User talk:Steakknife

This account is a sockpuppet of Premier (talk · contribs · logs), and has been blocked indefinitely.
Please refer to editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

Image copyright problem with Image:Original-eureka-flag.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Original-eureka-flag.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Original eureka flag.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Original eureka flag.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ 20:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Warprisonerssmall.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Warprisonerssmall.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:

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. 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Steakknife, Please at least use correct spelling and don't add images unless they have appropriate copyright. Unless you add the copyright information to the above image page, and it has been released under an appropriate license, it is simply dishonest to use it in the page. Also, you claim that you took the photo Image:Australians in Iraq.jpg. Were you really in Iraq in 2003? If not, please change the copyright info on that page, as well. JPD (talk) 12:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steakknife,

An image that you "just found on a website" is not suitable for Wikipedia. To use that image, you will need to tell us who owns the copyright on it, and why it is ok for Wikipedia to use it. I am sure you have enough contacts in ANFA to find out where the image actually comes from, if you don't know already. If you keep uploading it without providing this information, it will keep getting deleted, and you will probably be blocked from editing. JPD (talk) 10:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this your one and only warning

No personal attacks. I'm referring to this. Do it again and you'll be blocked indefinitely. Please show at least a tiny bit of maturity. Slac speak up! 01:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further image copyright issues

Steakknife,

There are some legitimate concerns here about the copyright status of the images you have uploaded:

Image:Australians in Iraq.jpg -- Did you take this photo? Do you have a larger version that you can upload?

Image:Original eureka flag.gif -- This is a copy of the image on this site.

Image:Reviewofreviews.jpg -- This image is claimed as a fair use book cover, but the fair use claim is only for an article discussing the book in question. Use on Australian flag debate isn't covered.

Image:Warprisonerssmall.jpg -- I find it more likely that you got this off a web site, as you said in an earlier upload. However, it doesn't matter, because the copyright remains with whomever took the original photograph. Taking a photo of a photo doesn't mean that you can license it yourself. So you need to determine the copyright of the original photograph.

Image:Queen2006.jpg -- Another image which you claim to have taken, but based on your other image issues, I am somewhat skeptical. Do you have a larger version you can upload?

If you're unable to resolve these issues, the images will likely be deleted. Please don't upload any more images until you have a firm understanding of image copyrights on Wikipedia. I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thanks. kmccoy (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Exhibition Building image

The image Image:Reb.jpg, which you uploaded, was identical to http://www.anzaab.com/anzaab/member_files/images/Royal%20Exhibition%20Building.jpg, on the Australian and New Zealand Antiquarian Booksellers site. Especially given your history of dishonesty with images, it is highly unlikely that you were the creator of the image, and so it has been deleted. If you wish to include an image of the buildings where the flag competition results were announced in the Flag of Australia article, then rather than nicking images from random websites, I suggest you look at the images we already have (Image:Royal exhibition building tulips straight.jpg, Image:Royal Exhibition Building 2003-05-17.jpg, Image:Ac.exhibition1.jpg) and discuss their relevance to the article on the talk page. Myself, I don't think an image of the building really adds to that part of the article. JPD (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Polygonwood.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Polygonwood.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 04:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to Eureka Flag, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Tiddly-Tom 16:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop now

Stop this rubbish immediately or I will block you indefinitely. Slac speak up! 06:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being uncivil to other editors. Last warning before blocking. -- Chuq (talk) 13:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Steakknife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I haven't been taking my medication and I was in a state of hypermania when I edited the Harold Scruby page. I'm stable now. I was not vandalising the pages related to Australian republicanism. I made some good points

Decline reason:

You haven't been blocked. But any more insults and you will be. — Step hen 09:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Blocked as this user has been abusing multiple accounts to evade blocks on numerous republican topics - most notably Australian republic referendum, 1999, Republicanism in Australia and Bi-partisan appointment republican model. Orderinchaos 10:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Steakknife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm not vandalising any pages. I have a ton of references and I am going to be bold and expand some of the wikipedia pages that concern Australian republicanism. I devote my time and resources to the wikipedia project. My mental health is fine now really.

Decline reason:

This request does not address the reason for your block; see WP:GAB. — Sandstein 11:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I suffer from Manic Affective Disorder (MAD). I was too poor to buy my medicine for a fair while and this led to a period of hypermania and some unrestrained activity on wikipedia. I'm stable now and ready to come back.

I would be willing to consider unblocking you. The block is intended to serve a preventative, not a punitive purpose. But before I do, there are two things I would set as conditions - per WP:TALK, please use talk pages to discuss improvements to the article rather than try to start debates about the subject of the article or taunt opponents; and please stick to one account (this one or another you nominate). If you can agree to both, we can proceed. Orderinchaos 13:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

You have agreed to behave acceptably and to use one account, hence, the need for the block no longer exists. If any autoblocks prevent you from accessing the site as a followon from this, use the instructions provided on the autoblock notice to post here.

Request handled by: Orderinchaos 15:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|Maybe I used that word when I was suffering from mental illness. Since I was unblocked I have been making a lot of constructive edits. I'd like to see the evidence that I abused a fellow wikipedian in this way.))

Speeling

Do you really think Aboriginies is the right spelling - all the references in the world will not have that spelling - you have some cleanup to do :) Satu Suro 09:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Indigenous Australians appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. Ludwigs2 04:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reblocked

I just reblocked you. Repeatedly referring to Indigenous Australians as "Niggers" is not acceptable.[1] Your account appears to be a disruption account and it's going to end up being blocked indefinitely if you continue in this vein. Sarah 08:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Steakknife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I haven't abused any wikipedians since I was unblocked. Could the evidence be produced? I have been making a lot of constructive edits, I dispute being 'disruptive'. The material I have added to the 'indigenous Australians' page on the exogamy rate is first class.

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reason for your block. — Sandstein 09:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Self evaluation is dangerous. you cannot even spell properly and if you havent heard - your caption heading is enough to say goodbye Satu Suro 08:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really didn't use that term. Really. I want it looked into. Plenty of public libraries in this world mate. Yes, I might take numerous edits to get it right, but I get there in the end.

My mental health is fine now.

Steakknife (talk) 08:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you a diff in my message above. You kept using your account and your IP address to write "nigger" into the Indigenous Australians article. Sarah 08:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm telling you that it not so. If it can be proved unequivically I did that then I am going back to the psych hospital because I have no memory of this.

Steakknife (talk) 08:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way there are great geniuses who arent that fanatical about spelling.

Steakknife (talk) 08:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, have a look for yourself: [2]. Sarah 08:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah well I didn't do it. Keep the ban then. This is not my computer anyway.

As long as the exogamy figures remain in the article then I don't really want to edit any more pages.

Opponents of the aboriginal soverienty movement are quite pleased.

Steakknife (talk) 08:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block extended to indefinite as you say your account has compromised. Gnan garra 09:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support this block. I am increasingly convinced that you are a long departed, indefinitely-blocked user who had very similar obsessions and a similar posting style on the talk page of the same article. Orderinchaos 12:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]