User talk:The Raven/Archive 1

Random Ish, why is it here

I see you voted on a 1942 mod, well List of Battlefield 1942 mods is on AFD. Bfelite 02:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with the page Oordegemsestraat on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you for your understanding. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Zepheus 03:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Polfbroekstraat. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Fram 19:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Gotem. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Fram 19:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are cities in belgium. Its not nonsense. If you think the facts are incorrect, of course, feel free to edit them. --The Raven 20:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are not cities in Belgium: Gotem is a hamlet, Polfbroekstraat is a street. The only info on these articles that is correct is what you copied from the linked website to give it an air of veracity and to fool foreign editors who lack (logically) the basic knowledge of Belgium to kudge such entries thoroughly. Why do you deliberately and repeatedly add false information to Wikipedia, and then complain when it is deleted? If you don't know whet is or isn't Gotem, then don't start an article about it. Show me and the other editors at Wikipedia why these places are notable, show me that the info you present is correct, show me that you are interested in making good articles and a better encyclopedia. Then I will change my position, not when you add some superficial correct info to make a nonsense article look serious at first glance. Fram 07:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotem The Raven 16:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotem

no, not nonsense. Thanks for being persistent. - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, The Raven/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

V takom sluchae, you might be interested in adding Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board to your watchlist. See you around. - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Junk talk articles

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --John Nagle 03:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Sorry about that I went a little crazy.

Did not know it was possible to have talk pages of talk pages, perhaps this should be changed? --The Raven 03:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clean up your own mess, please blank each junk page you created and replace it with just {{empty}}. If you created a page, no one else has added content to it, and you want to delete it, that's the way to do it. It will then be deleted by an administrator. Thanks. --John Nagle 03:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --John Nagle 03:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As they say in the movies, "oh be-have". Seriously, though, we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so don't make joke edits. Some readers looking for a serious article might not find them amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do a bit seriously here. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write whatever you want (as long as it's not offensive).

--John Nagle 03:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Syphonbyte, User:Polfbroekstraat

In addition to the junk pages you are creating, you have made obvious bad-faith edits to certain user pages. Please do not vandalize user pages. Wikipedia allows anyone to edit any page, but along with that comes a responsibility to be respectful of others. Vandalizing user pages is disrespectful, against Wikipedia policy and could get you blocked from editing. Your edits are amazingly like those edits made by IP 68.220.132.148 -- please see User talk:68.220.132.148 where I added {{subst:blatantvandal}} to that IP's talk page. SWAdair 07:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion those users welcome such edits, being as they are my friends in real life. However you did not know this, I will continue to edit their pages as I see fit, and of course they will edit mine.

This has been done many times if you check history. --70.152.47.2 17:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh... I had assumed the previous times were previous vandalism. Well, if they don't have a problem with it then it isn't vandalism. Just don't be surprised if you get more of this type of message in the future. A lot of people check recent changes and without foreknowledge they'll have no way to know you're just playing around. Happy editing! SWAdair 03:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know this, and sometimes it frustrates me to no end. Thanks for understanding. --The Raven 00:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:DGScreenshot.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:DGScreenshot.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 22:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Alexander Anderson Priest.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alexander Anderson Priest.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Fram 11:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotem

This is the only warning you will receive.
Your recent vandalism to Gotem will not be tolerated. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Fram 20:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was unaware that italicisms were a such a grave offense that users are nigh-banned on sight for it. If that is the case then I will take note to format softly and carry a large blunderbuss from now on. Catbag 02:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it was his first vandalism edit, he wouldn't have received a final warning. Considering this user's previous history and the lack of many useful edits (e.g. his previous edit, threem months ago, was also vandalism), starting with the full range of warnings again is unnecessary. But I know that this explanation is hardly necessary for you, seeing that you know him. I only add it for any previously uninvolved editor reading this and wondering... Fram 06:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His previous edit appeared to be adding an image to an article. I will be sure to refrain from this in the future. Catbag 18:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A doctored image where he inserted the word "Gotem" in it, which was vandalism and a copyright violation. Fram 06:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should have just banned me on the spot, why even bother giving me a warning? I will never contribute anything usefull to wikipedia anyway. I'm sure you have realized this by now. --The Raven 02:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated vandalism, meatpuppeting and now harassment: blocked

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism on Wikipedia.

You are welcome to return and contribute to Wikipedia after the block expires. However if you again vandalise Wikipedia you may be subject to a longer block.

To contest this block please place {{unblock}} below and explain why you feel you should be unblocked.

Fram 20:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really mind if you block me, but could you tell me why you think I was meatpuppeting? Because I was acting by myself, and using only my own username. The Raven 21:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even ignoring the IP address that chimed in, Catbag is yet another of the bunch of Gotem editors where you are also a part of. Defending each others edits, helping each others vandalism, is meatpuppeting (assuming for a moment that you are different editors, otherwise its sockpuppeting). You were not just acting by yourself, you were acting together. Fram 19:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok. If we're talking about Catbag here, why are you accusing me of meatpuppeting yet not accusing him? Also, i'd like to dispute your claim of harassment. I did actually think at first that thereisaplace removed some legitimate information from the EHS page (I'm not talking about the picture), otherwise I would not have posted a warning to his talk page. I see now that after carefully examining the edit history, I was in error. Unfortunately I am blocked and can not apologize for my mistake. I do have some more things to say, but I'll wait for your response. The Raven 04:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well what can I say, I'm impatient. First : I really don't see how you can call what I did "repeated vandalism", all I did was re-add that one image. The rest of my information I added was (at least I thought it was) correct, ie my edits were made in good faith. I'll accept what you said about meatpuppeting, however I thought the definition involved recruiting a group of people (IPs/Usernames) to support your ideas (which I certainly did not do). If we were "helping each others vandalism", wouldn't that just be vandalism? Or would we both be each others meatpuppets? The Raven 05:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catbag didn't even participate in the Gotem AFD, so I'd hardly consider him part of our group. I'm a little confused about this claim of harassment, though. Also, Raven's edits to Eastside_High_School_(Gainesville,_Florida) aren't really vandalism since he's just inserting correct information. Another user (probably some GHS or Bucholtz student) has been repeatedly removing this information and edit warring. At any rate, I will shortly give some references that will put an end to it. 71.30.249.53 04:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was meatpuppeting, since the three of you (Raven, Catbag and IP) were acting together to insert false information and to scare away a good editor from the article. It was repeated vandalism from The Raven as he has done almost nothing but vandalism on Wikipedia since he joined. The info on the article added by Catbag c.s. was nonsense and fits the Gotem pattern. The fact that Catbag only joined Wikipedia after the Gotem (and related) AfD's, and after another user of your group wsa indef blocked, does not indicate that he is not part of the group, as can be seen by the comments he posted above, and the strange coincidence that he used a picture from Gotme in the article, and that The Raven came to his rescue. You cann claim whatever you want, but this is too coincidental... Fram 10:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can say with great certainty that Catbag is not part of our group. He is most likely some student from Eastside High School. The fact that he's edited the Gotem article is not suprising, because the term "Gotem" is extensively used in that area. (There was even a wiki article on it for a short time.) Our group consists entirely of alumni of that school, however judging from Catbag's edits, he is a current student. From the looks of his account, Catbag made an account on Wikipedia quite some time after Gotem's AFD, although his userpage states that he used to edit anonymously for some time before that. The fact that Catbag used the picture from the Gotem article in the EHS article is unsuprising, since it's a picture of the Tech Lab at EHS. I have no idea why it's in the Gotem article.

At any rate, I can safely say the following:

Catbag is not part of our group
I have not personally inserted false information into articles
Most if this discussion is pretty pointless anyhow since Catbag is only blocked for a week and The Raven has indicated that he'll wait out his block
Gotem

75.89.19.236 22:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, alright. I guess I will wait a month, it is useless to argue with you Fram. Though I understand you are probably not pre-disposed to believe me. You didn't have to ban me that long you know, although I am surprised you blocked me instead of an indef ban seeing as I basically asked for one in my last comment 6 months ago. The Raven 17:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Since I know how Fram is very sensitive (read: trigger happy) when it comes to accusations of sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry. I'd like to state that the above IPs are certainly not me, (although I can probably guess who it is given a few tries). The Raven 08:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link in Legend of the Galactic Heroes

I realize you added this about 8 or so months ago, but it's a copyright violation and I have removed it. I'm shocked it remained in the article for so long. If you added links like this to other articles, can you let me know? I realize you can't remove them yourself right now. Leebo ^T/C 04:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, can you explain to me how it is a copyright violation? As far as I know, nobody in the US has 'licensed' this anime. So 'fansubbing' is tolerated, it is not as if these shows are sold for profit : (see [1]), or is there a wiki policy that relates to fansubs that I am not aware of? The Raven 07:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is probably the only such edit I made however. if thats what you wanted to know. The Raven 07:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]