Welcome!

Hello Larix, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -Rholton 02:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians by politics

Hi Larix! Yes, I'm supporting keeping these categories. Thanks for notifying me! Ronline ✉ 02:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I find it interesting that the nominator cites "vote stuffing," yet this is the first time I've been contacted for ANYTHING on AFD, let alone by a category. Thesquire 04:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification about the VfD. I have cast my vote as a Strong Keep. --Peter McGinley 05:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spreading the word on this one - I'll defend against any attempt to cut down on the number of pastel coloured boxes on my user page. Ironically, this is the first time I've been asked to vote based on my political categorisation... --Hitchhiker89 09:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up Larix Dankru 12:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello larix. i'd like to reiterate Ron, Thesq, Pete, Hitch & Dank's comments. thanks mate. Veej 13:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for telling me about the cfd for liberal Wikipedians. Yeltensic42.618 18:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll join the "thank you"-choir. Nice one, compadre. Voted for keeping. Kind regards, --Twisturbed Tachyon 17:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

Thanks. Can I interest you perhaps in a vegan, anarchist, lennonist, or skeptical of astrology template? Daykart 11:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment, and for the Humanist userbox. Very nice one. :·D --¿ WhyBeNormal ? 19:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Awards

Thanks for the barnstar. I awarded you one, too. Yeltensic42.618 17:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Larix! Thanks for the barnstar as well! I think what you did was really great, particularly in informing us of what was taking place. Despite the accusations of vote-stuffing, I think it's perfectly legitimate and should be done more. I would love to see even more categories about Wikipedians, since it's a really good way of knowing like-minded people. And freedom of political expression is a key element at Wikipedia, which should be rewarded. I've hence given you a barnstar too. Once again - Thanks!! Ronline ✉ 09:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC) PS: What do you think of the new Wikipedia:Stable versions proposal. Personally, I'm against it, since it's anti-liberal for Wikipedia. What do you think?[reply]

Hi, thank you for my barnstar! The 'noedit' thing in my user page is just to remove those annoying 'edit' links for each section which look really ugly, not to stop others from editing my page. I see you've already been awarded two barnstars for your work defending the Wikipedians by politics categories but I'd like to give you this:

to say thanks for alerting me and everyone else to the vote and for giving me a barnstar! --Hitchhiker89 12:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Larix, thanks very much for the barnstar! Your diligence and presence here at Wikipedia is truly appreciated by me and many others! Эйрон Кинни 21:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appriciate the barnstar which you gave me. Thanks! Peter McGinley 01:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! -- Tetraminoe 09:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem RE: Image:Observingcat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Observingcat.jpg. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law. We need you to specify two things on the image description page:

The copyright holder, and
The copyright status

The copyright holder is usually the creator. If the creator was paid to make this image, then their employer may be the copyright holder. If several people collaborated, then there may be more than one copyright holder. If you created this image, then you are the copyright holder.

Because of the large number of images on Wikipedia, we've sorted them using image copyright tags. Just find the right tag corresponding to the copyright status of this image, and paste it onto the image description page like this: {{TAGHERE}}.

There are 3 basic ways to licence an image on Wikipedia:

The copyright holder gets the best protection of their work by licencing it under an open content license such as the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licence. If you have the express permission of the copyright holder to licence their work under the above licence, use the image copyright tag: {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}. The GNU Free Documentation License is another option. Again, if you have the express permission of the copyright holder, use the tag {{GFDL}}.

The copyright holder can also release their work into the public domain. See here for examples.

Images from certain sources are automatically released into the public domain. This is true for the United States, where the Wikimedia servers are located. (See here for images from the government of the USA and here for other governments.) However, not all governments release their work into the public domain. One exception is the UK (see here for images from the UK government). Non-free licence governments are listed here.

Also, in some cases, an image is copyrighted but allowed on Wikipedia because of fair use. To see a) if this image qualifies, and b) if so, how to tag it, see Wikipedia:Fair use.

For more information, see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Please remember that untagged images are likely to be deleted.

If you have uploaded other images without including copyright tags, please go back and tag them. Also, please tag all images that you upload in the future.

If you have any questions, just leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again. --Romeo Bravo 19:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no not realy, but just add one of these (pd-self states no copyright)

{{GFDL-self}} -- GNU Free Documentation License written by the Free Software Foundation. This was originally written to license free software documentation.
{{cc-by-sa-2.5}} -- Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike. This is one of several CC licenses. This version permits free use, including commercial use; requires that you be attributed as the creator; and requires that any derivative creator or redistributor of your work use the same license.
{{pd-self}} -- Public Domain. There is some question whether it is possible under existing law to release one's work into the public domain; but this is still the "license" of choice for some.
{{No rights reserved}} was developed to meet the question above of whether it is possible to release work into the public domain. See Wikipedia:Granting work into the public domain.

Romeo Bravo 20:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Categories and Userboxes

Hi Larix! Thanks for the user freedom box, I've added it to my user page. I think it's great that there's now a user box that can unite all people with these views regarding Wikipedia! Is there still dispute on whether categories and userboxes on personal views should be deleted? I think that there's a growing movement in Wikipedia to basically mistreat the community (through the denial or rights and expression) in the interests of "creating a (fair, NPOV) encyclopedia". I don't think people realise that it is only through a liberal, vibrant community that that very task can be best achieved. I'd love to help on anything that can further this cause! Thanks, Ronline ✉ 00:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for telling me about that, I'll think about putting it on there, but I've had trouble getting the formatting to work out right for the ones I have. So I might try to clear that up first. Yeltensic42.618 15:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User freedom

I have changed the image on the template because the original was of unknown copyright status, and queued for deletion. (Posted here as well, since I don't know if you are still watching my userpage). Ian¹³_ID:540053 16:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Entertainers who died aged x etc. categories

Hi, you said you find the young died categories interesting but you didn't say anything about the others. I would appreciate it if you could change your vote to keep just for Category:Prematurely deceased entertainers and Category:Entertainers who committed suicide and delete the rest so we can get consensus Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_29#Category:Entertainers_who_died_aged_x_etc._categories Thanks Arniep 22:34, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"inhuman rights"

Thank you for your question. I answered it on my talk page. —James S. 10:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes, cats

Thanks for telling me about that. It's getting to the point that I'm afraid that if I go on vacation or something and don't go online, I'll return and find that my userpage is gone. Yeltensic42.618 23:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Larix! Thanks for telling me about the vote. I'm really confused, however, as to what proposal is best. I've read the page over and over again but I'm really not getting anywhere, since it's really cluttered and confusing with all those proposals. Which proposal do you think is the best to maintain the userboxes? Deano's proposal?

Ronline ✉ 04:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me. As you might have noticed, I commented on the relevant page. This whole affair is just totally absurd. Thank you for being on the sane (no typo) side. :) Kind regards, --Twisturbed Tachyon 12:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beware of edit conflicts

I know there was an edit conflict but when you changed your comments on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/userbox templates concerning beliefs and convictions, you deleted my contribution. Please be careful not to do this. David | Talk 12:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TFD

I notice that you listed Template:User evolution for deletion. I'm having trouble finding the discussion section for that particular nomination. Could you post a link on my talk page? Thanks! --Mareino 15:05, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few hours ago you listed {{User:UBX/liberal}} for deletion also and it's not on the main tfd page... can you please add? -- Jbamb 16:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, maybe I should state this right here. I didn't list those templates, someone else did. In fact I'm vehemently opposed to the deletion. As he didn't feel like tagging them, I did instead. If you and others want to vote about it, here's the link: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/userbox templates concerning beliefs and convictions Larix 16:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you for addding the TfD template to the userboxes the deletionists are after. I really think that until then it was a stealth discussion, with many userbox users unaware of what was going on. And wonder of wonders! The consensus is now clearly for Keep. Good work there. TCC (talk) (contribs) 09:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xenaphon's block

Hi Larix! I've contacted User:Jayjg, who blocked Xenaphon indefinitely, for more information regarding the block. It turns out that he was banned first for personal attacks, for 24 hours, and then was blocked indefinitely by Jayjg for sockpuppeting (however, it doesn't say anywhere who he was a sockpuppet of). Thanks for telling me about this! The other thing I'd like to ask you about is the arbitrary deletion of userboxes and categories based on political viewpoints. Obviously, there is currently a great deal of argument on this issue, and no consensus has been reached yet (UPDATE: Consensus appears to have been reached on TfD in favour of keeping POV userboxes, but there is still debate on the anti-userbox policy), but I have heard numerous reports of admins already starting to delete categories and even userboxes simply because they personally believe that these shouldn't be taking place. Are there any concrete examples of this? I know that User:Tony Sidaway has been accused of this, and has acted unintuitively and quite disrespectfully in recent times, which I find quite unacceptable. Hopefully the whole issue will be resolved, with the userboxes and categories kept, as consensus and the majority says. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 06:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Larix, I have a few questions. Why are you interested in Xenaphon's block? Why do you think he was blocked for comments on Tony Sidaway's page? Why aren't you interested in the similar block to Xenophon of Ephesus? Jayjg ^(talk) 15:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request

Hi. I wrote the article Regent Parrot mostly by translating the Dutch article at nl:Bergparkiet. There were some words etc. where my Dutch let me down, and those remain commented out. I'd appreciate it if you could edit the article and finish the translation. Thanks for your time and attention. Cheers, Tom e r ^talk 09:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you looked in on the article, thanks for your time...my questions have been answered. :-) Tom e r ^talk 20:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much for awarding me a barnstar. I am very greatful and I am also happy with the area where it is placed. Thanks again, Shell. --Shell 16:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

RfC for Tony Sidaway

I have started to formulate the Request for Comment concerning Tony Sidaway's behavior at my personal sandbox; the subpage is here. Since you expressed interest in supporting such an action, I thought you might like to help formulate the RfC; feel free to edit the proposal. Rogue 9 09:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moving ahead with the RfC

Clicky. This needs to go forward now before the issue grows stale; I just hope it's enough. It can still be improved while on the RfC page. Rogue 9 16:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Freedom template

Hi - Could you or someone else re-protect Template:User_freedom ? I have had to revert 2 Tfd attempts by User:MarkSweep , who by the way deleted it during a debate on Jan.22.

VWN en WCN

Beste Larix Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org . Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 16:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Walmarting deletion vote

As a fellow eventualist inclusionist (hey, where's our user box?) you may want to look at this, as the article was only a day old when it was nominated for deletion and there was a long list of delete votes before there was a single keep one. I tried to add a few links to examples to strengthen the article and also added the see also links to related terms. Otherwise I don't have the time right now to work on it. Thanks! I'll post to the includsionist page. Feel free to write a few folks if you see fit.--Beth Wellington 01:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar, OTR & PUA Review

FYI. You may want to look and comment here: Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/Proposed Changes. For your reference, the guidelines are referenced here: Barnstar Proposal Guidelines. Thanks -- evrik 18:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Possessivecat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Possessivecat.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 16:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boylover and girllover userboxes

Thank you for your input into the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_5#Template:User_paedophile. It is unfortunate that this template was deleted with neither a good reason nor a clear consensus. I believe that by using language that lacks the criminal/abusive connotations, we can satisfy the concerns of the delete voters and create useful, less controversial userboxes. So I created Template:User boylover and Template:User girllover last night.

Unfortunately, Doc glasgow speedy deleted these templates, citing T1. T1 did not apply, and you can tell him so. Your vote at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#Template:User_boylover_and_Template:User_girllover will be much appreciated. Seahen 15:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

userboxes

Hey Larix, please keep in mind that Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia. A bunch of admins and I have looked over your contribution history and we really don't see anything indicating that you're here to do anything other than mess around with userboxes. If you want to run your own personal website you can put whatever you want on there; but when you're on Wikipedia, you're here to work on the encyclopedia. Got it? --Cyde Weys 22:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In your RfA you said you'd stay away from userboxes. Now you use your adminship to silence people who have another view on userboxes as you do. "Got it?" Larix 21:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxen

Hey Larix,

As you've been the most outspoken proponent of keeping userboxes, I'd really like your support of my proposal, which is attempting to rectify the situation by moving all the userboxes out of the Template: namespace (which will then be NPOV) into a newly created Userbox: namespace. It keeps all userboxes, including POV ones, while fixing the problem of POVs in the Template: space- which, overall, has been the major problem. Thanks! // ^The True _Sora 04:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Nogus

[1] John Reid 04:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-Semitic people

Vote They are attempting to close the +cat AGAIN, please vote to KEEP.

Volapük Wikipedia

Hi Larix, I've found your name at the m:Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians and thought you might want to help us fight against the proposal for closing the Volapük Wikipedia. In case you agree that the Volapük Wikipedia should remain open to have a chance to grow (which is already beginning to happen), then you could come there and cast a vote. Thanks in advance! Smeira 05:55, 29 oct 2007

MfD nomination of User:EVula/Userboxes/Eris

User:EVula/Userboxes/Eris, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:EVula/Userboxes/Eris and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:EVula/Userboxes/Eris during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of File:Outspokenbarnstars.png

A tag has been placed on File:Outspokenbarnstars.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image with an unknown source or an unknown copyright status which has been tagged as such for more than 7 days, and it still lacks the necessary information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. –Drilnoth (T • C) 22:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:David - The Death of Socrates close up.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:David - The Death of Socrates close up.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Chaitanya knows everything that happens in all three phases (past, present, and future, of time. He knows that in the future some demoni people will serve Lord Advaita.

Text 123

They will refer to Lord Advaita by the name "Shri Krishna". In this way they will reject the words of the true Vaishnavas.

Text 124

These sinners will thus disobey the devotees who affirm that Advaita is "the greatest Vaishnava".

Text 125

Many persons will consider themselves the followers of Lord Advaita, but they will not have the power to see how in the future they will be punished.

Text 126

Lord Chaitanya, the crest jewel of they who know everything, knew all this. Therefore He did something to try to stop this from happening.

Text 127

By punishing His mother, Lord Chaitanya showed the result that comes from offending Lord Advaita or any other Vaishnava.

Text 128

No one can protect a person who has offended a Vaishnava.

Text 129

Therefore one should avoid persons who offend Vaishnava.

Text 130

One should avoid an offender, even if the offender is otherwise very qualified. A little association with an offender will make one fall down.

Text 131

Who has the power to understand why the Lord gives punishment? By punishing His mother, He taught everyone.

Text 132

Anyone who blasphemes they who use the word `Vaishnava" to address Lord Advaita will be punished. He will perish.

Text 133

Lord Chaitanya is theSupreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all. To be called His follower is very great praise.

Text 134

Without any intention to deceive, Lord Chaitanya openly said that Lord Nityananda is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself.

Text 135

By Lord Nityananda's mercy I know Lord Chaitanya. By Lord Nityananda's mercy I know the Vaishnavas.

Text 136

By Lord Nityananda's mercy offenses are destroyed. By Lord Nityananda's mercy one attains devotion to Lord Vishnu.

Text 137

Blasphemy directed to Lord Nityananda's servants never enters my mouth. Day and night I happily sing Lord Chaitanya's glories

Text 138

I carefully serve Lord Nityananda's devotees. Lord Chaitanya is the life and wealth of Lord Nityananda's servants.

Text 139

A person who has only a little good fortune will not become Lord Nityananda's servant, for Lord Nityananda's servant is able to see Lord Chaitanya.

Text 140

Anyone who hears this story of Lord Visvarupa becomes a servant of the limitless Supreme Personality of Godhead. He feels that Lord Nityananda is his very life.

Text 141

Lord Nityananda and Lord Visvarupa do not have different bodies. This Mother Saci knew. Some other great souls also knew.

Text 142

Glory to Lord Nityananda, who takes shelter of Lord Chaitanya! Glory, glory to Lord Nityananda, who is thousand-faced Ananta Sesha!

Text 143

O Lord Nityananda, O king of Gauda-desa, glory to You! Who can attain Lord Chaitanya without first attaining Your mercy?

Text 144

Anyone who loses Lord Nityananda will not be happy in this life.

Text 145

Will I some day see Lord Chaitanya, Lord Nityananda, and their associates all thogether in one place?

Text 146

Lord Chaitanya is my master. With great faith and hope I meditate on Him within my heart.

Text 147

I bow down before Lord Advaita's feet. I pray that he will always be dear to me and that He will always stay in my thoughts.

Text 148

The two moons Shri Krishna Chaitanya and Shri Nityananda are my life and soul. I, Vrindavana dasa, sing the glories of Their feet.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.82.156 (talk) 13:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Humanism.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Humanism.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 14:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]