Jump to content

User talk:😂

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Serendipodous (talk | contribs) at 14:22, 16 September 2007 (→‎Wikipedia:Bot requests#Template:Unreferenced bot request). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User talk:^demon/header

re: OTRS ticket #1076845

Demon, the user page in OTRS ticket #1076845 has been recreated once again, with the copyright violations still intact. I removed the copyrighted text, but isn't there a more permanent solution? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klumcup (talkcontribs) 17:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked the user reposting the copyright violation for 24 hours and deleted the page.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 23:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Demon / Persian Poet Gal: Unfortunately, the same person is back, with a new user account and the same old copyright violations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Limitedlincolns

He's nothing if not persistent! Klumcup 02:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Old Talk:Lizzie Grubman content

There is a pending request at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Content review to restore the Old Talk:Lizzie Grubman content that you deleted. Please let me know whether you plan to restore the page so that I can close out that Lizzie Grubman request #2 at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Content review (and regain some control over that page). Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ^demon[omg plz] 11:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation committee re Novak Djokovic

Hi, demon! I'm writing in response to your comment on Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Novak Đoković, which I'm reproducing here: Comment: I echo Daniel's rejection, and I must add that I reject it with prejudice against re-requesting. This has been requested 3 times within 24 hours, and rejected every time. There is no consensus for a page move, and trying to force mediation will not change it--as mediation works on consensus as well. Redirects are cheap, so I see no reason why this should be continually debated again. Iff there seems to be a wider consensus for a move and perhaps for mediation, then I wouldn't be opposed to a case being reconsidered, but at this present time, please do not post it again

I think you have misunderstood the issue (or perhaps it wasn't well stated in the RfM, which didn't come from me). The idea is not to remove the redirect, but to reverse its direction so that Novak Djokovic is the article, per WP:NAME, and Novak Đoković is the redirect. Consequently, "redirects are cheap" isn't a relevant argument.

Also, I don't really understand the last part of your comment. If there is a consensus for a move, no mediation is needed, right? :-) --Tkynerd 18:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I retracted my comments. And I wasn't specifying which site the article should stay at, and which should redirect it, I was speaking more generally. ^demon[omg plz] 11:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for clarifying that. Best, --Tkynerd 22:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LionelBarrymore.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:LionelBarrymore.jpg. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on Mediation comments

At Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Novak Đoković, you said the proposal had been submitted three times in 24 hours, but it was only submitted once by me, and only once total to my knowledge.

There seemed to have been a bot error earlier. The notice that mediation had been denied was posted to my and everyone else's Talk page three times, for example, before being cleaned up by the users and an admin. Perhaps the same happened to the Mediation Committee, in which case the request was not proposed three times, only reported three times.

If that is not the case, can you please clarify? Right now your reproach seems awfully unfair. -- Yano 04:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Bot requests#Template:Unreferenced bot request

Did you get a chance to address this Wikipedia:Bot requests#Template:Unreferenced bot request? I was expecting to see some impact in Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 while working Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles and have not yet so just checking in. Jeepday (talk) 15:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC) ==When you deleted the image , it disappeared from the page Definition of planet. If you could explain how to re-link to the image from the commons, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Serendipodous 14:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]