User talk:Ybbor/Archive 1

The diffs for this archive can be found at User talk:Ybbor/2007

Archive 1

Kappa Sigma Sigma

Sorry if this is not how you do this - I am not a wikipedia regular. I keep trying to log in, but it keeps logging me out I think. My username is Alex Strand. I saw on the 'Edit History' of the Kappa Sigma Sigma page that you made an edit. I think it says that you put back material that was deleted from the page. While I assume you are well intentioned, the material removed was innapropriate, offending, and misrepresentative of our organization. It was removed after everyone in the organization deemed it innapropriate (except for the individual who posted it). We are facing disciplinary (spelling?) action for the material on the page and it is necessary that it stays off. Please respect our wishes on this. Could you possibly help us restrict editing on this page, permanently lock it, and or remove the article completely? We do not know how to operate wikipedia and we are suffering the consequences.Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.62 (talk • contribs)

No problem. I wasn't qualified to make the decision to put it back on, and would have left the change as-is, but there was no explanation. In the future, it would be best to mention a brief explanation in the edit summary so people don't think you're from some rival fraternity or something trying to remove correct information. I wouldn't be the person to talk to about protection or deletion, for that you can check Wikipedia:Requests for page protection or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, possibly mentioning WP:BLP to them.--Ybbor^T 23:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. That was very helpful. Keep up the good work.

ALex

What's the deal?

Please explain yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.76.45.34 (talk • contribs)

For Reverting this edit? It was pure vandalism. However messed up the guy's views are, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and you drastically changed the article while providing no references, and against any and all sources able to be found on the subject. I was not the only one to revert your vandalism. I should probably just delete your comments here lest someone for one second think that your "contributions" have any credibility. --Ybbor^T 02:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: image deletion

Hi Ybbor. Right, you would think that if an image is released for non-commercial use, and since Wikipedia is a non-commercial site, the image would be OK for us to use. But it's not. Images that we use have to be able to be used by anybody, including commercial uses. This is the policy, and they're pretty strict about it. We want to be not only free, but freely re-distributable by anyone, in any format, for any reason. So we are only allowed to use images that are completely released into the public domain (or else released under GDFL which, except for some legal mumbo-jumbp, is the same thing. There's more at WP:C

Now, in the case of your image, you might be able to use under "fair use". This is described at WP:FU. Basically you can use an album cover etc. to illustrate an article about the album, and so forth. We're trying to get away from using any fair use images, though. The reason your image was deleted was that it wasn't being used anywhere at the moment that the robot found it, so it couldn't have been fair use at that moment. Hope this helps, cheers, Herostratus 02:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Review_4.5.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Review_4.5.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Harbord Collegiate Institute

For the record, there IS a Ms. Stalker. Yeah, I didn't believe it either, heh. GooTuM 22:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, imagine. Sorry for the revert, but the stray add by an IP made me suspicious and I wasn't able to find anything on the school website. Go Figure. --Ybbor^T 22:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Rainy River (Minnesota-Ontario) edits

Thanks... I am always glad to see people taking care of things around here. Rtrev 03:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the vandalism revision. These guys are seriously starting to get on my nerves. Fredil 02:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Dupage County Maps

I've noticed that you have posted a lot of township/city/village maps for DuPage county -- do you have high resolution, lossless (IE png) sources of these maps, as the uploaded versions are very low detail. Ameise -- chat 16:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

If by many you mean exactly one. :P I actually just used another local Chicago township's map (Addison IIRC) (the image bio said it could be used for any reason or purpose) and whited-out their area. I then took this map and shrunk the boundary to what I thought was an appropriate size. The whole thing's really just a close approximation. You'd wanna talk to another user about getting a higher res image. --Ybbor^T 01:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)