User talk:Polly/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Blind mans bluff[edit]

i made this page with one thing on my mind. To show the world of out movie. And if that dose not show great influence then mam i dont know what dose. I mention sevral times about hwo i do not breech copyright laws at i wrote nearly a paragraph on how it influnces people SO i am going to make it again And i will write about how impotant it is to people if thats what you meant. SO please dont delte it since nothings wrong thank you

--Daryl274 (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please take some time to study the Notability guidelines, if your article can meet them then it will almost certainly be kept. Polly (Parrot) 23:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel J. Torres[edit]

You just created an article with nothing in it but an AfD notice. NawlinWiki had already deleted the article as a speedy. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • He must have deleted at the exact time I sent it afd, must have confused Twinkle as it froze on me for a bit. Pollytyred (talk) 16:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Beinn a Bhuird[edit]

Fair enough - you were just a bit quick off the mark - that's all - no damage done :-) WikiWriter (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Air Ambulance Picture[edit]

I was just looking at the same edit myself and wandering if I should revert it. I decided not to after reading the article talk page which shows the editors have previously cleared out a large clutter of images and asked people not to add more without discussion. On that basis I am going to assume that you did not read the talk page and revert you - sorry. SpinningSpark 17:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dmcm2008[edit]

I see you have commented on Dmcm2008, I think this user may be a problem. They seem to be engaged in an expand Liverpool POV edit session.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You'll have to be more precise please. Polly (Parrot) 21:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They seem to want to add references to Liverpool to all areas around Liverpool, removing refernces to Local government status and replacing them with suburb of Liverpool. For instance Maghull is a town in it's own right, before that it was a village. It may well be considered a suburb but that doesn't stop it being a town. It is considered by HMG to be a town, aintree and melling they has done the same to.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information to the user talk, just in response to Kitchen knife talk I have spoken with Kitchen knife and has suggested I need to slow down. I must qualify that I am not seeking to rewrite Government references but merely link in association with Liverpool. For example Maghull is a suburb of Liverpool regardless it being a small town in its own right. I have already said i am quite new to this and i do not know the rights and wrongs but I am learning so pls do not class me as a problem user :-( I am not. I conside some ammendments are appropriate for example in the postcode for Fazakerley it had L9. I know factually it is also L10 so I added this. I expect i will be under scrutiny but I don't intend to cause problems, in fact i am happy with feedback, but I dont intend to give up either. Dmcm2008 (talk) 11:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I assumed your edits were made in good faith, I'm sure you and other interested editors can come to an agreement on this matter. Polly (Parrot) 18:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello[edit]

i was just wondering. are people here friendly? or are you guys always serious. i am new to this. i dont want to be intimidated!
Gotcheese 2008 (talk) 01:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • There's all sorts on Wikipedia, from the very serious types, to the very silly. Just try clicking on some random user pages and you'll soon see. Here's one to start you off User:LaraLove, it's one of the most looked at user pages. Polly (Parrot) 01:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome messages[edit]

Hi there; I notice that you are sending out a large number of welcome messages to new users. Could I ask you to consider a couple of points?

Firstly, you are yourself still a very inexperienced editor, with almost all of your contributions being made this month - indeed, this week - and they being essentially all just welcome messages. As part of the welcome message which you are posting invites new users to seek your advice if they have problesms, are you confident that your experience is sufficient to enable you to give this advice if requested?

Secondly, a number of the editors whom you have welcomes have submitted unacceptable user names, which have been or a currently being blocked. It seems to me to be both inappropriate and incongruous for an editor to welcome a user, and an admin such as myself to almost instantly impose an indefinite block on the user in question. May I suggest that you spend some time on WP:UAA, and the associated policy page? Happy wikying. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Username appropriateness is extremely subjective, If I think a username violates policy I report it, if not I don't. Looking at a couple of the usernames you blocked recently I'd have to say they seem extremely harsh decisions, maybe you should lighten up a bit. Polly (Parrot) 01:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just like to echo Anthony.bradbury's comments, and encourage you not to welcome editors in a bot-like fashion (or using a bot if you are). Just the other day, you started welcome people at 19:51, 4 February 2008 and didn't stop until 03:32, 5 February 2008; that's nearly 8 hours. I find it hard to believe you sat at your computer welcoming editors for 8 hours, without taking a break. - auburnpilot talk 03:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • All done by hand, no bot involved. Surely one of the main points of WP:Friendly is to welcome new users and to give them a helpful template to aid their Wikipedia understanding? Polly (Parrot) 03:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've never used Friendly, so I couldn't say what its main points are, but you may be interested in reading Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots and Wikipedia:PEREN#Use a bot to welcome new users. While all your edits may be done by hand, they are "bot-like" and I believe both links apply. - auburnpilot talk 03:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Respectfully I must disagree with your opinion. I don't see how my welcoming new users can be considered bot-like. I really don't go that fast. Polly (Parrot) 12:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dear Polly, I am extremely new at this so you can take this with a grain of salt if you wish, but I agree that you may want to slow down a bit on the Friendly welcomes. I think it is great that you want to welcome and encourage those of us who are new editors. However, I notice that you recently sent a nice big welcome to an new editor who logged in and made 1 addition: an external link to a commercial website soliciting business related to the article. His Edit summary says "Added link to free help line." It is essentailly an ad for a bond broker. While I do not want to chase this person away I think it may be a better use of our time to discuss article content with him/her instead of sending large welcomes. Thank you --95McCartney (talk) 05:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Surely what better way for a new user to find out about Wikipedia policies than a useful template with all the relevant links. Hopefully the template will aid them in the future. Polly (Parrot) 12:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]



My RfA
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

Speedy Deletion of Proterochampsidae[edit]

Added context to the article. Just saved it to avoid losing the taxobox.

Superraptor (talk) 22:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well done, I was a bit quick on the old delete button. Polly (Parrot) 23:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Alexander[edit]

That was like, his real nickname. To quick to add the db template hey. Babs Wins Sore (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't doubt it, but it really isn't an appropriate title for a biography article. You could probably get away with mentioning it in the main body of the article if it was well sourced. Polly (Parrot) 03:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of temporary injunction[edit]

Hi Polly, I noticed you added a {{notability}} tag to an article about a television episode[1], and I am letting you know that there is currently a temporary injunction that applies to all editors[2] while this arbitration case is open. The injunction was enacted on February 3, 2008 and it reads:

"For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction."

The arbitration committee would like all editors to hold off on such actions while the case is open. I will also notify you when the injunction ends. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 10:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks[edit]

Essential Penguins[edit]

Thanks for tidying my references; I knew it could be done; wanted to do it but didn't know how. I do now !

GrahamHardy (talk) 21:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your welcome, I only found out by looking at how it had been done on other articles. I find that's the best way to learn, by seeing how others have done it. Polly (Parrot) 21:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcomes[edit]

Your apology is, of course, accepted. Welcoming new users is a significantly positive activity, and I would not dream of criticising the principle. It is, as you obviously now appreciate, important not to welcome some categories of user; as I say, you are clearly now aware of this fact. Welcoming, vandal-reverting and username-notifying are vital parts of the project, and I hope that you will keep on doing this. I would suggest that you try to keep your activity in wiki well-rounded, by making article edits, joining projects, taking part in WP:AfD discussions, and so forth. But all seems well, and I suspect that with a little more time you may even come to feel that my username blocks are not so unreasonable!! Happy wikying.--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 17:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the encouraging reply, I will try to broaden out my activities. Not sure which project might be for me, some though required I think. Polly (Parrot) 18:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What did I do[edit]

Please explain how I violated the rules.

  • The ethnicity of the individuals is not relevant, you seem to be making a point of some sort. Polly (Parrot) 02:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

about your message[edit]

I'd like to say that although I lack a source, no one would has the arguments to deny that this woman is indeed one of the greatest gold diggers of all times. It is my duty, as a wikipedia reader, to inform this. Greetings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.180.248.171 (talk) 01:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're entitled to your opinion, but you're not entitled to voice that opinion in a Wikipedia article. Polly (Parrot) 01:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-[edit]

Your right about that. It might be my opinion but I think there should be information about that matter. It is undeniable that she is stealing money from a man that has given so much. Not talking about the negative is misinformation. Maybe we shouldn't put it like that: "the greatest gold digger" but what about putting inthe headline: "H. Mills has been severely criticized for her divorce with McCartney" or something of the sort. I find it relevant as it has become the most expensive divorce of all times. Greetings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.180.248.171 (talk) 01:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You could make mention of media criticism, but it would need to be well souced to avoid WP:BLP violations. Polly (Parrot) 01:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Polly[edit]

Who Are You? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.114.60 (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You from Peg Entwistle![edit]

Hi, Polly! Thanks so much for that! Gosh I feel like a jerk. It seems simple when you know how! You're an angel! Thanks again... :-) Jameszerukjr (talk) 23:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're welcome. As you say it's easy when you know how, happy editing to you, Polly (Parrot) 23:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barbie and Bratz[edit]

I hate you!!! Go slit your throat. I stated true facts that should not and can not be avoided! Barbie ans Bratz are the most awful role models. They teach things that are a bunch of bull crap. Get it through your thick skull. I will take a stand against them until people understand! So BITE ME!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelli214895 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate you!!! Go slit your throat. I stated true facts that should not and can not be avoided! Barbie ans Bratz are the most awful role models. They teach things that are a bunch of bull crap. Get it through your thick skull. I will take a stand against them until people understand! So BITE ME!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelli214895 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for sharing your strongly held opinions with me, such a strong POV though is not acceptable in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia tries to maintain a neutral POV. Polly (Parrot) 20:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

I have 1 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 20:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, I'll be sure to not misuse it. Polly (Parrot) 20:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University School[edit]

How is this vandalism? There's two campuses, so I added two coordinates. How is this vandalism? see WP:GEO. (?) Operation Sea Serpent (talk) 01:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I probably should have assumed good faith, the trouble is two coordinates together don't seem to work on the page, they merge and look a mess. Polly (Parrot) 01:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your sig[edit]

Hi. I just saw your sig on User talk:Seresin and am here to suggest a tighter implementation.

You don't need the #top in there. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, I've made the change. Polly (Parrot) 10:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ah, it doesn't seem to have taken... copy the second version. Jack Merridew 10:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Testing. No still no link to the talk page. Polly (Parrot) 10:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It's correct now. You won't get a link on your own talk page; this is by design. The #top you had was dodging that feature. Go sign somewhere else and you'll get a link. The idea here is a shorter sig spreads less clutter. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Doh! silly me. Just tried it elsewhere, all is now well.Thanks for the fix. Polly (Parrot) 11:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of PROLIX[edit]

Hi, I've found a "Speedy deletion of PROLIX" message on the article I've written. I'm the writer/owner/admin of all contents of the PROLIX official website so there is no copyright problem, I'm the person who wrote all contents so there is no say it in your own words issue. I'm the PROLIX Dissemination Manager and you can find my profile on Linkedin. From December 2007 I'm managing all dissemination activities in order to improve the PROLIX project visibility. The PROLIX consortium is informed on all my activities about the project dissemination. How should I solve this problem? Many thanks Regards

Fulvio —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fulvio Solari (talk • contribs) 10:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the text would have to be released under a GFDL for it to be acceptable to Wikipedia. Polly (Parrot) 10:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, what I've to do in order that tha article will be acceptable to wikipedia? Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fulvio Solari (talk • contribs) 11:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well if you wanted to just copy verbatim the content of the website, the website would need to have a notice on it like this; "All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License". Copying verbatim though probably isn't a good idea as the text may well not be in an appropriate tone for an encyclopedic entry. Far better to do it afresh, though as you are the owner of the website you wish to write an article about this causes conflict of interest issues. Polly (Parrot) 11:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "Counter-Strike: Condition Zero" search[edit]

All I did was add important info to the search after realizing not to make mistakes. This is what I wrote:

"MULTIPLAYER:

Multiplayer is a huge entertainment in the game. Millions over the world compete with each other to gain their skills. In multiplayer, there are clans in which test your skills, they display them and prove to others that you are part of a difficulty in the game. Many clans have wars proving which one is greater with certain maps and rules like Deathmatch and Last Player Standing.

Something new taken into the game in creative maps like fy_simpsons and fy_mario. It shows that people are able to create their own maps and let players have fun with them. Also, people put other downloads on their servers like advanced weapons and attacks from the World of Warcraft game."

How is this considered vandalism??????????????????? I gave more info about it since I play this game. I think it should be added to give readers a better idea of the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.83.47 (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • That edit has not been reverted as it seems to be constructive. The edit that was reverted as vandalism was this [3], which was clearly unconstructive in nature. Polly (Parrot) 20:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graditude[edit]

Thanks for reverting the edit on my userpage! SchfiftyThree 00:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my license plates (Vanity_plates)[edit]

These are my images taken with my camera. Was the copyright too restrictive ? If so, I can loosen it even to the GNU one. - BradCuppy

  • Yes, limiting it to Wikipedia was too restrictive, the GNU one or the Creative Commons attribution 2.0 or similar would be fine. Polly (Parrot) 00:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my contributions[edit]

You seem to be getting upset at my editting of UFC 84. However these fights are scheduled to happen. I am currently unable to prove this matter, however I would respect it if you would just let those edittings occur. If you allow this to happen I will refrain from putting obscene and unnessecary comments on things.

signed Travis Atkinson

  • I really don't know what you are talking about, I've had a quick look through your contributions but can't see where you and I have ever edited the same article. Can you please be more precise? Polly (Parrot) 20:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

im sorry wrong person

Excuse Me[edit]

I specifically stated in the description that it's my image Jamezp1 (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible duplicate logo created[edit]

I added copyright info to the image file I recently uploaded and you tagged. I also tried to upload a lower res image. However I might have created a duplicate file. Both now have identical copyright info. Will one of these be cleaned up? Akshaygs (talk) 17:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yep, one of the images has already been taged for speedy deletion so no problem. Polly (Parrot) 18:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chaplin Soc[edit]

Hey Polly,

I'm new to writing articles on wikipedia. I've got more information on The Chaplin Society (and other dining societies in Cambridge), but I don't know what else I should put up. What do you advise I include to make the article avoid deletion?

Kind regards,

David —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmillbury (talk • contribs) 17:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • To avoid Speedy deletion some assertion of the Society's importance or significance needs to be made. To establish notability then significant coverage of the Society in reliable secondary sources would be required. Has there been any media coverage of the Society that you could use to establish notability? Have any books been published that reference the Society? You could try a Google News archive search and Google books search and see what you can come up with. Good luck to you, Polly (Parrot) 18:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Polly. I have now added a printed source, and explained my case for the article's inclusion in the talk page. I will add more references as soon as possible; there is a particularly interesting reference in a history of Peterhouse which I had the chance to read, and which I would like to include, so I shall look it up and include it as soon as possible.

Thank you once again for your help and concern.

Yours ever,

David Davidmillbury (talk) 20:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DeVotchKa - How it Ends.jpg[edit]

Hello, Polly/Archive 1. Did you mean like that? I think my English is quite good, but not my "legal English". I tried to read the fair-use rules before uploading the image but... If the problem is not solved, please feel free to delete the page. Saludos, Gons (¿Digame?) 19:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC).

Message from Mcaa09 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)[edit]

i was trying to insight something and the guy before it ruined it

  • Your contributions thus far have been vandalism, try to do something constructive instead. Polly (Parrot) 02:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • r u trying to ruin everything i type asshole
      • Please remain civil, and add useful content not vandalism. Polly (Parrot) 02:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:FrizQuadrata.png[edit]

Apologies! The template I was using didn't show up properly (I used lowercase PD instead of capitals) so I went to change it when I got your message. Thanks anyway. -- M (speak/spoken) 02:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interact-TV images[edit]

Hi Polly, I created the images you marked for possible copyright violation. I uploaded them in the interests of the company for which I work in the process of creating an article about that company's product. Since I am new to page creation on wikipedia, I don't yet know all the rules - is it OK for me to remove the warnings you inserted in my article?

Thanks, Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferdfarnsworth (talk • contribs) 22:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • In order to be sure that you are the copyright holder of this corporate logo I believe you'd need to contact the Wikipedia Foundation via WP:OTRS and email them some kind of evidence of this. Alternatively you could switch the current license on the image page to a generic logo one and add a fair use rationale and that would suffice. As regards the TV equipment image, I agree that that isn't really a problem as regards copyright and will remove the warning tags from it. Polly (Parrot) 23:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Thanks[edit]

No problem. Fusionmix 22:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aptina[edit]

Polly, Howdy, you commented on the speedy deletion for Aptina. Do you know how I would find out which user posted it in the first place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.201.242.130 (talk) 23:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polly, thanks, the does not seem to be any user information for APTINA. Any suggestions regarding how I could locate the user? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptina

  • There is no realistic likelihood of finding out who really started that account, so best to just forget about it. Polly (Parrot) 00:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification[edit]

Hi Polly,

Thanks for your message and for bringing the situation to my attention. The image is now accompanied with an appropriate explanation and links to the article that it is used in (which was just submitted).

Eradicator (talk) 00:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Excellent, that should ensure its survival, at least until the fairuse criteria is altered yet again (Shock, Horror!!!) Polly (Parrot) 00:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ur a bitch[edit]

stop messing with my userpage! go fiddle with your own dick!

  • Those two statements would seem to be mutually exclusive. Polly (Parrot) 01:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to move this to your userpage[edit]

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Awarded for your valiant defense of my talk page while I was away. Thanks a million, VanTucky 02:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chausie Page[edit]

The original information is incorrect and not factual. It needs to be properly updated with the correct history anf information pertaing tp the breed and not to breeds that are not Chausies. There are large portions and the pictures are not representative of the breed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinipenda (talk • contribs) 09:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You might like to explain your reasoning on the article's talk page in order to clarify the matter. As totally rewritting an artice without explanation tends to be contentious. Polly (Parrot) 13:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a stranger[edit]

Hi Polly, can you please help me and tell me why my Don't be a stranger information keeps on getting rejected, I have removed the external link.

Do I need to create a new page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coajt (talk • contribs) 14:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, you are trying to turn an existing article into one about your Facebook group. You'd need to start a new artice, but does your Facebook group meet the Notability guidelines. If not then it will most likely be deleted. Polly (Parrot) 14:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why is there so much resistance ?[edit]

I dont see why I cant make a page for Zina, what is the problem. We arent promoting her, I just thought it would be nice to make her a page. why is there so much resistance ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.121.241 (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The tags are placed on the article to highlight any shortfalls it has, please do not remove those tags unless you have addressed the problems raised by them. Polly (Parrot) 21:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008[edit]

Do not vandalize pages as you did to Talk:Wikipedia is oligarchy. If you would like to experiment, than use the Sandbox. Wikepedia is oligarchy (talk) 19:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your vandalism will continue to be reverted, try to be more constructive in future contributions. Polly (Parrot) 21:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GSBA_logo1.jpg[edit]

Hello Polly, I've updated the fair use rationale for this image. Is it satisfactory now? I see the "no-fair use rationale" tag is still present. I wanted to clear my updates with you prior to removing that tag. Please let me know.

Thanks, Financial-Foodie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Financial-Foodie (talk • contribs) 20:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've added a more detailed rationale and removed the no fairuse tag. Polly (Parrot) 21:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User:Fredwestthelast[edit]

On the one hand, the block may be what set him off. On the other, immediately after the block, he made another harassing comment (see the edit history). I'm going to say that you're right in this case, and a block, even if technically pre-emptive, is going to prevent more misbehavior from that user. Good call to request the block. —C.Fred (talk) 01:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • If it had been the normal kind of user page vandalism of blanking or swearing then I wouldn't have reported them at that stage. But as the vandalism was so very offensive I thought it warranted reporting. Hopefully that short block you gave will have a positive effect, and they'll come back to make useful contributions. Polly (Parrot) 01:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of our good faith[edit]

User:Agim cura is apparently a professor, using us as a scratchboard for creating mock articles for his students to find. See Talk:Agim Cura! --Orange Mike | Talk 01:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Team building exercise! Now that is taking a liberty. Polly (Parrot) 02:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allegory of the cave deletion[edit]

I'm trying to figure out if you're deleting the smiley face image or the entire picture of the image of the allegory of the cave? Why not revert the vandalism and keep the previous image?--Richiar (talk) 16:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The original image [4] is safe and not up for deletion, just the uploaded vandalised version. Polly (Parrot) 16:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image problem[edit]

can you help me with this editing of my page, i want to link image to the text, thanks in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnLisy (talk • contribs) 19:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • First you need to add a license to your image, is it self made? Polly (Parrot) 19:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing an account[edit]

Is there a way to delete my Wikipedia account? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eronara (talk • contribs) 22:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Since you haven't created a User page then all there is to delete would be the talk page. Talk pages are seldom deleted in case they are needed for future reference.Polly (Parrot) 22:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Polly/Archive_1&oldid=1073933697"