User talk:Sasquatch/Archive 4

I asked Essay this and he directed me to you. How would I go about removing/hiding tabs I don't use much, such as protect and watch; the goal being so that I can put in the block/unblock tab and lots of room. Also I wanted to make sure the monobook.js and monobook.css work together (btw, which has priority?), since I have rounded edges installed on monobook.css. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 21:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have to concede defeat, I've included your code in my monobook.js but it doesn't seem to work, nor does any of the code I've placed there. Either my cache isn't clearing (I am doing the Ctrl+Shift refresh for Firefox, or I've made a simple stupid mistake somewhere. Is monobook.js loaded by default, or do I have to change a setting somewhere? - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 23:26, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sassy, see Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Neuro-linguistic programming. Remember to check the article's talk page. Thanks. Redwolf24 (talk—How's my driving?) 03:40, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sassy! (Er... may I call you Sassy? :P) I just wanted to pop in to thank you for supporting me in the Advisory Committee Election. I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to do yet, but I trust that Essjay will be a good leader and let us know. And if he doesn't, I'll impeach him! ;o See ya around! Acetic'^Acid 21:07, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your vote of confidence in the Esperanza elections. I look forward to helping Esperanza and Wikipedia progress. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 21:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Esperanzians! A few announcements.

The Advisory Committee election results are in. In tranch A are Acetic Acid and Flcelloguy. In tranch B are Ryan Norton and Bratsche.

My other annoouncement is that our founder, JCarriker, has founded Esperanza's sister project, Wikipediology. I have written two essays here (my name is Matt Binder). My essays are under Teenage Wikipedians and Anon Editors.

On behalf of myself and Jay Carriker and the other wikipediologists, I would appreciate it if you were to join.

Cheers Esperanza! Redwolf24 (talk—How's my driving?) 23:45, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! See you on IRC soon... --Celestianpower ^hablamé 12:17, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Is that some sort of trend going on that I'm not aware of? It seems there have been a number of those accounts lately. --HappyCamper 23:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that explains the effectiveness. I haven't actually been on IRC before. Maybe I should do that. Anyway, I'll see you around the Wiki! And thanks again for the reminder about the blocks :-) --HappyCamper 23:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just posted some info on 3RR case 165.247.208.115.

As I wrote on the winter soilder talk site:

how about TDC's violation of reverting text? Do I need to post a 3RR complaint to have that resolved? He has a long history of being reprimanded for 3RR's, and lest we forget, TDC started this revert war, not the anon.

TDC has started a new revert war with me.

Despite what you said here at the Winter Soldier Investigation site: [1]:

Alrihgt, here is my last plea. Do not remove content just because it appears to be mostly comment. Rather, use your brain, read it thouroughly and edit it. There's a reason why it's called edit this page. Just because one sentence in a paragraph is copied, don't delete the whole thing. Wikipedia:Copyrights clearly states "If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed". The only case where you should remove ALL content is if the entire thing is a clear and cut copyright violation. Also, if you take an idea and rewrite it (i.e. put some creative effort into it) then it is no longer a CP. The next time you observe a CP, do not just delete it right away. Read it and see if there's a better way to summarise it and then fix it. Deleting it is a last resort. I'm pretty sure the policy on this is very clear. Remember: don't just go around deleting stuff. That's counter-productive to what Wikipedia is trying to accomplish in the long run (i.e. store as much encyclopedic information as possible). Sasquatcht|c 21:27, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to change the content as we speak, and he continues to put up the copyright notice. See the history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hughes-Ryan_Act&action=history

As he mentions on his talk page he is a wikistalkers:

Beware the wikistalkers. Wiki members who investigate certain users contributions and continually revert them.

He targeted me just because I brought to everybody's attention his aggressive tactics, history of abuse, and frequent bannings in the past.

Please keep in mind TDC's history of being banned from posting and his tactics, all discussed at length on the 3RR site that his friend Duk posted:

165.247.208.115

Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation#Removing_content_versus_fixing_content as well as Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation#Fair_use before you revert mass chunks again. If you find a copyvio sentence, delete that sentence and that sentence ALONE. Honestly, Wikipedia's position on this cannot be more clear of copyvios. The only reason to delete an entire article is iff the entire thing is a copyvio. Thanks Sasquatcht|c 04:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

You are flat out wrong. Read the instructions for dealing with copyright violations on WP:CP. Articles get reverted to the pre-copyvio verstion, not only the remove the copied text but to remove the possiblity of derivative work that occured to, and in relation to, the copied text. --Duk 04:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is refering to large chunks of copyrighted text. Why do you believe this? What is the size limit?. Again, you are flat out wrong. --Duk 04:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PS. if you have a problem with wikipedia's policy on dealing with copyright violations (ie. reverting to a pre-copyvio or new version), then your problem isn't with me, it's with the policy. --Duk 04:57, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See copyright. authors are automatically entitled to all exclusive rights to the work and any derivative works unless and until the author explicitly disclaims them, or until the copyright expires. --Duk 05:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Using a derivative work without permission is most certianly a copyright violation. --Duk 05:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now your getting a tad rude my friend. Saying "I am flat out wrong" is not very nice at all. Frankly, if you opened your mind a little and read that stuff, you can see all the evidence supporting my evidence. And don't patronise me on Wikipedia policy thank you very much. Again, reconsider the stuff i wrote and add a rebuttal. I quoted from Wikipedia:Copyrights directly which is actually the master page in dealing with copyright issues. Again, all you've cited is one page while I cited the ACTUAL policy page as well as a meta page discussing it. Sasquatcht|c 05:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did respond, go look --Duk 05:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so what is a derivative work? I read a bit about it and basing a movie off a book would be a derivative. But how is taking facts and restating them really derivative? If your more familiar clarify what constitutes a derivative and what doesn't on Wikipedia. It would be absurd to require all the stuff on Wikipedia to be completely original as they have occured elsewhere. Also, there is the whole issue of fair use but I won't dig into that. Sasquatcht|c 05:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to go review the archived talk page and all the links on it, the old WP:CP entry, and the discussion I started at WP:AN to resolve the previous copyvio (a few weeks ago). Once you do this you'll understand how it's the same copyvio that dogged the article for the last thirteen months that is starting to sneak back in. --Duk 05:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duk is mistaken here, and he knows it (since I've corrected him 3 times on this already). Not to worry; I will continue to correct him as long as he persists in misrepresenting the facts. This is NOT the same copyvio that Duk addressed three weeks ago. The text we are dealing with now is NOT starting to sneak back in - it was there several months ago, just as it was there yesterday. The copyvio issue that was resolved a few weeks ago remains resolved to this day. You can see a description of it here. This doesn't change the premise of Duk's argument that copyright content (and derivatives) need to be removed from wiki-articles, but I'm growing weary of his insinuations that there is an ongoing conspiracy to sneak copyvio material back into articles. 165.247.213.239 09:29, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Be nice. End of story. Sasquatcht|c 09:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I didn't answer your question above. OK, a derivative work would be to copy text into a wikipedia article and slowly morph it until the words aren't the same. The new work is based on the old copied text, it says the same things in a similiar way but it was derived from the other work. This would be a copyright violation.

Conversely, you can read some text and present the very same facts in your own words and it's not considered a derivative work.

Reverting copyvios to the pre-copyvio version (or to a new version) breaks the possibility of derivative works. --Duk 05:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I was unable to reference the website from which the work you mentioned was copied/derived, but I will point out that much greater leniency is given to derivations from works of fact as opposed to "creative works", i.e. fiction sprung wholly from the mind of the author. Facts are free to be reported, and there are only so many combinations of words that can be used to effectively convey specific information. If you were to write a book entirely in your own words telling the story of the Lord of the Rings, you would be in far greater peril then if you were to write a book entirely in your own words telling the story of the First World War (even though your writing would necessarily convey much information that has already been written about the latter).  BD2412 ^talk 23:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Don't include copies of primary sources which discusses article sized quotes going into wikipedia and longer quotes going into Wikisource or Wikibooks. Rewriting is often done but is not mandated by any wikipedia policy. WAS 4.250 06:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use says "Fair use makes copyrighted work available to the public as raw material without the need for permission or clearance, so long as such free usage serves the purpose of copyright law, which the U.S. Constitution defines as the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (I.1.8), better than the legal enforcement of claims of infringement."

See [2] for further information.

"RULES OF THUMB FOR COURSEPACKS

The Classroom Guidelines that were negotiated in 1976 can provide helpful guidance and we recommend that you read them. 1. Limit coursepack materials to

• single chapters
• single articles from a journal issue
• several charts, graphs or illustrations
• other similarly small parts of a work. "

from [3] illustrates the principle of extracting part of a work being covered by fair use.

The New York Times itself quotes others.

"Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work." [4] therefore a quote that essentially lists facts isn't even covered by copywrite in the first place.

Wikipedia primary servers are in the US.

While it would be nice to have no legal complications, the rich in this world are seeking to own everything including math equations (which is what software patents are).

Don't help memes that block the free flow of information. Help memes that promote freedom. Fair use is one such doctrine, law and meme. WAS 4.250 06:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time on mediating the Winter Soldier Investigation.

I just wanted to let you know that I posted a response to comments about my use of the Pikachu image on my talk page. Best regards, Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 04:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning. Unlike the people trying to push Original Research on that article I try to comply with Wikipedia policy. I trust you will be cautioning them also. Unbehagen 11:35, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Out of courtesy, wanted to tell you that I mentioned your name on Winter Soldier Investigation

Sasquatch needs to monitor this site more agressively, or give job to another moderator

What I wrote:

Another revert war has began, again from TDC. If Sasquatch is unable to babysit this site because he has more of a life than most of us here, another moderator should monitor the site.--Travb 05:36, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

You wrote on my talk page:

I am not really moderating. In fact, I'd probably be a shitty moderator for this situation as I'm already involved. I archived the Request for Moderation because the specific complaint was over deleting all the content over and over which was solved... Anyways...

So what should I do, the revert wars are full steam, should I contact those several admins who have booted TDC before?

Should I put up another arbitration request, or go to the next step and do dispute resolution?

TDC WILL NOT stop--I dont think there is anyway he will stop revert wars unless forced. I would like him to surprise me--but I have met the type.

You wrote:

I'd probably be a shitty moderator for this situation as I'm already involved.

How so? Do you mean in that you are editing the article now too? Like Ed poor? (Can I mention his name here without alerting him?)

PLEASE GIVE ME FURTHER LIGHT AND KNOWLEDGE.

You wrote on my talk page:

"you know, what, screw that, I'm gonna protect it."

Ultimately it is your call, I havent seen the damage on the site yet, it may be minor, but it is probably signifigant--I would bet the revert wars have started anew today... I am busy talking to Ed poor now on the talk page....Travb 22:44, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy alert....

Just wanted to tell you Sasquatch, that I just mentioned you name on [Talk:Winter Soldier Investigation]

my talk page that he might protect the page, we will see what happensTravb 22:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was a great idea to protect the page. The page was changed so much, even from my last edit. But as soon as you unprotect it, unfortunatly it will be attacked again by TDC and his friends.

Historically on the Winter Soldier Investigation page, TDC (talk · contribs) actions, along with his friends, prompted another protection in October of 2004, August 8, 2005, and again on 25 August 2005.

There needs to be arbitration with this issue in the future, after you unprotect it--I think it is the only way to stop this.

I also agree that both sides are guilty of revert wars.-- Travb 22:55, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Though I may mention that I did a Request for arbitration on Winter Soldier Investigation. I mention you and Tony_Sidaway as neutral parties. Travb 10:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible for an administrtor to abuse his delete ability?

Is over 300 deletes on one and 400 deletes on another page normal?

If so, who can I report this too and where? Travb 10:55, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

h0w d00 u cu570m123 ur 516 11k3 7h47? (How do you customize your sig[nature] like that?) Flarn 02:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support on my RfA. If my RfA passes I will use my new abilities with the common interest in mind. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ] 20:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember exactly why, but it was obviously me who did it. I have moved a number that didn't *yet* have duplicate name in wikipedia, but one's where I found another in Google. Also, I move schools where it seems obvious there'll be a future name conflict. In this case, I can't find a similiar name on Google; so I don't remember why I did it.

Given that no other high school is likely to ever be named after this former mayor of Edmonton, I won't object if it's moved back. I'll be a little more selective about moves.

--Rob 10:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, on July 29 you protected this image since it was on the Main page. The protection template was removed shortly after but the image itself was never actually unprotected. Please take a look into this. Thuresson 15:12, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Evidence. You may make proposals and comments at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Workshop. Fred Bauder 20:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I ever thanked you for voting in my RfA. Allow me to correct that. DS 20:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sasquatch. I wasn't aware RK had requested mediation. I've been informally mediating, as will be evidenced from the Talk:Chabad Lubavitch page. I'm familiar with the subject and have previously edit warred with both, making me less impartial. I'd be happy to hand over mediation to you, or (alternatively) for you to monitor progress and to step in if necessary. JFW | T@lk 15:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is at Talk:Chabad Lubavitch, and although it's a bit messy, I've been making some progress in the sourcing of the main issues. JFW | T@lk 10:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are you mentoring him still? There are some problems with his behavior on Talk:Conspiracy theory according to a notice on WP:AN/I. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 04:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How familiar are you with his history of editing habits? --Ryan Delaney ^talk 04:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What happens now with the request for mediation, since RK hasn't made any edits since December 6, and most of the issues on chabad are resolved? --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 03:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFM#User_Eliezer_is_making_outrageous_personal_attacks_and_reverting_articles and move it to the appropiate location. Thanks. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

See WP:RFM#Anarchism. Andrevan has worked on that in the page, so be sure to talk to him about it too. Redwolf24 (talk) 08:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether this falls under your remit, but user ScienceApologist has moved two comments from an Article for Deletion page [5] to the page's Talk page. I feel this is improper. I thought that the whole point of an Article for Deletion page was to solicit comments, and there was not requirement to vote or sign a comment. Further comments on this are made at the bottom of the Article for deletion page in the section "twice keep on discussion page". --Iantresman 21:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm just checking to make sure you're active. I'm checking with all the mediators listed as active to make sure they are truly active and ready to take a case. Reply at my talk page ASAP :) Redwolf24 (talk) 04:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation&action=purge#phpBB_entry_dispute