User talk:Ryan4314/Archive1

License tagging for Image:Justice League of America (Live Action) 2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Justice League of America (Live Action) 2.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Martian Manhunter JLA Live Action.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Martian Manhunter JLA Live Action.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Live action Watchtower under attack.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Live action Watchtower under attack.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Tora Live 2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Tora Live 2.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Tora_Live.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Tora_Live.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I have moved all of the redirect pages. It seems like a colossal waste of time to move everything else seeing as it directs to the film anyway.

Orphaned non-free image (Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 20:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

About comments made earlier on CVU talk page

I strongly suggest installing Twinkle. It has a few extra tabs that allow you to easily spot vandalism, request page protection, and the like. But one feature does exactly what you are looking for - when on a serial vandal's talk page, you can press the "arv" tab, add the primary target page (the page that has been attacked most), add a reason for reporting (e.g. vandalism after final warning) and it will automatically report the vandal to WP:AIV. Before doing this, you should make sure he has a final warning, or if not, just hit the "warn" tab. let me know if you have any questions. J-stan ^Talk 15:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

hey, sorry it took so long to reply. One way to test Twinkle's vandal fighting abilities is to go to the recent changes page. Look under the interaction box on the left side of the page, under the navigation page. What you do at recent changes is hide logged in users, because most vandalism is by anonymous users. So what you do is see if there are any really large edits, like 500 characters removed. Then look at the (diff) tab to see the difference that was made. If it is vandalism, click the Rollback (vandalism) link, and you have automatically reverted the edits made by that user since the last user. Then, click on the user's talk page, and hit the warn tab at the top, next to the watch tab. Then, choose which message you want such as "general warning: Vandalism", then add the page that was vandalized, and click submit, and it will automatically post a message on the talk page.

If the user is a repeated vandal, and has a final warning, you can hit the "arv" tab next to the warn tab. Fill in the form, and it will submit it to WP:AIV, where an admin will take care of it. Twinkle is really fun and easy. You will figure it out more as you go along. J-stan ^Talk 19:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Mike Read

Just another one of the many features of twinkle: The "rpp" tab brings up a request for protection form for the page. I've actually never used this. I'll give it a try. J-stan ^Talk 21:48, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't seen enough vandalism on that page to make a judgment. I think that if you see more vandalism on that page, you know what to do. J-stan ^Talk 21:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Descriptions

What do you mean "descriptions"? J-stan ^Talk 22:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I looked, but I suppose there really is no place to view messages, outside of usertalk pages. If done right, they should be in order, like from general note to final warning. I assume the reason you ask is so that you know which message to add. Well, General note is as follows:

"Welcome to Wikipedia. Although we invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to (page), was not constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you."

Caution is as follows:

"Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to (page). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you."

Warning is as follows:

"Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to (page), you will be blocked from editing."

And Final warning (pretty much the same as only warning)

"This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to (page), you will be blocked from editing."

After this, they should be reported to WP:AIV. You should follow this order of messages, as it usually is taken by AIV more seriously. J-stan ^Talk 03:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I hadn't seen that before. J-stan ^Talk 14:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I wasn't able to see that article. When I click on the link, it said that it was already deleted. Why did you want me to look there? J-stan ^Talk 14:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I see. Well, if you need any help with anything else, let me know. J-stan ^Talk 00:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Haha, check this out: [1]. You must have clicked to tag it within seconds of me deleting it. I saw it again and was confused because I had just deleted it. Basically you created an article containing only a deletion notice :) James086^{Talk | Email} 13:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

If only it were like this all the time; then vandalism/nonsense would be history. Ah well, one can hope. See you round, James086^{Talk | Email} 14:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Anti vandalism

Hey Ryan, on my recent editor review, Giggy suggested that I use Antivandal tool. I installed it, and it works great. I strongly suggest you install it. In conjunction with Twinkle, it is the easiest, most efficient anti-vandalism force on the project. Contact me if you have questions. J-stan ^Talk 01:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, I really like it, and I think you will too. The "Filter recent changes" tool is excellent. It uses a formula to find words commonly used in vandalism. You can even filter out certain namespaces.

Also, Giggy suggested I get popups as well. I tried it out, and I didn't like it at all. You could give it a try, though, if you want. J-stan ^Talk 15:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, they made the same edit, so they're probably the same person, although they both seem like testers - 148.186.4.203 reverted his own test on Total Annihilation. If they continue, keep issuing warnings. If they vandalize after warnings, report them. You can never be "too close" to an article to want to protect it from vandalism. You're trying to improve the article, and these IPs are getting in your way of that. I wouldn't request protection for the page just yet, that's for larger edit wars between respected users and anons.

Popups is a tool that let's you preview articles and if they have been vandalized, you are supposed to be able to revert them or take other actions. I wasn't able to do this. It couldn't have been that I had javascript turned off, because twinkle and avt worked fine. It might work for you, but I found it to be unreliable. It's different than twinkle, but it's not nearly as user-friendly. J-stan ^Talk 15:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Glad you like it! J-stan ^Talk 15:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a separate filter for that, it's two lines below Filter recent changes, under "Recent IP Edits". J-stan ^Talk 15:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've actually found more legit edits on the IP filter than I've found by registered users on the Bad Words filter :) J-stan ^Talk 16:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll look into that. Remeber, be bold - try posting it yourself if you want. J-stan ^Talk 16:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there's a filter in the filter RC page where you can only focus on the Mainspace. J-stan ^Talk 17:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Go to the Filter RC link, and in the middle of the top row, it says "ignore Pages outside the article namespace". click on that, and it only shows mainspace edits.

I've done that too! I got a big fat level 3 vandalism warning for it! I discussed the mixup with the other guy, and he took it down, but that was a little weird receiving the same message I had posted on other talk pages. J-stan ^Talk 17:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bsw2645

Thanks, & nice job on catching the vandalism to The Weather Channel (United States) ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 05:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

If I knew how to make Barnstars, I'd certainly give you one. :) Thanks for reverting that weirdo's edits to pages I've created. FamicomJL 06:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know...I put a speedy delete tag on one of his articles and I guess he got all bent out the shape over it. Thanks again! :). I would join but I don't have that much time. Thanks though! FamicomJL 06:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I do the same thing with newpage patrolling. I'm not in any projects, if there are any. That's cool. How do the tools work? I've heard of them before, but always wondered how they work...

Ok, I'm sold. :) Tell me how to set this stuff up. :) Thanks! FamicomJL 06:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't use it, I use Internet Explorer. Pretty much because it's easier to use RSS Feeds with it...FamicomJL 06:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try downloading them all tommorow morning. :) FamicomJL 07:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I got AntiVandal Too to work, how cool! This makes going after Vandals so much easier, LOVE the filter list. :) Thanks! FamicomJL 14:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Another article

Wow, those vandals put tons of vandalism there! I'd wait it out for the rest of the day, if there's any more vandalism, request semi protection. Watch out though, I think thee default choice with Twinkle is a form of full protection, so remember to double check it before submitting.

Also, notice that those IPs (of which there are actually 3) all start with the digits 82.4.x.x. I don't know what that means, but it might give a clue that it's some sort of proxy. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 16:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I saw that when I posted the above message. It's awesome that your really becoming a member of the community, making friends and all that. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 16:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Just one thing: sign your talk page posts :) J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 17:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The closest thing to "auto-sign" is the 4 tildes: ~~~~ = J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 23:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC). Other than that, there really isn't anything. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 23:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think saying that they both don't respond to questions is reason for believing that they are meatpuppets. It is, however, further proof of their intent. They do not stand by their edits as legitimate. Because the IPs have really nothing in common location-wise, I do not believe they are working together. I believe a request for page semi-protection is justified in this case. Also, a few of these users seem to have made edits outside of the Terran Federation article, so they are not single purpose accounts. Just remember, they may believe that they are making legit edits, but are too new to understand proper wikiquette. Just remember to not bite the newbies, you were a nameless IP once, too. Cheers, :) J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 15:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I got an idea! Maybe the IPs belong to some sort of proxy, so it appears that each IP comes from different places. These IPs could very well be the same person. None of the IPs were used at the same time, one at the beginning of July, one in late July/early August, and one very recently. My guess is that the same guy uses a proxy that provides IPs that appear to come from around the world to protect his ID, and that's why all the edits are similar. I suggest requesting semiprotection on the basis of vandalism, and keep warning these users. You might want to switch to higher level warnings, as you may be warning the same guy twice.

Also, I made a few adoption offers, but still haven't heard back. I am still looking to adopt. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 22:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

That's pretty much all that would change. You add {{adoptee|J-stan}}, and I add {{adopter|Ryan4314}}, and then we are all set. Good to have you aboard! First off, do you have any questions at all? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 23:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

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

-WarthogDemon 02:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Just spreading some wikilove. :) I do that on occasion with a random user. Hope I didn't offend. =) -WarthogDemon 03:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll remember that. Sorry for the scare. :) -WarthogDemon 20:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

There really aren't any requirements to voting so long as one is a member, and fairly assess the candidate's contributions and his/her answers to the questions given. :) Reason I started a little now is because I felt I should probably shift focus and familiarize myself with other parts of wikipedia; I've spent long enough on new page patrolling (and was actually starting to goof up; I was at it too long). -WarthogDemon 01:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Budgies

I have one budgie and one cockatiel. I really enjoy their company, such neat animals. Why do you ask? Lyrl^Talk _C 02:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

They do share a cage (both male). The budgie is much more high-energy and aggressive than the cockatiel, and acts like a bully to the cockatiel who weighs three times as much. The budgie is also much more horny than the cockatiel, and will try to feed the cockatiel, step on his tail, etc., and the budgie will also, um "take care of himself" since he's not getting any from the cockatiel. Kinda awkward to be around. I think they are both happier overall to not be alone, though, and it's neat to see them learn from each other. For example, the cockatiel was terrified of swings before we got the budgie, but after watching the budge swing, the cockatiel now LOVES swings. Lyrl^Talk _C 02:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Just stopping by again to thank you for commenting on my RfA, which was successful. And it was neat to hear about your budgies :) Lyrl^Talk _C 00:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

You assumed right

As per what you asked, yes, a Synocnus does indeed have something or other to do with the Ice Age Pages, in that it is a species of ground sloth, and the only documented (here) species that must be the one shown in the film. Thanks for the help. Greatly appreciated, and I thought that I'd have to deal with the vandal forever!

--KnowledgeLord 16:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi there my friend Knowledgelord answered your question and I would like to thank you in helping us with this vandal. EwanMclean2005 19:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:welcome back

It was pretty good. Went down the cape for about a week. I am going away again a week from thursday. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 23:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Your question on my RFD

Hi Ryan4314, you asked me a question at my RFD page, and I answered, but I haven't heard from you since then. I was just wondering if this was an overlook (in which case I'd be glad to know if I answered your question or not). Cheers, Schutz 23:07, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

CVU First Response

Hey Ryan, check out this discussion at the CVU talk page. Interested? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

RPP

Hey good work! The same thing happened to me, I was trying to report Emo (slang), and It crashed or something. Weird. Had to do it manually, and it is now indefinitely semiprotected.

Hey that IP you mentioned, just as a reminder, if an IP is blocked, comes off of block and starts vandalising again, you don't need to warn him, you can just report. Also, just in case you didn't know, the "arv" tab isn't just for vandalism. You can make sockpuppet reports and WP:UAA reports. Just found that out! J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 15:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Who am I?

Hiya, just saw your question on my talk page. Sorry but no I'm not The Suzy Wallace you was thinking of, she is an imposter! ;o). Take care. ♥♪♫♥♪♫ 16:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

When making AIV reports in the future

It's not necessary to quote the vandal's vandalism ... most admins will look at the user's edits anyway. And more importantly, it runs counter to WP:DENY. Daniel Case 03:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You want Riana for that one. Daniel Case 03:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a deep breath...

Hey Ryan, I noticed your interactions with one Stepscurve. You might want to tone down your comments; they violate WP:CIVIL. For more info, please read WP:TROLL#Not feeding the trolls. If he continues to make accusations of terrorism, just report him. His incivil way of dealing with others will get him a block. I would not wish the same to happen to a legitimate editor such as yourself. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 14:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, He left another accusation of terrorism, but I just removed that (check your history). It is just blatant trolling. Generally archiving or striking through is preferred, but sometimes it is appropriate to just remove content if it is outright unconstructive. However, information should almost always be archived in Article talk pages. WP:UP also has a few good points to make, and WP:CIVIL#Removing uncivil comments justifies removing uncivil comments. By the way, I don't think you broke WP:CIVIL, you were just on your way to an argument that could cost you your credibility as an editor. You might have been able to get away with it with Stepscurve, because he was behaving much worse than you were, but another editor could have caught both of you.

I don't believe you are able to watch a user's contribs page, as this could aid in wikistalking. However, WP:STALK states that checking up on a user's contribs to look for un-constructive edits is not wrong, but even though you have a legitimate reason to check a user's contribs as you would any other page, that feature is still unavailable to the general wikipublic. Admins might be able to do this, though I'm not sure.

And finally, I am doing well :) Just got back from another vacation, and I am ready to get back in the swing of regularly editing. How are you? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 18:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

Hey Ryan, I wanted to suggest going up for Editor Review. It's a good way to get an idea of how well you're doing, which in my opinion is very good. You have three articles which you have made 20+ edits to. I've personally done 2 reviews, and I definitely recommend it. I will back off of it, because as your adopter, my job is to give you a continuous editor review :) Happy editing, J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 03:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sounds like a good idea.

Like how many? Well, wannabe kate is used in RfAs and ERs to determine the edit count of the candidate or reviewee, but it also shows which pages have the most number of edits from the person. That's how I found out that you have 20+ edits to three articles. Let me know if you have any questions. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 14:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing

Anytime, thanks for the thankyou :-) --Ben^talk 08:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Adopted by J-stan? Lucky you. bibliomaniac15 Two years of trouble and general madness 23:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Seen him around. bibliomaniac15 Two years of trouble and general madness 23:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Blogspot

Remove them. That linked policy clearly states that "blogs are largely not acceptable as sources."

Also, I know bibliomaniac15. His RfA passed as almost unanimous, with one neutral !vote. Why? Is he the admin you rubbed up the wrong way? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 02:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, cool :) J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 16:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, we're fine. Unless I'm forgetting something... Nah! We're cool! Unless I seriously am forgetting something... J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 23:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hah! Blocked! J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 01:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, that terran federation problem can pretty much be fixed if you cite that it takes place 1000 years into the future. then other editors will help revert those edits. J-ſtan ^Talk_Contribs 15:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. just type the line <ref>x</ref>, with "x" being the external link. see WP:CITE for more in depth instructions, but my instructions are really all that's needed to cite a web source. I've taken the liberty of adding a "{{Reflist}}" in the references section, so when you make a reference, it will automatically add it to the references section. J-ſtan ^Talk_Contribs 16:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, personally, I've found myself unsure of whether to remove information as vandalism or to keep it in. If editors see that something is verified, they will remove unconstructive edits as vandalism because they know it's vandalism. Right now, it is unverified, so if someone changes it, no one will know who's edits are correct.

As for not being able to find a web source, is there some sort of review for the book? Any reliable source that says that this takes place 1000 years from now, you can add that as a source. J-ſtan ^Talk_Contribs 16:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Be careful, it might wind up as "ne thusand" ;) J-ſtan ^Talk_Contribs 17:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism / Vandal Counter

Not a problem. And, honestly, without checking I don't know whether I was the one that reported your particular vandal or not. As for how to add a vandal counter to your user page, simply add: {{User:UBX/vandalized|#}} to your user page where "#" is the number of times its been vandalized. Cheers! Into The Fray ^T/C 21:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sarah Silverman

Lol, thanks. Its just getting annoying how people (whom I think it would be fair to assume are Britney fans) are vandalizing Sarah's article. I think she went a little far with the comments about Britney's kids but its really immature to attack her on an encyclopedia of all places.--CyberGhostface 00:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:KennyJohnstonFlash.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Smoking airguns and such...

No problem. I was working on the airgun section of Accurizing, so all that information was fresh in my mind. If you're interested in spring airguns, take a look at the R1 tuning article in the references section of the accurizing article; it's a very complete 13 part article posted at Pyramyd Air, a big airgun retailer. And good luck with the fireplow; I never had the patience to do fire by friction, other than a couple of accidental times when using a too-dull bit in an electric drill. I preferred flint and steel. scot 13:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Sorry about that if I'd known I'd have done something about it...too busy editing articles. Justin talk 11:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Falklands

Hermes and Invincible never received so much as a scratch in the war. Each however lost a Sea King, one of these crashed when it had a bird strike just after take off and caused a major loss of life for the SAS. The casualties listed are aircrew from each ship.

There were 12 casualties on Atlantic Conveyor, the source you listed only gave the names of service personnel. At the time she was hit, there was a fairly large contingent of ground crew preparing helicopters to lift off later that day. Justin talk 11:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Necessary Evil has decided opinions on the Black Buck raid. BTW the move of the Mirage III is not British propaganda, the information originally came in an interview with a member of the Argentine Air Force but now they dismiss it as "British propaganda". Justin talk 12:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The Argentines tend to diminish the impact of the raid, the British tend to exaggerate it. Truth to be told BB1 and 2 accomplished exactly what the British intended to do, i.e. a) denied the runway to fast jets, b) stopped the Argentines extending it. The FAA had imported metal mesh to extend the runway, their engineers were trying to install arrestor gear. The Navy fliers had tested operating Skyhawks from Port Stanley and that could have had major implications for the Task Force. Part of the reason for diminishing the impact of the raid on the British side is simple cap badge rivalry, Sharky Ward RN had a chip on his shoulder about it and slagged it off in his book. The rest of the BB missions did not accomplish much, they were trying to take out an Argentine surveillance radar but the radar operators didn't play ball. Its still a remarkable achievement. Justin talk 19:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want to check for yourself about the Mirages, try this one [2], its a site written by right wing Argentinians campaigning for an amnesty for one of the soldiers involved in an attempted coup. Try a google search, for more information on this guy. The link is on Photo 32 of the Gesta de la Malvinas. Not a reliable source but hardly one to repeat British propaganda. Interesting the spin they put on it, that the Vulcans didn't bomb the main land because the Mirages deterred it.

If you don't speak Spanish try this link[3] Justin talk 22:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The Mirages had nothing to do with it, the British considered attacking the mainland but couldn't find an effective way of doing it. It wouldn't have been illegal as they were launching attacks against us, and therefore an attack would justified on the basis of self-defence. I very much doubt it would have brought in the rest of South America or the US.

One SAS mission was aborted, interestingly after an intervention by the politicians not the top brass. The SAS intended to land a Hercules on the main runway at the Super Etendard airbase, drive a load of armed Land Rovers out, destroy the jets, kill the crews and then "escape and evade" to Chile. They did land SAS on the Argentine mainland covertly from a Sea King with the aim of attacking the airfield but the helicopter was detected and compromised the mission. The helicopter crew flew onto Chile as planned and destroyed the helicopter whilst the SAS walked out. Justin talk 07:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Sea Kings were used as Exocet decoys. Exocet is a radar homing missile so its not the IR signature that they helicopter is working on. It relies of the difficulty that a radar seeker has in resolving the target in azimuth when the beam width covers the target; essentially two objects appear as one. If you can imagine a helicopter hovering close to a ship as a missile is incoming and the two objects appear to coalesce in the seeker field of view, then the weapon will hopefully be decoyed to pass either aft or in front of the ship depending on the helicopter position (at least in theory). Still a ballsy thing for the pilot to do (and yes Prince Andrew did it). Justin talk 09:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Argentina had 5 AM-39 (Air Launched Exocet) and a number of MM 38 on surface ships. They removed a twin launcher from ARA Guerrico to improvise a land based launcher. I would guess an Exocet costs around $250,000. Justin talk 14:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

British and Argentinin troops used essentially the same rifle. British troops used the L1A1 SLR, which is itself a single fire version of the FN FAL (as used by Argentina). The only people using the M-16 were the Special Forces, such as the Arctic and Mountain Warfare Cadre at Top Malo. Justin talk 07:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The stories of starving Argentine soldiers are sadly very true indeed. The conscripts were left in place in defensive positions and whilst there were massive logistical stores in Stanley (and Goose Green etc), they never reached the conscripts. They were left to survive on inadequate rations and punished severely for stealing food, killing sheep or begging for food from the Falklanders. Many of the islanders took pity on them and did feed them but if conscripts were caught accepting such gifts they were severely punished. What makes it worse in my book was that the "professional" officers and NCOs would leave the conscripts at night to berth in comfort in Stanley, ensuring they remained dry and well fed. If you look at photographs of the surrender, contrast the very dapper uniforms of officers and NCO with the rags of the conscripts. Its also interesting to compare the British Officers in the surrender document dressed in fatigues, with the very smartly dressed Argentine officers. The relationship between officers, NCOs and men broke down so badly that the Argentine officers were allowed to retain sidearms to protect themselves in the POW cage. Try an Internet search for Miguel Savage, he was an Anglo-Argentine conscripted in '82 who relates some of this on his website. Justin talk 12:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Did a quick check and it isn't mentioned. Good luck if you want to put it in, there are some editors who don't take kindly to any criticism of Argentina's conduct of the war. Justin talk 13:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Vandal

Good for you. Don't feed him. By the way, check out WP:AWB. If you like wikicleaning, it's a good tool. I am not particularly fond of it, it's kind of boring and it gives you a lot of pages that have nothing to do, but it acts like a bot, helping you make auto edits. I haven't found any vandalism with it, and I don't think it's that kind of tool. But if you want, give it a try. You have to get approved, but basically, if you have over 500 edits, you're in. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 03:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and closed Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/69.113.27.13 and addes some comments there. I also semi-protected your userpage to prevent further vandalism. Request unprotection at WP:RFPP or my talk page. Cheers!--Chaser - T 07:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Good job! Excellent report, and it was smart of you not to just send them to AIV. I had a similar guy vandalize my userpage, who was soon blocked. He came back as a sockpuppet named "Itoldyouidbeback", but before I could post him on SSP, he was blocked. So nice job, anyway. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 15:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

JLA

delete if if u must. All i was trying to do was help. - Redhead911

Question about old article

I noticed your question about the Peppers article here (Yanksox is an old friend of mine who has sadly gone inactive recently). In this case, Google is your best bet for information. I'm not linking to anything specific because of attack site concerns, but you'll quickly find whatever you're looking for (including a copy of the old article).--Chaser - T 19:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to say thanks for your help with semi-protection, and with helping me find the article I wanted. Would u like to know where I found it? or I imagine you already know. Thankyou very much, cheers Ryan4314 03:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Live action Watchtower under attack.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Live action Watchtower under attack.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Goatse

Yes, the "source" provided is bogus and that was probably put there by a troll. Chubbles 05:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't want to restore an identity section without a very reliable source, since that could be a serious WP:BLP problem. Chubbles 05:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocking

No problem at all. Keep up the good work reporting the vandals at WP:AIV, makes our lives a little easier! The Rambling Man 08:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

What

I did no such thing. What I put was an accurate description of what that word was.Bowchicawowwow 18:28, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

User in blocking need

Eherm Hello. I have an urgent report of a IP user. It is 67.67.42.253. He needs to be blocked for a period of 36 hours for abuse and vandalism. Try Hot Topic's history so you can reach his contributions to block him. Use this Image . You give me a message on my talk page when you're done. Rember that. Cheers. Robbie williams star 24576 17:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I've learned that you are not an admin so im sorry. But you can contact an admin if you want. Tell me when you have contacted an admin to block 67.67.42.253. Cheerio Robbie williams star 24576 Sing 16:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The blocking guy

LOL! Check his talk page! I saw it come up in my watchlist, and I decided to talk to him, tell him a few places he should go. I found it funny that a user with less than 20 contribs was attempting to instruct an admin on how to do their job. And yes, I got User:Miszabot III to auto archive my talk page. It's really helpful. If you need something, I can find it for you. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 17:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Weather Wizard's Forecast.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:The Weather Wizard's Forecast.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:NONFREE

Hey Ryan. Haven't spoken in a while. How's it going?

On a more targeted note, I've noticed the multiple fair use notifications, and I think it's in your best interest to look over WP:NONFREE, and apply some of the guidelines outlined there. Happy editing! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 00:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it does appear that out of all the notices, only one image was removed. Still, just to make sure you don't miss anything, it's always good to look over all policies and guidelines. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 03:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JLA Live Intro.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:JLA Live Intro.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JLA Live Intro.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:JLA Live Intro.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

2PWRR

Answered on talk page of 38 Brigade article. Hammersfan 16/11/07, 16.07 GMT

2PWRR contact details; Regular units attached to 38 Brigade - Hammersfan 16/11/07, 16.59 GMT

Re: Update

Nice job! Your editing is coming along quite nicely. Quick question: Do you do lot's of Newpage patrol? I recommend it. There has been some discussion of whether to allow IPs to create pages, and if it passes, Newpages will be flooded.

Also, I've been meaning to tell you. I am going under admin coaching currently. I don't really want to spread it, though, as it might be considered canvassing. I thought you should be one of the first to know, as you're my adoptee. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 16:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Pomp and Circumstance

Ryan, you have been a pleasure to guide through these past few months. However, you have gained much experience on your own. I think that it's time for you to graduate, unless you feel you need some more help. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 05:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok then, replace the current userbox with { {AdopteeGrad|J-stan} } and I'll replace mine with { {AdopterProud|Ryan4314} }. I'll let you know if I get to RfA. Hopefully my coach will see fit to nominate me. Newpage patrol is patrolling for the new pages that are created. The point is to nominate for SD the obvious pages. You'd be surprised how many there are. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 15:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

M-16/M203

M203 is the underslung grenade launcher for the M-16, does that clear it up? It was used by Special Forces only, not for general issue. Britain's Small Wars has info on the weapons used. As far as I'm aware they were only issued to the SAS/SBS, I don't think the MAWC used them at Top Malo House. Justin talk 20:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Foreign Language sources

Yeah, I've seen it before. I think the point the editor was trying to make is that we can't judge its reliability when we can't understand it. Try looking for a translated version if you think that the source is important enough. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 04:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think online translators are always as accurate, dammit! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 17:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

You should be fine, just read through WP:IMAGE and WP:IUP especially this section. I've seen plenty of images made by Wikipedians. Also, look out for Betacommandbot. It tags images as non free, but I hear it's been acting up lately, so it might tag some fair use images wrongly. BTW, are you OK? Just since you were at the hospital, I'm just curious. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 17:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, well I hope all goes well with your partner. My admin coaching is going great. He's got me focusing on writing for the time being, so I've strayed from vandal fighting for a while. Actually, if you check my talk page, someone offered to nominate me (I turned them down). Thanks for asking! Once you get enough experience, you should try it too (Maybe I'd even get to be your coach!). One thing I recommend you do is not just add yourself to the queue and leave it at that. I asked my coach personally if he'd help me. Happy editing, J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 18:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tori Live.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Tori Live.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

I reviewed you at your editor review; just thought I'd let you know here, as the watchlist of any busy editor tends to bury things like that. Cheers, Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 00:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the heads up! I'll check your ER out, but since I've been giving you a continual editor review for the past few months, I'll let others review you, but you should know that I'm proud of all the vandal fighting you do, as well as being a calm, civil article writer. Thanks for the kind words on my contribs (although if I was History of timekeeping, I wouldn't appreciate getting the crap kicked out of me :)). And yeah, besides wikipedia, videogames are my biggest hobby! I mostly like RTS and FPS games, so I jumped at the chance to be an editor on the first true hybrid. Looks to be the awesomest game ever! Cheers, J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 00:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, vista sucks. I am absolutely addicted to Age of Empires 3 and its expansion packs, although you won't be able to pull me from my Xbox 360 once EndWar and Conviction come out. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 00:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Already there - I've had it up for months, and now it links to the right page! Hasn't been vandalized in all that time, though they've certainly visited it on numerous occasions (one guy, after he was block, came back with two different socks). I don't want to add a box with how many times my userpage has been vandalized, though. No particular reason, just laziness. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 01:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, archive your page, dude. I mean, January? Come on :) J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 01:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Oi!

Oi (what a cool expression!)! Check out WP:BLP. It refers to "any wikipedia page", and I suppose that includes talk pages. I've seen Tyrenius around, and I think he's a pretty good admin, so I assume he knows what he's doing. Also, read this section and the one below it on the talk page guidelines. It isn't a good idea to insult people, even if they're not on Wikipedia, and what Ty did was ok. Happy editing, J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 22:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Brian Haw

Per WP:BLP, I redacted a gratuitous derogatory comment you made. You then made an edit and put the comment in the edit summary adding "lol;)". That's not clever and it's not funny. Kindly don't do it again. And do study WP:BLP. Your edit and summary have been deleted. If you want to add to the talk page please do so without insults. Tyrenius (talk) 06:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

There's no "punishment". It's the only way to remove an edit summary. If you want to repost with a proper summary your text was as below.

I saw a bit about the State Britain exhibit on the news the other day, and thought I recognised the picture of the dead baby, supposedly "maimed and burnt in missile a attack" (quote from the State Britain article) in it. So I did a little research into it, and found out the photo (that can be seen at the 3rd reference on this very article here) is actually a photo of a little baby boy who died, aged 3 weeks of cardiovascular arrest due to a rare disease called "Harlequin type ichthyosis", at the Pamukkale University Hospital in Denizli, TURKEY! This dead child was nothing to do with the war in Iraq or the "War on Terror" or whatever, he was born to unrelated parents in their early 20's after a normal pregnancy. Here is the source for this of course; http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijd/vol1n1/harlequin.xmlit's It's a case study about the child (be warned though, the pictures are pretty grim).

Oh, by the way, very interesting research. Are you sure it's the same baby? The State Britain pic, for example, doesn't have the red lines all over the skin.

Tyrenius (talk) 06:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, no problem. Thanks for your understanding and rewording on State Britain. I see you're up for editor review, so count this as a contribution! It would be no good asking Haw, as everything was put there by members of the public. I think you've given the wrong URL with 's on the end, which doesn't seem to work. This does: [4]. I can only find this picture of State Britain, and, although the image of the baby isn't very big, I am inclined to agree with you. This is no good for wiki as it's original research, I'm afraid, unless there is a reliable source that carries the information. Tyrenius (talk) 06:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's a close-up of the State Britain photo.[5] It's not the same photo set. There's a couple of photos at the bottom of this page and a video.

If you don't want to be an admin, ever, and you don't want more barneys getting close to wiki's core, I recommend sticking to articles, making sure your edits are well referenced. That's all you need to do really. :)

Tyrenius (talk) 08:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I think there's no doubt it is a photo of a harlequin baby. Maybe you should let these people know! Tyrenius (talk) 23:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Brian Haw mayor edit

you removed brian haw london mayor edit why? (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Not referenced is a good enough reason. Tyrenius (talk) 22:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

(edit, add) Ah-ha! Actually it is a good enough reason! Under "Dealing with citation problems" at WP:CITE, it says "All unsourced and poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed from articles and talk pages immediately. It should not be tagged." Shame it took me nearly 3 weeks to work this out lol ;) Ryan4314 (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

(edit, add, again) OMG! I just realised you said "is a good enough reason", you supported me! All this time I thought I had done wrong! My word, how stupid am I!? Ryan4314 (talk) 18:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yea I know now, I should've whacked a on it, but to make up for it for I've offered to source it for him if he can find can find one. Although, I googled "Brian Haw" and "London Mayor" and couldn't find anything about him thinking of running. In fact the only thing I could find was a link from the London mayoral election, 2008 article, that lead to a Facebook group of 7 people! Coincidentally the entire (heavily biased) Brian Haw entry on that article was added by the guy above, so even though I reckon Brian Haw running for mayor is bullshit and that this guy is in fact the guy who started the 7 member strong facebook, I (like you with the animal rights wikiproject) neutralised the entry here, pending if this guy can actually get some proof. Ryan4314 (talk) 05:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Definitely remove. Tyrenius (talk) 15:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

A rather hawful joke. Tyrenius (talk) 16:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Farsi pronunciation

Well, tiger specifically is "babr" and I'll try to spell it out phonetically for you: ba-brr. the "ba" is the same is the ba in "bad," just take out the 'd', and the "brr" sounds similar to a rolled r sound you find in Spanish or French, with a 'b' and the beginning. note the entire word is only one syllable.

The overall category used for tigers, jaguars, etc., is "pa-lang," with the "pa" rhyming with the "ba" above, and lang rhyming with "rang." two syllables here.

Hope this helps. ---Mass147 (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

well, yes that is the "beh" character, but that's used only at the end of a word. here is the word spelled out (with two 'beginning'-beh's): ببر --Mass147 (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

close enough. ;) --Mass147 (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Musa Qala

Hi Ryan! Spotted your edit summary 'NPOV' I also laughed at the word 'Crack' however it is what is stated in the referenced article supplied, so I thought it was a requirement and therefore better to leave it! Perhaps the crack referred to the rear lower extremity of the participants. <lol> Richard Harvey (talk) 16:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

HMS Sheffield

The second Exocet was decoyed by another of the escorts and splashed harmlessly in the sea. Found it on the MoD FoI website but have limited connectivity at the moment and can't pull down the PDF files. Justin talk 12:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[6] Page H-6 shows the Exocet hit the sea approx. 1/2 mile off Sheffield's port beam Justin talk 18:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks!

... for the barnstar! Happy editing! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 20:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Pshhh yea but that other guy's barnstar sucks, he handed out 16 that day! The one I gave is for well-deserved merit, on an article a normal person might actually read lol Ryan4314 (talk) 20:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you mean the other barnstar? :) Yeah, that one was for being one out of a number of editors who helped get the user's students acquainted to Wikipedia. Yours means more. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 23:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Yay! Ryan4314 (talk) 07:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Live_Action_Ice.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Live_Action_Ice.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jusjih (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Footnotes

I don't think there is a standard as to how long footnotes should be, but I don't think you have to quote the entire paragraph from the article, you only need the reference. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 16:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but just take out the quote, and leave it as a bibliographic reference. It was a good faith edit, just too long of one. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 16:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question

Sure. What's the question? J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 17:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Actually, I have a bot archive for me. I think I'm going to step it back a little. BTW, it's here. And now for Mercury. People say it stemmed from his actions dealing with RfCs, ANI postings, and ArbCom cases with his former admin coach, Durova. Durova made a block on an established user, and everyone got all up in arms about it (She made a mistake, is all). Supposedly, Mercury's actions there in support of his coach were a major reason as to why people wanted him to give up the bit. However, this came up maybe three times in all these recalls and RfCs. What people focused on his his decision to close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Beesley (7th nom) as no consensus, but then deleted anyway per this section of BLP, as she had asked that it be deleted. Perfectly legit. Well, people didn't like that, and I can't go to the exact discussion now, as it's been deleted. But basically, I wanted him to stay an admin, and if you could see the discussion, you'd see that about 12 others did too. Now, the recall closed, and Mercury started a userspace RfC on himself. Those who though he should keep it vastly outnumbered those who thought he should give it up for a few days, but then somehow there came a large pile-on of votes in favor of recall, though they were still the minority. Mercury closed it early, right as these votes started to pile-on (not the brightest move, eh?), and people got mad at that. Well, everything shut down once Mercury asked for a steward to desysop him, and now, Mercury has exercised his right to vanish, judging by his talk page history. The comment I was asked to remove was just me joking around. Hope that helps! J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 18:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

ANI is basically a place where admins discuss admin related activities, and some editors ask for help in disputes and such. Check it out! I guarantee that if you don't like the behind the scenes work on Wikipedia, ANI will make you never want to become an admin. ArbCom is the last step of dispute resolution, kind of the high court. I believe that an ArbCom case is the only way one can be desysopped without any voluntary action on your own part. They place official community bans. Really serious stuff. One thing I've found to be almost therapeutic when you feel the drama that is the Wikipedia and Wikipedia talk namespaces is to go to Wikia and get into a small wiki. Since there would be only a small number of editors, there's less micromanagement.

Asking a steward to desysop yourself is a voluntary process, yes. The reason Angela Beesley is there now is because of a deletion review case, where the result was to over turn the deletion. When I said Durova made a mistake, I mean it was a mistake to block the user in the first place, not that she accidentally blocked the user. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 21:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

At wikia, people make their own wikis, which are not nearly as popular, but sometimes it's better to keep things small. You could create your own, or you could jump into one and start editing. J-ſtan^Contribs_{User page} 16:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Lokata

Thanks for your comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.199.183 (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Red Dawn

Probably would be a good call. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 02:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)