User talk:Bob House 884: Difference between revisions

You must be joking!! I think everybody who have the energy to read and counter check the conversations between me and your colleges of discreditationists, sincerely agree to my complaints about your incorrect behaviour.
I have tolerated incessant, personal attacks from Wikipedia officials and others, suggesting that I “almost”!!! have done something wrong.
Yours and your colleges lack of response to my well formulated arguments are legio and you only reply with accusations rather than the factual matters.
So please answer these questions and do not start accusing me.
Once again: The overall questions are:

1. Where my pictures taken away from the galling page against my will, due to complaints by anonymous person who falsely claimed owner ship of my pictures ??
2. Is it a fact that Karlstad University finally approved me, (Harald Wallin), as the owner of the pictures currently found in the Wikipedia galling article and also authorized me to give the pictures away to Wikipedia commons, if I wanted to ??
3. Where my university level scientific D-report containing the original pictures describing the context that surrounding them included as a reference by user User:Thumperward 3 November 2009??
4. According to user User:Diego Moya may my university scientific report be included as a reference to the pictures as well as the written text found in the Wikipedia galling article??
5. Have my work and contributions massively improved the following articles: wear, galling and Stress (mechanics)?

--Haraldwallin (talk) 11:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harald Wallin: Forgive if I missed something here (and I'll just address two of your points listed), but if you are indeed the owner of the pictures you have the option of Contacting Wikipedia to permit the wiki to use those images, as long as you verify ownership.

Also, you can use # instead of actual numbers to make a numbered list, and you don't need to include the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ part of user's names in order to link them (I've went ahead and fixed the user names).

Cheers!

– AJL^talk 10:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harald, you will note that I haven't edited Wikipedia in over a month, it's highly likely that I have forgotten many of the details of your sprawling, ridiculous case. Still, permit me to answer your points. I will use bold face to indicate anything you should pay paticular attention to.

1. Your pictures are still on the fucking galling page. It is completely moot whether they were removed for whatever reason, wikipedia has (through the OTRS system) accepted your authority to release them into the public domain and they are included in the article. I accept that the pictures are yours (in a moral sense but no longer a legal sense) What the hell more could be done about this?!?!

2. I really don't give a shit. I have at no point addressed this issue because it is not relevant. You have asserted that you are the author, I have no reason to believe that you are not. Woop-de-do. It is of no concern of mine whether I'm right about this or not. OTRS has confirmed that you have the right to give away these pictures, you have given them away and we now use them in accordance with the terms of their licenses in the articles. Until someone else asserts to be the author and raises the issue with the WMF, you appear to be a credible authority and your purported release into the public domain is good enough for the WMF. I don't care who the picture belongs to, it's simply not relevant

3. You are completely misunderstanding what Thumperward's edit was doing. All Thumperward did here was move a reference from the picture box (where references do not go) to the reference list (where references do go). Thumperward was WP:copyediting. It is highly unlikely that Thumperward read or even skim-read your report, he was just following the WP:Manual of Style. Even if Thumperward did think that the reference was worth including, it's not important - he is just one editor - everybody else who has looked at the page disagrees with you

4. No. Pictures are references of themselves. The purpose of your pictures is to illustrate galling, not to show a user how to replicate the subject of the picture. Wikipedia isn't a how to guide, its an encyclopedia. Similarly, the article cake rightly does not provide instructions on how to make the pictured cakes.

5. Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia. No matter how much work you have done, you don't get the right to ignore policies or be granted favours. Your reference is unsuitable. End of. This would be equally true if it was added by the world's greatest known authority on galling or a small squirrel.

Please remember Harald that EVERYTHING ELSE IS FINE. The ONLY thing ANYBODY has been saying this whole fucking time is that the reference cannot be used. This is not a slight on you, its not some attack on your academic credibility or the work you have done on wikipedia or the value of postgraduate research work or the importance of the subject of galling or anything else. Its not part of the big mega-conspiracy controlling wikipedia. It is just an isolated decision by the community on ONE SMALL DETAIL of the article.

You will note that I haven't tried to get you blocked, I haven't followed you around, I haven't changed anything else about the article. ALL THIS WAS EVER ABOUT IS THAT ONE FUCKING REFERENCE. I don't give a shit if you own the pictures, I don't care whether you are the real Harald Wallin or an imposter, I have no interest in this dispute about who owns the report. THE ONLY THING I AM SAYING, THE ONE ISOLATED TRUTH I AM TRYING TO IMPART, IS THAT THE SINGLE REFERENCE TO THE DIVAPORTAL REPORT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE SOURCE. Anything else is for another time. Please just fucking understand this Harald.

Otherwise, fuck off.

Bob House 884 (talk) 12:05, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 ::Also, you can use ''<nowiki>#</nowiki>'' instead of actual numbers to make a numbered list, and you don't need to include the ''<nowiki>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/</nowiki>'' part of user's names in order to link them (I've went ahead and fixed the user names).
 ::Cheers! {{=)}} &ndash; [[User:Ajl772|AJL]]<sup><b>[[User talk:Ajl772|talk]]</b></sup> 10:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
+Harald, you will note that I haven't edited Wikipedia in over a month, it's highly likely that I have forgotten many of the details of your sprawling, ridiculous case. Still, permit me to answer your points. I will use '''bold face''' to indicate anything you should pay paticular attention to.
+::1. Your pictures are '''still on the fucking galling page'''. It is completely moot whether they were removed for whatever reason, wikipedia has (through the OTRS system) accepted your authority to release them into the public domain and they are included in the article. I accept that the pictures are yours (in a [[moral rights (copyright law)|moral]] sense but no longer a [[public domain|legal]] sense) '''What the hell more could be done about this?!?!'''
+::2. I really don't give a shit. '''I have at no point addressed this issue because it is not relevant.''' You have asserted that you are the author, [[WP:AGF|I have no reason to believe that you are not]]. Woop-de-do. It is of no concern of mine whether I'm right about this or not. OTRS has confirmed that you have the right to give away these pictures, you have given them away and we now use them in accordance with the terms of their licenses in the articles. Until someone else asserts to be the author and raises the issue with the WMF, you appear to be a credible authority and your purported release into the public domain is good enough for the WMF. '''I don't care who the picture belongs to, it's simply not relevant'''
+::3. '''You are completely misunderstanding what Thumperward's edit was doing'''. All Thumperward did here was move a reference from the picture box (where references do not go) to the reference list (where references do go). '''Thumperward was [[WP:copyediting]].''' It is highly unlikely that Thumperward read or even skim-read your report, he was just following the [[WP:Manual of Style]]. Even if Thumperward did think that the reference was worth including, '''it's not important''' - he is just one editor - '''[[wp:consensus|everybody else who has looked at the page disagrees with you]]'''
+::4. No. '''Pictures are references of themselves'''. The purpose of your pictures is to illustrate galling, not to show a user how to replicate the subject of the picture. Wikipedia isn't a how to guide, its an encyclopedia. Similarly, the article [[cake]] rightly does not provide instructions on how to make the pictured cakes.
+::5. Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia. No matter how much work you have done, you don't get the right to ignore policies or be granted favours. '''Your reference is unsuitable. End of.''' This would be equally true if it was added by the world's greatest known authority on galling or a small squirrel.
+Please remember Harald that '''EVERYTHING ELSE IS FINE'''. The ONLY thing ANYBODY has been saying this whole fucking time is that the reference cannot be used. This is not a slight on you, its not some attack on your academic credibility or the work you have done on wikipedia or the value of postgraduate research work or the importance of the subject of galling or anything else. Its not part of the big mega-conspiracy controlling wikipedia. It is just an isolated decision by the community on '''ONE SMALL DETAIL''' of the article.
+You will note that I haven't tried to get you blocked, I haven't followed you around, I haven't changed anything else about the article. '''ALL THIS WAS EVER ABOUT IS THAT ONE FUCKING REFERENCE'''. I don't give a shit if you own the pictures, I don't care whether you are the real Harald Wallin or an imposter, I have no interest in this dispute about who owns the report. '''THE ONLY THING I AM SAYING, THE ONE ISOLATED TRUTH I AM TRYING TO IMPART, IS THAT THE SINGLE REFERENCE TO THE DIVAPORTAL REPORT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE SOURCE'''. Anything else is for another time. '''Please just fucking understand this Harald'''.
+Otherwise, ''fuck off''.
+[[User:Bob House 884|Bob House 884]] ([[User talk:Bob House 884#top|talk]]) 12:05, 12 August 2011 (UTC)