User talk:Skier Dude/archive/archive Mar 08

Question about open proxy

At the open proxy report page, I sometimes see that a result is overturned. The bot's initial report says "No open proxy" and then a clerk concludes the reported ip is open proxy. How do clerks judge whether it is an OP or not after the first bot report? --Appletrees (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed information. Dealing with open proxy is really a nightmare as your expression. I was so curious as to how result can be different from first report. I visited to file some suspicious ip editors and one third of which are open proxy users. I really appreciate your time and effort. Regards. --Appletrees (talk) 16:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work!

Someone dedicated to making your day a little bit better! (talk) 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. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Need help..again

Hi, SkierRMH,

I have uploaded about 25 images to Wikipedia and, except for Image:Hardy boysUBdeprivation house.jpg (thanks for your help with that one), haven't had much of problem...until today, BetacommandBot has tagged 4 of the images that I have uploaded, saying, "there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid"(click here to view full comment) I not sure what I have done wrong, because I used what it says to use here:Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline#Non-template,

Keep up the good work,

Thanks,

WHLfan (talk) 00:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I just noticed, you seem to have the same problom, with User:BetacommandBot!

WHLfan (talk) 00:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!

Did you clear out 800+ non-tor nodes the other day? Excellent work!!! SQL ^{Query me!} 05:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

usernames

I just learned something. I used to think that corporate names as user names was not allowed. Many people think that. Upon reading official policy, this is not the case. See http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Usernames#Company.2Fgroup_names where it says "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on the circumstances may be seen as a problem."

Should we not block usernames that are corporate names? Or should we require proof that they are users who are company employees? Archtransit (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The username is Thepokeratlas Archtransit (talk) 16:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is being discussed at WP:AN Archtransit (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A question re images and SOURCE of image

Hi I trust you've been well. I edit a lot of film noir articles and I see many images are being deleted. Thank God not mine because I learned from Blofeld how to do it right last year & he has some great templates he shared with me. Now someone at Wiki has gone completely BONKERS and is trying to delete images just because the name of the ARTICLE is not included in the title of the Fair use rationale. This is quite frustrating. Common sense should prevail here.

But to my question: I do add a rationale to the images being deleted but often I cannot find the SOURCE of the image. Will the image be deleted because the image does not have a source? I hope I've been clear on my question. Of course another thing I can do is just let them all be deleted (I have a good list on my user page) and them add the images again later...I guess I'll can wait two months. Let me know what you think. Best Luigibob (talk) 06:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ample Destruction.jpg)

Y SkierRMH (talk) 03:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hediedwithafelafelinhishhand.JPG

Whoa! That was fast!

I intended to come back to this later and add the fair-use rationale, and discovered that you'd beaten me to it. Thank you very much! --Calton | Talk 01:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Betacommand

Hi, Blofeld pointed me in your direction. I would have taken this to WP:ANI but I don't want to get shouted down by the betacommand supporters brigade again. Betacommandbot has been malfunctioning, tagging loads of articles for deletion but not notifying the Article talk page or the uploader talk page. Examples

this edit. no notification here Talk:History of the Chicago Bears
Image:ItuzaingoLogo.gif, Image:GimnasiaCU.gif, Image:Laflorida.gif, Image:GrupoUniversitario.gif + at least 20 more, all tagged for deletion with no notification on my talkpage.
Image:Ahitienetumadre.jpg tagged for deletion, no notification on Blof's talkpage.

I think it's well out of order that many of the 20,000+ images tagged in the last run will be destroyed without any notification on the uploader/article talk page. I'm slowly trawling through at manual speed but I'm only at Ah and I've ignored virtually everything thats not a coin, banknote, sports logo or somehow Argentina or football related and they are all up for deletion on Tuesday. English peasant 01:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: February 13

We have a problem. It seems that I can't get large lists of articles properly anymore. It's not a bug in the bot because the same problem happens when I try to get the list with AWB. I get only 2215 pages when I make the list from Category:Album covers. This causes the bot to work incorrectly because it needs the list of album covers refreshed on a daily basis. Do you make lists from large categories in AWB without problems? Jogers (talk) 10:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also suspected that it may be related to the internet connection because it didn't happen before and I'm connected through a router since recently. Let me know what you will find out. Jogers (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Coltrane-Simpsons.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Coltrane-Simpsons.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Hastily Cobbled Together for a Fast Buck Album

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Hastily Cobbled Together for a Fast Buck Album, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hastily Cobbled Together for a Fast Buck Album. Thank you. Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FurMe

I've noticed that several editors use FurMe to add fair use rationales. Looks like a convenient way to do this so I'm just letting you know about the tool in case you didn't know :-) Jogers (talk) 10:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kunjunni picture

Amolnaik2k (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am new to Wikipedia. I had uploaded a photograph of Kunjunni. I see that you have reverted back to earlier version. Please let me know why. Thanks for your reply.

Amolnaik2k (talk) 13:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Saw your comment on my usertalk. Thanks for the instant response. Please advice which option in the Licence dropdown menu to be selected if the picture is downloaded from a website like a online newspaper.

Deleted images

Hi, I did some work adding FURs to around 500 images earlier this week. Many were uploaded by this user User talk:Machocarioca. I added FURs to 200 odd film related images he uploaded before his apparent retirement, I only found a handfull where I couldn't do a FUR due to lack of details of the source. Perhaps you could look through some of the deleted images on his talkpage and see if they are salvageable, I imagine that he included source details on them too, I would do it myself but I don't have admin powers. Let me know how you get on, kind regards English peasant 20:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and have a look how the page was before I deleted the ones I resolved [1]. English peasant 20:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page deletions

Hi SkierRMH. Re [2]. I've come across a fair few talk pages like this. I think talk pages of open proxies should generally not be deleted as they often contain useful history. A simple blanking will suffice. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Kubrick

Hi. There is a NEW user who's come on board with one purpose, and it seems, with one purpose only: to add a link to this research library. I deleted the link from Lolita, a film I've worked on, because the link, especially where he/she placed it is improper because it has nothing to do with, well, er, the LOLITA film! What are you're thoughts? Keep me in the loop, so I can learn Wiki policy as these things happen. Best-- Luigibob (talk) 12:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you are super for getting back to me. I'll wait a few days and wait for the folk who watch the K film pages to do their thing. But I'm not sure. Did you know that I SAVED 10 images on KUBRICK'S article from being deleted by adding the FU rationale. My Gosh who's taking care of that article. It's enough to get a Wikepedian down. I have another matter re external links (on film noir articles) from blogs that I need help on, but it'll wait for now. I need to draft a good argument for my case. You are doing a great job! Best -- Luigibob (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Deeds Goes to Town

Sorry for the intrusion but could you look at this article? A series of anon IPs (same person based on comments) has added an unusual addition under popular culture with no attribution other than his/her viewpoint/OR. Of a more serious nature, the editor has also made inappropriate comments on the article's discussion page and my talk page. Thanks for your assistance. FWIW, I may be asking a number of admins for their review of the article. Bzuk (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Image talk:HD.jpg

Hi. Would you please consider undeleting Image talk:HD.jpg? There is valuable information there related to the now-deleted image, which may at some point reveal that it is validly in the public domain. Thanks, Iamunknown 17:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. One more question: Do you know of a way to mark that a talk page should not be deleted? I kind of suspect it may be deleted again. :-\ --Iamunknown 22:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Two Two

I've been trying to get my hands on a copy of the old Jacob Two Two film by Theodore J. Flicker for years. Growing up in the 80s in Canada it was one of my favorite movies. Do you know where I could get it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.6.42 (talk) 22:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jabob Two Two (forgot my contact info)

I've been trying to get my hands on a copy of the old Jacob Two Two film by Theodore J. Flicker for years. Growing up in the 80s in Canada it was one of my favorite movies. Do you know where I could get it? Thanks!

Mike.McNulty@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theycallmechief (talk • contribs) 22:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Is this fair use template okay to use?

Hey chief, I trust you are having a good week-end. I ran into this template which seems to work wonders. It's a Fair Use Rationale template. A dumb question, but, can we use this on image pages we create or edit? This is the one: {{filmrationale}}. Of course you place it below the article specific heading -- see: Image:Kubrickstrangelove.jpg. Thanks! Luigibob (talk) 01:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts

Thanks for your efforts in rescuing images related to the Simon Templar book series. Unfortunately it looks like one has been lost: Vendetta for the Saint has lost its image. I don't know if you have undelete ability, but if you want to try and rescue that one, please feel free. Cheers! (PS the book covers for Electronic Revolution and The Cat Inside, two books by William Burroughs, have just been flagged as well.) 23skidoo (talk) 15:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar on skidoo's page

something weird is going on with it. I don't think it was closed properly. Enigma ^msg! 22:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Hammersoft closed it. Enigma ^msg! 22:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of User talk:91.122.58.230

Hi. I was under the impression that talk pages tagged with {{tor}} didn't qualify for speedy deletion. This one was recently re-created by a bot adding entries to Category:Tor exit nodes. Is there some informal policy on this that I'm not aware of, and if so, should this talk page be re-deleted? Thanks, ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 11:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked SkierRMH not to do this. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Pleasefind.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pleasefind.jpg. Y SkierRMH (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreleased Albums

I noticed you recently voted in AFD concerning an unreleased album. I invite you take part in the conversation here Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(music)#Unreleased_albums any input you have would be appreciated. Ridernyc (talk) 09:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking Tor

Hi again SkierRMH. Thanks for your previous response. I prefer to keep conversations together so you may wish to reply to this message here or it might be better moved to WP:OP. I have found myself undoing a number of your recent Tor unblocks (after just a few hours and after proper verification). Examples: [3] [4] [5]. Some of these nodes have extensive histories. Just as some Tor nodes are only Tor for a day, some Tor nodes are not Tor for only a day. I suspect you may have unblocked these nodes during a short downtime, while they were switched off for the night, or while they were using round-robin on their available IPs. Or I wonder if the method you use to check is 100% reliable. To try and help with this problem I have started adding the node fingerprint to Tor block summaries. It is very informative to Google the fingerprint, as they only remain in Google for a few days, they lead to pages which display graphs of the uptime, and they indicate any other IPs the node might be using. What I'd like to suggest is that you Google for these fingerprints, and that Tor nodes (especially the ones which have been repeatedly blocked) should not be unblocked immediately, but should be monitored over the period of about a week. If they are consistently Tor they should probably remain blocked. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that 3 out of about 1200 isn't "a number of" - but I do agree that adding the TOR footprint is a very good idea - that gives an easy history to refer back to. I'm using both of the tools that are on the OP page to check - and yes, I've left a many of them that did have long edit histories (or histories of on/off/on/off) as blocked. Beign able to check via the fingerprint for 'repeat offenders' is probably the best way to keep track of those that may even be toggling the TOR to bypass this. SkierRMH (talk) 19:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually a few more than that, but apart from one they have all been your unblocks (easily explainable as you have done some good work unblocking loads). On some of them it's beginning to look like we're wheel-warring, so I thought I'd get in touch to get this working together. You should see some of KrimpBot's edits revert-warring with itself - open, not open, open, not open... Thanks again. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did notice the KrimpBot appeared to be a main "player" in this, and I'm very hesitant to take a bot's "word" on some of those things. There was one of the pages where I think there was about 10 on/off's by it - as the only edits on the page, and it didn't look like there was even an edit made from the TOR node! Will keep an eye out for the others, and agree that keeping a fingerprint attached to the offender is perhaps the best way to keep a history on them. SkierRMH (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tunog Kapuso.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tunog Kapuso.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manhattan Transfer Live.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Manhattan Transfer Live.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pastiche album.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Pastiche album.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

High Plains Drifter

Could you restore Image:High Plains Drifter Poster.jpg thankyou ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 16:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged thankyou. Seen the film by any chance? The score is really haunting. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 17:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think highly of the soundtrack too -the contrast of the electric eerie sound and wailing with the tradiational stirring western soundtrack -da da dah da. Da Da Da Da. -. The film gives me the creeps -theres something about it that is quite shocking. Incidentally I created the article on the composer who created the music Dee Barton ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 19:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Marin Creek

An article that you have been involved in editing, Marin Creek, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marin Creek. Thank you. W-i-k-i-l-o-v-e-r-1-7 (talk) 21:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

deletion (05:12, 13 March 2008): "European Multiple System Atrophy Study Group" ‎ (G11: Blatant advertising)

EMSA is not "some entity" but an established network entirely devoted to optimizing the care of MSA patients by conducting a large number of preclinical and clinical studies. It seems bizarre that wikipedia should not inform their users some of which may desperately seek information about MSA and potential therapies.

We kindly ask you to reconsider your position on the EMSA entry.

Best wishes

78.94.119.154

Hiya - would you mind taking another look at the above? I was just looking at their contributions in more detail when you blocked them. They're correct - the official website isn't at www.paulaabdul.com, it is at www.abdulpaula.com. Bearing in mind BLP, and various other considerations, I wonder if it's worth re-looking at their actions...? _GB^T/C 21:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ShamanDhia's Page comment

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 06:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC) I think we are past the notability issue as I have added citation for shows and included the US Copyright info on my most recent work. COI and AUTO are being discussed because of the kind of digital media artist I am and the special issues I am encountering. If it still reads like a resume, its because I don't understand how to footnote/cite and I have already asked for help. Once I can get my facts and links straight, I can free up the narrative. I am not looking to sell anything from this page - I am trying to give away Art through Wiki, which is what it is all about, I think. I appreciate your comments. 161.38.223.246 (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)ShamanDhia[reply]

What do you mean? - the COI thing, so I meant to say wiki supports the concept of distributing free/editable/changeable artwork, and that's why I want to participate. I'm not trying to sell stuff from wiki - i'm trying to make it available - regarding COI - freedom to use, copy, edit, change, cite, whatever...ok what do you mean about my grave lack of understanding? I'm refering to the free-art license stuff. Its so hard to follow everyone's dialog on separate pages - but I really am interested in what you mean, and thank you for your input again. I wrote a lot on that page tonight in closing...I know time is ticking for me ;) I think I've been doing this for 4 days now...reminds me of my early chatroom addictions....ppl love this wiki editing stuff don't they! 24.188.143.21 (talk) 06:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)ShamanDhia[reply]

Classical Music Wikiproject

Hi, just to let you know, any article with {{classical-composition-stub}} should be tagged with {{Classical|class=stub}} on its talk page. Cheers. Centy – reply• contribs – 02:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 09:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More deletions

We've lost tons of film images by the bot not informing people its not good. Could you restore the lost images to Deewaar (1975 film). thanks ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 22:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cliffhanger Poster.jpg ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking tor

I've run across a couple of IPs you recently unblocked as "not tor" however as of today they are tor and checkuser shows they are being used by an abusive sockpuppeteer (Spotteddogsdotorg (talk · contribs)). What is the basis for your unblock as "not tor"? 193.170.194.42 (talk · contribs) for example. Thatcher 14:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.ippages.com/us/?ip=193.170.194.42

When I unblock as "not TOR" they show up under two checks; Kewlio.net & ippages.com; as not a TOR account. The problem is, as you know, that some of these are one time only users & go off TOR after a while, while some of these are off&on users that do this most likely to circumvent checks such as this. When there's a history of not only TOR but 'sock' or other grievous problems I leave them blocked (& if I remember, put a note on the talk page). However, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt & unblock when they're not showing a bad history & they are not listed as TOR on the usual checks. SkierRMH (talk) 18:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Jack Of All Trades (CD)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Jack Of All Trades (CD), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Jack Of All Trades (CD) is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Jack Of All Trades (CD), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 21:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cameo Murders

The image is free, and fair use rationale applies to the image. I am an associate of the publisher who published the book using that image.

Thanks

Zardoz99 (talk) 01:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zardoz99

Nancy Price

Dear SkierRMH - wondered if you have time to a look at the Nancy Price entry - I'd appreciate some help with taking it forward - cheers Excellentone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Excellentone (talk • contribs) 23:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pvsamrat (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)pvsamrat hi have a small doubt how can we upload the pictures which are not copyrighted[reply]

Thanks for your input - I seem to have made a right old mess of the table for the filmography and it took me ages to input the information so I don't want to lose it - can you see if it's a simple mistake - sorry to bother you Excellentone (talk) 23:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please restore hilton t young

The article was deleted for not showing my importance before i had a chance to finish it or respond. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Htyoung (talk • contribs) 06:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

frowned upon by who --Htyoung (talk) 06:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I'll find a better, more relevant wiki to post too.

Too many circular links to read how you guys want things done at wikipedia. There has to be a wiki where things are straight forward and OPEN. Thanks again.--Htyoung (talk) 06:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ip addresses
213.146.135.126 from GB 4403/tcp filtered unknown 9270/tcp filtered unknown 89.165.7.76 from Iran PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp filtered ssh
216.58.96.135 from Canada PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 3.5p1 (protocol 2.0) 80/tcp open http Cisco ACNS httpd 5.5.7 443/tcp open http Cisco ACNS httpd 5.5.7 553/tcp open pirp? 554/tcp open rtsp? 5274/tcp open tcpwrapped 8001/tcp open unknown 8003/tcp open ssl/unknown 9443/tcp open tcpwrapped 4 services unrecognized despite returning data. If you know the service/version, please submit the following fingerprints at http://www.insecure.org/cgi-bin/servicefp-submit.cgi :Service Info: OS: IOS
User:ClueBot_IV/WPOPreports/128.205.33.79 from US PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 5800/tcp open vnc-http TightVNC
User:ClueBot_IV/WPOPreports/213.146.135.126 from GB PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION 23/tcp filtered telnet 4403/tcp filtered unknown 9270/tcp filtered unknown