User talk:Bento00/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bento00. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, Bento00, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your efforts to fight vandalism on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Recent changes patrol
• Anti-vandalism tools

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! LovelyLillith (talk) 02:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I've answered your query at the help desk. --Bfigura ^(talk) 20:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

*grin* Thanks. Glad to help. The article looks quite good by the way. --Bfigura ^(talk) 20:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-moses.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-the-mothers.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-bowl-with-carnelians-inset-in-glaze.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-abstract-vessel.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-towards-unity.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:MaryTuthillLindheim-trimming-bowl.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Come on... read the article. Does wikipedia deny that Madeleine Dupont did not make her appearance in an attempt to promote curling? She herself made a comment in a direct agreement with the changes I have made. So why is that my information is not published? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.145.211.68 (talk) 23:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering, but how is deleting "Kobe Bryant ROCKS!!!!

Paul Pierce is a dumass who sucks" considered vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.201.222 (talk) 02:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Michael rocks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asyer (talk • contribs) 22:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I AM Fidelis Morgan and am so pissed off with constantly being written about as being A) from Wiltshire - I am not I am from Liverpool and B) from the Isle of Wight - I am not I am from Liverpool. I refer you to that great British soldier the Duke of Wellington, who, when people referred to him as an Irishman, replied "being born in a stable doesn't make you a horse". I happened to have been born in a caravan on Salisbury plain. The thing about caravans is that they MOVE around. The place we called home was Liverpool, where the family lived, and I spent much of my young life being mocked and disparaged for my Liverpool accent. It's bloody annoying. PS My cousin is the writer Lynda La Plante - no one queries her Liverpool roots - and she talks a lot posher than me. Why mine?

I should like mention made please of my Liverpool background and would prefer to be taken off People from the Isle of Wight and added to People from Liverpool.

I also note that none of my nominations etc are on this site. I was 1. nominated Most Promising Playwright Plays and Players 1985, 2. on a list of the 7 best actresses The Observer year review 1986 and The Rival Queens was nominated for a Lefty Award for funniest book of the year at Left Coast Crime, California, 2003 Fidofelix (talk) 13:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

• This is the trouble with real life - how do you find a reference? My birth was recorded in the Liverpool Echo in August 1952. My nominations were printed in Plays and Players, The Observer and on the website of Left Coast Crime. I don't have the pieces of paper, but it is all on my website, which is presumably where the rest of the stuff came from anyhow. I wonder where you got the reference for my being raised in Bonchurch Isle of Wight on wiki page "List of people from the Isle of Wight" ? I don't think being at boarding school in nearby Shanklin from 15-17 quite counts as being "raised" there, do you? Yet that is down in black and white as a fact. If you want to prove I am me, try writing me an email through my website and I can reply to you off-site. PS I can also correct another two pages - Damaris Hayman (has a page) did NOT deliver the line about Petit Fours, though she was in the advert. The line was in fact spoken by Rosalind Knight (also has a page). Fidofelix (talk) 11:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for helping tag articles for speedy deletion. Regarding the deleted article Nuclear Sperm created by 80sthrash (talk · contribs), I'm not sure if you remember the edit history with that, hopefully you do. The original and only editor of that article blanked the page several times and you reverted and warned him about it. The blanking is allowable and you should not revert and warn him. Instead, you should tag the article as {{db-blanked}}. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:47, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: There was indeed a speedy delete tag already on it, {{db-band}} to be exact, and the creator shouldn't remove it. But there is an exception where if the sole author blanks a page, that is inferred to be a deletion request and the blank page should be re-tagged as {{db-blanked}}. 80sthrash was the sole author of the article, so her/him blanking it is acceptable. -- Gogo Dodo (talk)

How is giving links to Better Homes and Gardens Furniture page from the Better Homes and Gardens page (as an external link) violating anything?? It is **their** furniture?!

I might understand why you would not want our link to our website as we sell the product, but being there is very little information for customers to find the BHG furniture, I am trying to help those in our area find the furniture better.

But to delete an external link from the BHG site to the BHG Furniture site seems a bit absurd. And if that violates me to the point of not being able to edit, then so be it as there is no real reason to edit if you can not add valuable information to the site.

And how is the link to TVWeek less of an offense than to their own site, or mine for that fact?

Richard

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.59.19 (talk) 20:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Matter of fact, how is the link to http://www.kptv.com/moregdo/index.html any different to a link to our site that showcases their furniture, let alone the link i added that goes to their own furniture site??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.59.19 (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be something of an edit war on this page and I noticed you tried to help out. But since your message to Pax1rom, (which I see another editor sent also), they've ignored you and carried on making unexplained edits, removing sourced and quoted material. It might be an idea to lock out Pax1rom or at least lock the page until they can at least respond as to why they are so determined to remove the seemingly relevant and publicly available comments. I admit, they are somewhat negative, but I can't see any real reason to exclude them since they appear to be accurately quoted from a well respected source. But I admit, I haven't had a chance to check that source myself. Any thoughts?TVArchivistUK (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

• I added a second "don't delete content without giving a valid reason" warning to P's talk page. I suggest you and I (if you know how) add more serious warnings if P continues, and then have him/her blocked if it continues. Bento00 (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The deletions continue. I think it might be best to lock the page until this user can explain their actions. TVArchivistUK (talk) 22:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• I don't think this warrants a page lock, that is used when a page is bombarded with vandalism, usually by more than one person. he needs to receive 4 warnings, and then his username can be blocked. I gave him warning 3. You might want to read up on giving warnings, in particular, the Wiki software Twinkle or Huggle, which make it easy to issue warnings. Best, Bento00 (talk) 22:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I'll leave it to you to decide what's best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TVArchivistUK (talk • contribs) 22:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I have had a chance to check the source of the material that's being repeatedly deleted and it is an accurate quote and source. Perhaps the editor just finds it too negative? Not sure how to tell without them responding. But it is definitely accurately sourced. TVArchivistUK (talk) 11:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

The deletions continue. Only now the editor has expanded the notes by adding in comments defending this particular subject. Unfortunately, they're not sourced and are quite vitriolic. Reading between the lines, I would take a guess that this editor might be the page subject herself. Which might explain their annoyance at the inclusion of what they see as negative commentary. But it is a reliably sourced article and is quoted verbatim. I think they'll keep on reverting any edits they don't like, so I will take my eye off the page. I think it's too touchy to get involved with. Good luck! TVArchivistUK (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ksenija Pajcin se ne zove Ksenija Pajcin i romanizacija njenog imena nije Xenia Pajchin ili sta? Treba ukrstenica da joj se slika da ti ne bi to sklonio i ta bi bilo sourced? Ne razumem koji ti to edit? Pogledaj malo kako izgledaju ostali chlanci po wikipediji pre nego shto tako olako brishesh.

Dodaj ovo http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2010&mm=03&dd=16&nav_category=16&nav_id=418206 - poshto ne znam kako se navodi sources (da je kapisoda upucao nju, pa sebe) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.145.5 (talk) 20:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, I don't understand your edit above or the link. Do you have an English language link? Bento00 (talk) 20:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

First you removed the romanization of her name, stating it was unsourced. Now you removed the information of her death. There is currently no news on English about it. But she was found dead with her boyfriend FIlip Kapisod who apparently shot her, and then himself. use Google translate and let her rest in peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.145.5 (talk) 20:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry for the confusion, it seemed that a group of editors was trying to vandalize, which happens sometimes. I've found an English language article that confirms that she and her boyfriend were found dead, at http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/314407,serbian-celebrity-couple-found-dead.html. Please restore your edits and use this link as a source (or I will add it for you). Or revert back to a good version (or I can do it for you if you don't know how). Thanks for your understanding, and your prompt editing of a major event for this page. Bento00 (talk) 20:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I tracked the article itself and noticed you fixed everything, all is fine now :) In matter of article ofc :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.145.5 (talk) 11:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Whoa! Who are you and why did you undo my edits? You are assuming that the information already present in this article was correct, which is an assumption. I was merely giving full disclosure and correctly wording what was there. Please state your authorization to undo my edits, and put them back, as you are essentially editing as well without citing content for your edits. Rahmspeed (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahmspeed (talk • contribs)

• Hello. Anyone may revert edits, but Wikipedia does have policies on this. I think I should have pointed more to your non-neutral point of view. Words or phrases you added were not encylcopedic. "Notoriously known," "justifiably so," and ""overwhelming" are examples. It's true that new pages are added that often don't reference all statements. Wikipedia is more lenient toward this, expecting you, me and other editors to correct them. Please feel free to discuss your concerns about the article on the article's talk page. That's how we try to produce a verifiable, unbiased article. By the way, I will be leaving now, so if you have any responses to this, I won't get to them right away. Thanks. Bento00 (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I noticed you reverted all my edits, however, which is not the purpose of your job. I took a look at the etiquette, and noticed that in fact, not everything needs to have a sourced or referenced link. It' more about neutrality. So fine, I will redit without those examples above, which I admit could be considered less than neutral. But I will insert full disclosure items, such as that CASA doesn't distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants (and I will call them illegal immigrant or illegal aliens, which is the correct terminology) as oposed to undocumented immigrant, which is actually misleading and takes the focus off their legal status, and changes the context of the discussion as a resault.) Mentioning that they depend on taxpayer state and county funds is also full disclosure, seeing as they openly aid and abet illegals with that funding (they don't deny this, they just reword it and don't think its wrong).

And mentioning that CITGO is not only Venezualan state owned, but that Dictator/Strongman Hugo Chavez is the leader of Venezualan is not opinion. He is in fact the head of that country, and that country is not a democracy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.141.74.65 (talk) 12:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Arthur Rubin Wikipedia:Vandalism Colin Beavan 350.org 99.29.184.15 (talk) 13:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bento00. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.