Force Base revisions