User talk:Iamblueman4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. You might like to start by reading the tutorial and introducing yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask at the help desk or on my talk page. Two useful tips are that you can sign your name using four tildes (~~~~) and you can preview your changes before you save using the show preview button. You can regularly find new tips on the Community Portal. I look forward to reading your great articles and I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:05, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

PS - Thanks for your contributions to Bob Jones University. I've cleaned up the formatting, but we really should have some sources or references for your knowledge. For example, which college rating services are you refering to? Words like "some", "many", and "often" are called weasel words, and are better replaced with more precise phrasing. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:05, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I see you're fairly new. You may wish to take a look at WP:NPOV - the neutral point of view guidelines that we at Wikipedia strive to uphold. Your edits to Drake University, while I'm quite sure were well-intentioned, did not seem to fit into that spirit. They tended to turn the article into fluff rather than an informative article. Please feel free to rewrite and expand sections of the article - it needs it! But when doing so, make sure you're being factual and not promotional. Thanks! --FCYTravis 10:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, you can sign your Talk page entries with four tildes in a row - it's considered good Wikiquette. Happy wikiing :) --FCYTravis 11:10, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bob Jones University[edit]

I see you've added a POV tag on Bob Jones University. Please describe on the talk page (talk:Bob Jones University) the specific parts of the article that you believe violate NPOV. Otherwise the tag will be removed. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:47, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Bob Jones University vandalism[edit]

Please do not vandalise Wikipedia. Your change of the image on Bob Jones University has been reverted. Please make only positive contributions to Wikipedia. :) Thanks. kmccoy (talk) 06:52, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pensacola Christian College edits[edit]

I've removed some of the links from the PCC article, as well as the image of the letter (due to copyright concerns - please check to make sure that the image has proper licensing; some people who are regulars at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images may be able to help you with that) and the comment about Dr. Howell (we might be removing the notable teachers section anyway; that's a current topic of discussion on the talk page). Thank you for adding in the portions of the rulebook. Please remember that we need to keep articles in the neutral point of view, rather than praising or attacking the subject of the article; the reader should decide for him/herself what to think without our help. --Idont Havaname 03:51, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Animal Liberation Front[edit]

Please stop adding that the ALF is a terrorist organization or engages in terrorism. It has not been officially designated as a terrorist organization by any government (or if it has, please supply a reference), and any description of their acts as terrorist acts would have to be attributed to a reputable source. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:44, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

You appear to have violated the three-revert rule (3RR), which says we're not allowed to revert to a previous version of an article more than three times in 24 hours. If you revert again, you may be blocked from editing for 24 hours. As for your claim that the ALF are often called ecoterrorists, please supply a reputable source for that claim. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:57, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the sources. I think you'll find these are idiosyncratic uses of the words "ecoterrorism" and "terrorist". It states: "The FBI defines eco-terrorism as the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons ..." The ALF is not an environmentally oriented group, nor does it act for environmental reasons; quite the opposite at times - for example when it released the mink in the UK, which allegedly went on to do an enormous amount of damage to the environment. Nor is it a terrorist group according to any of the standard academic definitions of terrorism or the definitions used by the United Nations, all of which involve causing deliberate physical harm to civilians. But in this same testimony, the FBI states: "Despite the destructive aspects of ALF's operations, its operational philosophy discourages acts that harm 'any animal, human and nonhuman.' Animal rights groups in the United States, including the ALF, have generally adhered to this mandate."
However, the FBI does count as a reputable source for Wikipedia, so feel free to insert what the source says, but be careful to stick very closely to what it says, and use it in its proper context. Don't use it to advance your own arguments or opinions. You might want to read Wikipedia:No original research (because that's what you're currently doing) and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. More reading for you: Wikipedia:Three revert rule states (or ought to) that you can be in violation of 3RR even if your edits are right. And finally please sign your posts on talk pages. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 22:48, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

User:216.8.85.54 (the pesky PCC vandal...)[edit]

I realize that User:216.8.85.54 is clearly engaging in edit wars by repeatedly removing the Student Voice and PCCBoard links, but please don't be so rude to him/her. I'm watching that user too, and I'll let WP:VIP know if they continue to be a problem. --Idont Havaname 20:46, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Morons?[edit]

Please stop calling people morons, wikipedia has a no personal attacks policy. Always use Wikiquette when dealing with other users. Thanks. -JCarriker 03:12, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

Copyright[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Drake University, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, take a look at our Five Pillars. Happy editing!

I noticed you copy and pasted text from any university pages into Wikipedia. Please never do this. It must be removed -- wasting everyone's time.

Regards,

lots of issues | leave me a message 07:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure most sites you lift from don't care or in fact are happy that you disseminate their promotional text into Wikipedia. Instead of adding information, self aggrandizing prose full of shallow claims replaces the entry. It is instantly clear to any visitor to the Drake University entry that all the text was plagarized off the admissions site. They will dismiss the entry and go elsewhere because they were looking for objective information not a sales pitch. They leave remembering the shoddy workmanship of this site. If you intend to make a helpful contribution, research and write. If work doesnt appeal to you, then don't bother -- just don't dump text in.

lots of issues | leave me a message 08:15, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism Accusations[edit]

Your accusations of vandalism are inappropriate in consideration of the facts. Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia.. If you would like to discuss the rules modifications to the article, please use the Bob Jones University talk page. I have clearly outlined why these rules do not belong any more than the rules at Ohio State University (or lack thereof) do. Adding the rules is strictly something added for POV. - Sleepnomore 03:11, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism Warnings Again[edit]

Once again, your accusations of vandalism are inappropriate and out of line with the rules of vandalism. My edits are perfectly legitimate. However, your personal attacks on the edit notes are out of line with Wikipedia policy. Simply because you don't agree with the edit doesn't mean its vandalism. The article leans severely POV due to the reasons I've mentioned in the article discussion page. The reason these rules seem important to outsiders is because they are consistent with a Christian high school or university -- strict. So why should Christian universtities be singled out to have their rules listed? Mititary schools have very strange rules to me but even West Point doesn't have their comprehesive list of rules listed. I'll also say that your statement about having a friend that is having rule difficulty at the school makes you extremely biased and makes it near impossible for you to have a NPOV on the subject. I've already agreed (despite my best judgement) that a rules section can be added as long as it has a neutral point of view. Listing the rules outright and quoting everyone under the sun that has a problem with the rules is highly POV. However, a brief mention that the rules are 1) Consistent with Christian universities, 2) Are criticised by some, and 3) are praised by others is NPOV. Come up with text like that, and leave a link to the rules is fine with me. It meets half way on the rules issue and doesn't lean one direction with the rules section. - Sleepnomore 08:49, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Sleepnomore: "Your statement about having a friend that is having rule difficulty at the school makes you extremely biased and makes it near impossible for you to have a NPOV on the subject" - What's that about? Are you trying to tell editors that they are unable to edit Wikipedia articles? The rules are not consistent with most other Christian colleges, they are infamously strict even among Christian collegiates. Read the sources that you want to delete.
Also, to user:Iamblueman4, it's better not to write things like "someone who is being very immature". -Willmcw 09:24, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
I have asked him to not edit based ont he fact that he's already stated his bias. It is silly that there should be this much POV slant in a simple college listing. - Sleepnomore 15:25, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Drake University[edit]

Please do not revert back to your preferred version. It is a copyvio. If you object, please take it to the talk page. I look forward to the discussion. JesseW 06:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Image:SPswastika.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:SPswastika.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.

Semi-automated template substitution[edit]

Fair use rationale for Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 17:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} 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 {{non-free fair use in|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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 17:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Digipen.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Digipen.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 19:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Digipen.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Digipen.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} 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 {{non-free fair use in|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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 19:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Drakeulogo.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Drakeulogo.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will 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.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 19:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Drakeulogo.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Drakeulogo.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} 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 {{non-free fair use in|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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 19:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mnu.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mnu.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 17:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg[edit]

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Digipen.jpg[edit]

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Digipen.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Drakeulogo.gif[edit]

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Drakeulogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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: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. 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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Zedla 03:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DMULogoNoTag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)