User talk:Sn0wflake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Archives

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk01, which includes messages from 16 July 2004 to 24 July 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (30) general comments (22) cricticism (6) negative interaction (4) adminship nominations (1)

User:Sn0wflake/ArchivedTalk02, which includes messages from 26 July 2005 to 13 December 2005. Statistics for this archive are as follows: positive interaction (49) general comments (12) cricticism (2) negative interaction (3) barnstars (2) long-standing conflicts resolved (1) conflicts I was dragged into unintentionally (1)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nightwish

Now I feel stupid for not notifying you, damn yeah..it would have been a smart thing to do in the first place..I apoligize. However, that thorough copyedit of Nightwish was superb! Thanks a lot, and could you please consider voting? You don't want your own work to go unrecognized, now do you.SoothingR 12:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

You asked what is wrong with it. The answer lies in seeminly as more and more people contribute to it, with the FAC trying to be reached by some, with others trying to use crystal ball methods, and some trying to get over-factual accuracy dominative, is leading the article into a POV Warzone. I suggest, that you let people make their edits, and then ask them why. Then if it can be done, which is normally the case, reword and juggle what that person edited to keep the same implications, but with a more fluent, better fitting, and FAC type wording. Leyasu 01:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, let me try to be specific, im not too good at it it seems. I tend to have this problem of i know what im talking about, and nobody else does.

First thing is the Fac. I can see why some users are desperatly trying to get it up to FAC standards. Thats all well and good, but one thing ive noticed is that in the process of it getting to FAC standards, its requiring more and more a need for core knowledge of terms used in the article, and people mentioned. This could probally be fixed with writing to bridge the gap between the UK and USA's slight differations of language, and adding links into articles. Linking things like Simone Simons would be helpfull. Also take into account that people outside of Uk and USA will read this, so using common words is also good.

Next is the Crystal Ball problem. I dont see the need for predicting the future. If albums arent out yet, dont list them as being out. If things havent happened yet, dont list them as having happened. I notice some users want to post about the new Nightwish singer, and others dont. Well if the band says something about the new singer, but it in. However, make sure that its noted to be only speculation, and not fact. It solves most problems that way.

Lastly is the Factual Accuracy people, and i suppose i fall into this. People like me always want to get things perfectly accurate, without any speculation at all. This mostly arrives in problems of what Nightwish are when it comes to music. People like me know this is this, that is that, there is there. So when someone says This is that, that is there, and there is this, we get somewhat cold about things, and try to point out every fallacy and problem with that, and show people this is this, etc etc. The problem here arises when someone writes in only specific places have claimed this is this, etc etc, when its actually a broad argument all around, from varying different people, with varying different views, most of which will of course, be wrong.

Hope that clears up what im trying to say, im not very good at explaining things in all honesty. Leyasu 03:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gothic-Doom

Again read the Gothic Metal article, ive been through this argument with another user already. The differences are large and the music very different in both sound and composition. I suggest reading all the article, and all its catagories, as you seem to lack core knowledge in the subject which i specialise in. Leyasu 00:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

As for the links like this one (gothic-doom metal) ive started doing that as of late, as i learned better how to do it. Second, me and user Parasiti are already on the case of the catagorys Symphonic Metal, Gothic Metal and Gothic-Doom. Thirdly, check the talk history of the Gothic Metal article. After a month of arguing with another user, much like yourself, i was turned over as right not only by the bands agreeing with me, but by my expertise in the subject, and my far better knowledge of the issue than what people try to force as something, when it in fact as no relevance to that or otherwise. The revision is a consensus after over a months hard work to get to something everyone mainly involved with the subject could agree on, however, with the slew of childlike fan sites on the internet all trying to latch onto its misconceptions as a latest craze, it does make it hard to run through internet sources. The best advice i can give you is go spend a few years in the Gothic Metal scene and corely study it, and also study music, and you will realise that what i say is not wrong. Leyasu 01:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grunge Music

While im here, any chance you could take a look at the user Lganon's discussion with me on the discussion page of the Grunge Article? Im having problems with this user, who is making personal attacks and exhibiting meglomanical point of view. Hes also threatening me with banning me from Wikipedia and such. IM not sure how to best deal with him as ive tried being civl, and tried warning him and apologising if i seem offensive, but he still persists in attacking me. As such i have no idea what im supposed to do in this case, so if you can take a look and possibly intervene, or give council, that would be much apprecited. Leyasu 01:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute with Leyasu

Sn0wflake, please read the talk:Grunge music instead of taking his word for it. He has been the one making personal attacks, calling me a megalomaniac (he even did that in the above comment) for no reason other than the fact that I wanted him to cite sources. I am the only one who has cited sources in this argument; in the article, I have added Hype! in the References section (which I did long before this argument started).
As for "threatening with banning", I was warning him that if he continued to make personal attacks I was going to make a request for arbitration, which could result in a ban. I meant that as a warning, not a threat, because I assumed he did not understand what arbitration was about. Admittedly, I shouldn't have bothered to mention that, but there was no threat meant by it.
All I have asked of him is to cite sources. He has not cited so much as one, yet he continues to erase info that is cited.
I have gone through Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation, Wikipedia:Third opinion, and even Wikipedia:Requests for page protection in an attempt to deal with this problem. He instead has simply started a revert war. Trust me, I am not the one who is acting uncivil. -- LGagnon 02:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I did try to discuss things calmly with Leyasu early on. I even continued to as I tried to get outside help. However, outside help never showed up (except for one admin who scolded Leyasu and then left), and nothing is being done at all by anyone who can effect the problem. Yes, I did lose my cool, and I'm sorry for that. But if Wikipedia had any working system in place to stop harassment I wouldn't have. The admins have done nothing, mediation has done nothing, and none of any of the other proper steps have done nothing. There's nothing in place to stop violators of official policy. I don't think I should be blamed for my reaction when there's no other way I can defend myself from harassment. -- LGagnon 02:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to have to drop this in, but here is a comment from Lgangon on the Grunge Music talk page, directed at me. It somewhat exhibits the problem im having with this user.

Go ahead and lie to the admins. They did nothing about you when you were (and still are) making personal attacks, they aren't going to do anything about me telling you to stop it. -- LGagnon 00:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

These are the problems im having. I seriously do not wish to work with this user at all, and would like to know if there is anyway i can emmit this user from contacting me? Leyasu 03:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes its me again, har har. A personal favour if you will. Do you mind giving me examples of what i say that could be considered a personal attack, and why? It would work brilliant for my Social Skills class x) Leyasu 06:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Read it. Didnt get how i was making personal attacks from that. At a leap, my best guess is that by making any comment on anyone is deemed a personal attack. Mind giving me examples of what 'i' did, and what is personal about it, because that page was no help what so ever. Leyasu 06:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh i have provided sources. I provided him three websites he dissmissed because they werent 'grunge enough' for him. Aj, aka, WesleyDodds pointed out that all the refrenced books contradict what he said about Hype. I have provided 5 more links to history pages on Grunge, all of which say nothing about it being Hardcore Punk.

His argument is this, as far as i can tell:

• Grunge is Hardcore Punk, because it inherited its fan base from Hardcore Punk, Grunge bands often play with Hardcore Punk bands, and Grunge bands draw influence from Hardcore Punk Bands.

Ive said this is wrong, by using Gothic Metal as an example, if you apply the same argument.

• If Gothic Metal was the same genre as its originator, it would be Doom Metal. It it would be the same genre as bands it plays with, it would be all forms of metal. If it was the same genre as its core influences, it would be Black, Death and Doom metal.

Do you see what im trying to say now?

If you count both me and Wesley having provided sources now that contradict him, Wesley's sources being sources that Gangon himself provided, then i do honestly believe that his argument is void, and that this is all over others editing the article. Leyasu 07:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok i respect the banning. What i do ask however, is if you can show me what i did that was a personal attack, as i tried to be nice about things, and was trying to be nice about saying he was sounding meglomanical. I gave him the link as well, as he seems to not understand what it means to be meglomanical. So yeah. Mind showing me what i did thats a personal attack, and telling me how it is, because i dont want to get banned every five seconds for talking the way i talk. Leyasu 12:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Then without being a bitch about it, how on Earth are you supposed to tell someone that theya re acting meglomanical, when they are? Sorry i dont see this is a personal attack, and i dont see it mentioned as one, either. I suggest somebody asks the policy setters about this. If they say, 'Yeah its personal', fine, i can accept that. I just want to know how to tell somone they are being like that, when they are. Leyasu 01:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

If i am to concentrate on his contributions, and his contributions are meglomanical, what on Earth comes next? It is not a personal attack to state someone is being meglomanical. That comes under hiding behind a policy, and picking and chosing which ones to follow. Your action is questionable simply because its not part of official policy, and one persons view of a personal attack isnt another. He personally attacked me several times in a direct manner, and im the one scorned for trying to tell him in a nice manner that his contributions are sounding meglomanical? Folly, dear sir, absoloute folly! Again, you explain to me how im supposed to tell someone that in a nice manner, or seriously rethink your contributions as an admin in regards to what are, and are not, personal attacks. Leyasu 02:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I at no point said you were vicitimizing me. I said, yes, he does seem to have Behavioural problems. You blocked me on basis i made a personal attack. Id now like for you to EXPLAIN how what i said was a personal attack, other than some Users dislike being told when they are acting bang out of order. Leyasu 03:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Curiosity. Im not big on revising the article, simply just removing the templates, thats all, and removing claim that the genre is Hardcore Punk. Do i need to revise the whole thing, or just delete the parts in question? Leyasu 03:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Btw

Both users involved in the revert war on grunge music have been blocked for 12 hours. One had 5 reverts and the other 6. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 08:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute resolution

I'm ok with the compromise you came up with. So long as the opposing view is backed by an outside source, I'm fine with it being included in the article. That was all I was asking for anyways (that and an end to the personal attacks, which I assume we also have now). -- LGagnon 04:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Without being funny Snowflake, he is at it again. 'If you want a counter argument, it shouldnt be yours'. Again, its not ok, because its not his. Which again, is meglomanical. Can you please adress this issue, and simply say this is how it is, deal with it. Because he is seriously pushing me into the path of simply ignoring him, when he is blatantly trying to start another argument. Leyasu 23:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Children of Bodom Page Protection

I dont know of the policy or regime for a page requiring page protection. The article has been under heavy and repetative vandalism from a set of anons.[1] is the page history, some of these vandalising edits including [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. This is just some of the vandalism i have had to revert. I lack knowledge of other admins, and, as you were involved with me before, i thought best to ask you for advice on this matter. Leyasu 20:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nightwish

Yeah, I'm kind of glad with it, actually. Although, without your help and that of several others, I wouldn't have been able to get the article up to Featured-status. ! SoothingR 07:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Image:Fire Bomber (band).jpg

I'm sorry for bothering you, but are you sure that this image is in the public domain? It seems to be a picture which we can only use through the fair use-procedure.SoothingR 19:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright. {{tv-screenshot}} will do I guess ;).SoothingR 06:37, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guitar expert needed

I pulled the following from Articles for creation. Can you verify this exists and if it does, provide sources for the article? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pick tapping

Pick tapping is a technique wherein the side of the guitar pick is used to fret notes on the guitar neck. It is very similar to finger tapping except the pick is used, rather than the finger.

Pick tapping can give a cleaner sound than finger tapping, but it is harder to add vibrato to the tapped note than with the finger.

Generally, it is also easier to tap more rapidly with the pick than the finger. An example of this can be heard near the beginning of the Randy Rhoads guitar solo on the Blizzard of Ozz's Crazy Train where rapid taps on the G string are performed while the left hand is slowly bending and releasing a fretted note lower down on the string. This gives an effect similar to that of a whammy bar being depressed and released. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stub sorting Barnstar

Greetings. There is a Barnstar for stub-sorting up for proposal here. If you'd like to participate in the discussion, we'd much appreciate it. Thanks, and have a great days. :) SynergeticMaggot 18:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Accept (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Accept (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 19:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

{subst:image source|Image:Lana Lane (singer).jpg}} Abu Badali 20:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:To Die For (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:To Die For (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Alice in chains band photo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alice in chains band photo.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Arch Enemy (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Arch Enemy (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Nevermore (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nevermore (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Theatre of Tragedy (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Theatre of Tragedy (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Raul Julia (actor).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Raul Julia (actor).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Hammerfall (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hammerfall (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Dream Evil (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dream Evil (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Eoin Colfer (writer).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Eoin Colfer (writer).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Symphony X (band).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Symphony X (band).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Rebecka Liljeberg (actress).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rebecka Liljeberg (actress).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Kimberly Goss (musician).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kimberly Goss (musician).jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 {{fairusein|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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 20:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sonata Arctica (band).jpg listed for deletion

[edit] Removing legitimate messages from your talk page

Please do not remove legitimate messages from your talk page. Talk pages exist as a record of legitimate communication, and in any case, comments are available through the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. Thanks. --Abu Badali 04:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Replied.

Hello, Abu. My Talk page is, as everything in my User space, my property, so I'd like to ask you not to question my removal of the needlessly verbose template-generated messages you have flooded my page with. Don't question etiquette when you, yourself, appear to lack them. All of the images in question were uploaded back when there was no strict control of image tagging and sourcing, and really, I cannot trace back images which I found on Google years ago, so they will likely get auto-deleted.

Your human-written messages will never get deleted from my page, but no, I will not change my position regarding template-generated messages. --Sn0wflake 16:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

You may want to submmit {{wr0}}, {{wr1}}, {{wr2}} and {{wr4}} to WP:TFD (or educate me on what I have misundertood on their proper use). --Abu Badali 17:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't mind you posting the templates, as a matter of fact, thanks for the work you are doing for the Wiki. What I mind is you cricticizing me for deleting entries which I feel I have absolutely no way of fixing... from my own talk page. --Sn0wflake 04:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you appreciation for my job! :) About the "legitimate messages" issue, I think the point is that, even the pages being "our talk pages", others users may have good reasons to be interested in reading them. That is, talk pages are not like mail boxes. They are more of a recipient for open conversations. I, for one, have received all kinds of rant, criticism, sarcasm and pesonal attacks on my page, but I never delete them. Well... no harm done. Thanks for taking this so politely. Best regards, --Abu Badali 04:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Sn0wflake, Abu badali is lying to you; he did actually remove two personal attacks from his talk page. Tell him to restore those before he tells you to restore your talk page. - Ivan Kricancic 13:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Metal

Absolutely. Just a few months ago he was permanently banned from Wikipedia after violating his ArbCom revert parole too many times (make that too, too, too many times.) Just as the temporary blocks back then didn't deter him, he continues to intercept the permanent ban with various IPs (and apparently "cold" names) doing what he did before, like removing the "gothic metal" genre from band articles and replacing it with something else, adding factual, spelling, or grammar errors to articles, abusive and libelous edit summaries, and inflammatory commentary about others on Talk pages. That pretty much explains it. --Danteferno 03:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Ill make it short for yew, as Danteferno is known for lying. Im banned perma from Wiki for 'abuse' of Sockpuppet ips - like this. Danteferno and Deathrocker are banned from all articles concerning Gothic Metal. Both of them run a joint sock farm (which is known about) and have been banned and warned considerably due to this. Both have also been making abusive edits to other users (User:Fred138, User:Ours18, User:Cronodevir) claiming them as sockpuppets of me, even when RFC says they arent. They have been banned and warned for this behaviour though, as they have tried claiming anyone who disagrees with them is a sockpuppet. To cut it short, im barred from editing - they are barred from metal pages. They delete information from long term users who supply sources using sockpuppets, start revert wars, claim it was all me, and then get found out days later.

Basically, they are as guilty as me. Oh, and WP:ANI already said that until they can provide sources (And lots of them that are credible_, the community and edits by the long term users who havent been in trouble are to stay. These are the versions i revert back to until i can bring attention to it with Admins and WP:HMM - the latter even having significant notes about articles that D&D are causing problems on that need special care. Leyasu 05:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, to warn yew, they may attempt to delete this - so if yew get several users jump on your talk to reinstill what i have said, dont be suprised, as both are now in the habits of blanking their own, and others, talkpages of anything said against them. Leyasu 05:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.143.125.20 (talk • contribs) .