cars - User talk:Vague Rant

Some arrangement modified by me to fit with my preferred style.

Mistake

You must have made a mistake here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:68.40.239.194 No one at this IP address edited anything before Decemeber 17th, and what article are you referring to?

One of many users at 68.40.239.194

Dear Vague Rant

OK cool, I have a novel idea (maybe even an idea for a novel) — Let's start over. Thanks for being so quick off the ball with the copyvio policing even if it got my furr felined good and proper.

I think we can now safely say the copyvio issue is being sorted, even as our eyes scan this page. (Probably before). Sorry if I caused offence. I'll write my own offense up to experience. Wikipedia is a good resource, which both of us (I assume) are trying to maintain in the standard we'd like to see.

In the meantime (Greenwich or UTC) how about you lend a hand with the clean up process of the pages you've alerted me to as problematic? And put both the cudgel and the can of whip-ass away while I learn the ropes in this here wiki-universe

Keep well and happy wiki-ing.

mudthang 20 Dec 08.45 GMT+2

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing to put behind us. I harbor no ill will towards you, all I have done is report articles which appeared to be copyvios. Anyway, it's come time for us both to proceed. Have a good one. - Vague | Rant 07:14, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Expasy and Ensembl

This is natarajanganesan clarifying the two removals you have made. I had to provide information and links to Expasy and Ensembl which I found missing and was prompted to create information on. If you do happen to find information already on wikipedia I would be glad if you could provide links to them. Both these organisations are popular Bioinformatics sites.

I am learning to wiki around so that I may be able share some useful information.

Thank you natarajanganesan

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

That's great, I'm glad you want to contribute to the Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any information on Expasy or Ensembl, but you're welcome to write some yourself! Anyway, I'm glad to have you aboard. - Vague | Rant 06:02, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Could you help me restore the links to Expasy and Ensembl. I need direct links to be provided to them. Thanks natarajanganesan 2:31PM Dec 24th 2004

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Hmm, which sort of links do you mean? Internal, or external? I'll explain both:

"[[Article]]" creates an internal link to "Article", which looks like "Article".

"[http://www.google.com/ Google]" creates an external link to "Google", which looks like "Google".

I hope that helps. - Vague | Rant 10:23, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

Linking lesson

Thanks for your help making the links. I finally got it done the way I wanted it, using your model, and posted it to Slashdot -- where it fairly quickly got modded up to 5 for Informative! [1] I've also copied that "article" you created so I'd have it for the future. (Next time you want to do something like that, you might make it a User:Vague Rant subpage, so you wouldn't have to go through deleting it.) JamesMLane 02:44, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Thanks for the sub page suggestion, but I probably would have ended up throwing a {{db}} on that in my user space, anyway, so it really didn't have much benefit either way. Anyway, I'm glad I was able to help. - Vague | Rant 07:30, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

Regarding copyrights

The following conversation originally appeared on Rajatster's talk page:

Wait what are you talking about?

The list of top-grossing films you posted appears to have been copied from Yahoo.com's movies section. If you had permission to use the information you posted, please do tell us so on the article's talk page, and, as I said above, on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you don't own or have permission to use the copyright, then Wikipedia, unfortunately, can't use the content. - Vague | Rant 10:51, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Yes this information is compiled by exhibitor relations and is free to use by anyone

The information, yes, but the manner in which Yahoo chooses to present it is owned by them, and in this case it was presented in the exact same format. - Vague | Rant 11:04, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

do you want me to rework the format then?

If you'd like to, on the "/Temp" page. Oh, and before I forget, if you'd like to sign your comments, you can do so by adding ~~~~ (four tildes) to the end of your comment. - Vague | Rant 11:11, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Re your copyvio request

In the interest of completeness, my original comment is preserved here:

The original piece is located here: [2]. Also, I don't appreciate the implied accusation. Good day. - Vague | Rant 08:04, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry you don't like the implications, but the page I see doesn't match the external link you've provided. In other words, not a copyvio. Thanks for stopping by and good luck in the future. —RaD Man (talk) 08:13, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

If you read the VFD debate, you'll see that the article was reworded. I'm unsure of your knowledge of copyright law, but I assure you that such a reword is not enough--it's a refactoring of a copyvio, which is still a copyvio. That much was even stated in the debate itself. - Vague | Rant 08:34, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

IANAL, but as far as I know you can't copyright facts, only content. If you could cite the law in question I might be inclined to change my vote. But what I'm looking at on Wikipedia and what you provided me are two different things. —RaD Man (talk) 09:13, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Okay, here's the first paragraph past the intro in our article as it is at the moment:

Up until 1951, the area surrounding New Lenox did not have a local high school district. The absence of a high school created a considerable inconvenience for the four communities.

And here it is in the original:

The Lincoln-Way Community High School District was organized in 1951 by the voters residing in the ninety square mile area. Prior to 1951, this area did not have a local high school district. The absence of a high school created considerable inconvenience for the citizens of the four communities.

Emphasis mine, I'm using it to illustrate the articles' similarities, and while, yes, it is factual information, copyright law does not only cover the content, but also its arrangement. Our article presents itself in a noticeably similar manner to the original, and the manner in which they are presenting it is copyrighted. If nothing else, the copyrighted material appears word-for-word in our article's History, which in itself is a violation. Personally, I have no opinion of whether this article's subject deserves an article, it doesn't really bother me. I just want that article (or lack of one), to be within the law. - Vague | Rant 09:23, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your followup. Can you please cite the law that says you cannot paraphrase text that is arranged in a certain matter? And can you also please cite where it says that the original text is copyrighted? I agree, we do need to be within the confines of the law (U.S. law). —RaD Man (talk) 09:54, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

To be honest, I do not have knowledge of exact laws. I am aware that mildly rewritten text is still in violation of the original's copyright. I can't prove that for you, but I don't think it's especially necessary. It won't be either you or me who removes the article (assuming it is removed), nor will your vote or mine be important if it is a copyvio. As for a copyright notice on the page, I'm sure you're aware that a copyright notice is not necessary for material to be copyrighted. The text I type at this very moment is itself copyrighted, though I do not have a copyright notice anywhere within it. I don't mind if you don't feel that this is a copyvio. In the end, it will be up to whoever feels like worrying about it. - Vague | Rant 10:06, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Irish dialects

Hi, yes, I'm the author of http://www.ling.uni-potsdam.de/~green/gaeilge/gaeilge.htm, the source of the Irish dialects page as well as Irish phonology, Irish orthography and some more to come. I couldn't update the pages anymore at uni-potsdam.de, so I'm moving them to Wikipedia. I've put notes in the discussion pages of each article explaining the the material is my own, so there are no copyright problems. --Angr 12:30, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Excellent, thank you for confirming that. - Vague | Rant 01:51, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

OfficialWire

You removed the page I wrote. I own the website/business OfficialWire. Do I need to add some reference to the page? Help.

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

I've restored your article. Usually, in cases like this, we assume good faith, and move on. If it does turn out to be a violation, it doesn't really matter, we can delete it when the copyright owner complains. Seems like that won't be happening in this case. Have a nice day. - Vague | Rant 08:45, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

TPS Reports

Yeahhh, did you get that memo --Boothy443 10:20, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm also going to need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too. By the way, someone vandalized your user page. I reverted. Might have been that Thomas Yu guy you marked as speedy, but I didn't check. - Vague | Rant 10:26, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, i notced that, no it was 62.171.194.43 , been tracking his vandalism stuff, i need to take a break from what i was doing anyway. --Boothy443 10:30, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

CheeseDreams

Have taken your advise and aplogised to her. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:16, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

You humility is much appreciated. - Vague | Rant 06:13, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

Everyking RfC

I have filed an RfC against Everyking. Johnleemk | Talk 03:57, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

underscores in template names

Any reason you are against them? It's certainly optional to use them, but there's no reason to remove the existing ones. - UtherSRG 03:19, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Underscores in templates simply don't do anything. Putting aside the fact that it's possible to include them, I can't think of any reasoning why they should be included. When linking, we prefer not to underscore, and I think the same should be said of templates. There's no purpose to it. If nothing else, it's easier to press space than to hold shift and press hyphen in order to get an underscore. - Vague | Rant 03:23, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Also, there are about a jillion taxoboxes (and other infoboxes) with underscores galore in their templates. --Yath 03:22, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't see how that explains why underscores should be used. It just shows that people using taxoboxes took their source from the tutorial, which itself included underscores. - Vague | Rant 03:27, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that I care one way or another, but rather, that changing them all will be a huge project of dubious utility. So, why are you changing them? --Yath 03:35, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be a project at all. If I happen upon an article with underscores in templates, I remove them. The more people who learn to use spaces in their templates, the faster the Wiki is able to work (albeit marginally). I don't think that something being small (like the amount of time it takes to use an underscore) or the size of something (the number of templates already including underscores) should stop us from progressing. - Vague | Rant 03:48, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

I have been transforming non-template taxoboxes into templated ones with a program, and there are several hundred (at least) still to be done. I could change the program to use spaces very easily. If it makes the wiki work faster, I really should. Does the use of spaces result in a performance increase? --Yath 03:56, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough in that. It doesn't make the Wiki any faster that I am aware of, it's just easier for editors themselves to use spaces. - Vague | Rant 04:11, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Excuse me for jumping in without knowing the context, but I tend to use underscores in templates for one simple reason: to prevent multi-word article titles breaking across lines. If the context is inappropriate, just imagine that I've blushed; lowered my head; and slunk away. Noisy | Talk 19:50, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Rock and roll

Your last edit blanked rock and roll. Since I assume this wasn't your intent, I reverted it. I see your previous edit had changed the Rolling Stones link, but unless I'm confusing myself, that edit was kept in my rollback for some reason. Anyway, you may want to check to make sure whatever you meant to do got done. Tuf-Kat 00:46, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Yeah, that's a bug. Seems to be new as of 1.4.3beta. Thanks - Vague | Rant 00:50, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

You have new messages

Now you really do have new messages! silsor 02:42, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

Everyking arbitration

I've filed an arbitration request against Everyking. Please comment; brickbats for my foolhardiness are more than welcome. Johnleemk | Talk 07:52, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations, VR!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 07:17, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In the interest of completeness, my response is preserved here:

Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad to be aboard. - Vague | Rant 07:20, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Best you can do (tables)

Best you can do? Well, of course you can't do any better -- because what you produced is perfect!:) Thank you so much, what you did was extremely helpful. It's a joy to see the collaborative process work so beautifully here.Zantastik 23:01, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

GCOTW

I'm giving you this message because you have been active on Gaming Collaboration of the week in the past. The collaboration had a bit of a hiatus, but it's now active again. A new article will be chosen this Sunday. It would be greatly appreciated if you visited the page to vote and/or make new nominations and worked on next week's GCOTW. Thanks. --Slowking Man 08:18, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Aishwarya Rai

Vague Rant,

You listed the article Aishwarya Rai as a copyright infringment artilcle on Jan 10th 2005 , please see article history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aishwarya_Rai&oldid=10011976

You cited the link of:

http://www.galawallpapers.com/gallery/867/Aishwarya_Rai as the source.

You failed to check that the site itself acknowledges the WIKIPEDIA article as its source; (meaning the wikipedia article was/is original and not copied). Please check the site and see at the bottom, where they have mentioned wikipedia as the source.

One has to be very careful before accusing an article of being copyvio. Otherwise you will be deleting contributions by people over several months or even years.

Because you have wrongly attributed copyvio to the article Aishwarya Rai, it had to be rewritten, however the earlier version was much better and had an original picture. Please do the needed to restore the earlier version and be very careful the next time while going on a rampage listing pages as copyvio. Water Fish 01:32, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yidlix

Could you do me a favor and block that incredible idiot after what he did to my user talk? Thanks for fixing it, BTW. Best, Lucky 6.9 01:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Will do. What a weird world this is, no? - Lucky 6.9 01:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- LOL! Thanks again. Really. - Lucky 6.9 02:21, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Golden Arches

Thanks. Rick K 05:06, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

Mouse: cat:fps

Could you please reply here. Reub2000 09:13, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You rock

The reason I voted to keep was because the article is going to get deleted anyway, but I think Angela could use some positive feedback. And, yes, you rock also. :-) Samboy 05:20, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You rock, part II

Welcome back, O Vague One! Nice seeing you over on the copyvio page. They never learn, do they? - Lucky 6.9 02:43, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)