User talk:Pekaje

I generally keep user talk pages on my watchlist for a week or so, except when I use template messages. If replying to an older debate or a template message, please move the discussion here, so I will be notified. Unless requested to do otherwise, I will try to keep the discussion in one place.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Pekaje, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Thanks for your work at WP:DPL. Normally we do fix categories and templates (although in this case the templates were used only on Wikipedia: pages, so not a big deal); I've fixed them. TimBentley (talk) 22:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 21:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for spotting the recreation of My Last Tomorrow and warning the user again. Keep up the good work! :) Bubba hotep 11:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Accuracy and precision.png

Pekaje - not as on top of all this as I once imagined that I was. Thought I had released 'Image:Accuracy and precision.png' into PD but obviously not. Please just tell me what I have to do. Cutler 00:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually it was relased as GFDL 1.2, but my reason for requesting deletion doesn't concern licensing. The image was merely obsoleted by the SVG version at Image:Accuracy and precision.svg. You only need to do something if you think the SVG version is not an appropriate updated version of the original PNG version. --Pekaje 11:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thx. Keep up the good work. Cutler 11:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Breakthrough Interactive Group, Inc.

Nice job on User talk:Ethanjames, that is a textbook example of how to deal with such situations. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩

Posting for Breakthrough Interactive Group

I'm trying to post a number of wikis that are inclusive of Breakthrough Interactive Group and related topics. The intent is not to advertise, but to disseminate the knowledge of the existence of the entity and what it is. I have a re-written version of the article for Breakthrough Interactive Group which I would like to share with you before posting. All of the additional wikis that are related to it are also done. Do I send them to you first for review, or do I just post them? I have tried to make them as factual as I can. Also, I did some Google searches on it, and found various articles. I think when you see the other wikis that are related, you'll find better "proof" of the viability of the article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethanjames (talk • contribs) 13:41, April 8, 2007 (UTC)

First, I would like to apologize for not replying sooner, but you posted on the talk page of one of my subpages that was not on my watchlist. It was therefore only by chance that I noticed it. You should instead post directly onto my user-talk page, because that will show a rather conspicuous yellow bar at the top of every page, until I go to check.

Anyway, as for your questions, I would suggest you start out by posting them in a set of user subpages. The rules for what can be in your user-space are somewhat more lax, so they won't easily get deleted. This also allows you time to properly word and source the articles so they don't read like advertisements and can back up the claims of notability with verifiable and reliable sources. Not sure if this is the case here, but if you are in some way affiliated with the subject organization, you should be very careful, as there could be a conflict of interest. In such cases it's usually better to stay away and wait for someone else to write about it.

As for reviewing the articles, I have no more say than most Wikipedia editors, but if you leave me a message with a set of links to the articles in question, I'll be happy to give them a look. You may also want to try your luck with articles for creation or asking for reviews and suggestions for improvements on the new contributors help page. --Pekaje 19:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ooh. Better watch yourself.

65.92.94.207 might...I dunno, type something mean at you or something... HalfShadow 07:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my user page and for looking out for the troll User:Eoganan/User:Pan-ethnic. Alun 07:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Anti-me

I've yet to meet an editor who focus most of their edits on images or technical aspects of the wiki, who wasn't anti, or at least, indifferent me (well, except for ais523 and Kingboyk, I do bow to the exceptions). But hopefuly, this can one day change. Will you be my friend? Best wishes, El_C 00:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Foreign db-bio

Not that I think it will come up much, but if it does, to avoid the confusion we had over the Norwegian language article last night, I think the best methodology is to tag it using the generic {{db}} with something not unlike {{db|db-bio: I can read the article and its...}} I don't think any administrator would delete the article without first understanding that the tagger can read it and a description of why it fits A7. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

You are of course completely correct, and I think I would have acted much like you in a similar situation. Thing is that Twinkle seems to have removed the generic speedy deletion tag, and I suppose I was a bit lazy ... Oh well, no harm done in the long run :-) --Pekaje 19:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

No harm done at all:-) <tangent>Actually, I'm glad Twinkle doesn't have the generic tag as it may be the most commonly misused tag on Wikipedia. I would say only one use out of ten is proper (and I do a lot of CAT:CSD patrolling). Unfotunately, it's usually used because the editor placing it doesn't know the CSD criteria well enough to use a specific tag, which usually means the reason they provide for speedy deletion (if they provide one at all) does not fit any criterion.</tangent>--Fuhghettaboutit 22:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes, didn't consider that possibility. It has a certain level of convenience, like when it has been agreed elsewhere that something should be speedily deleted, and you want to point to the discussion, but I suppose the level of misuse could well exceed the level of acceptable use. --Pekaje 12:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

For the user page revert!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 09:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. User reported, account likely to go poof soon ... :-) --Pekaje 09:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thank you very much for reverting vandalism on my talkpage. I've been trying to make that user see sense and make good edits for the last half-hour, and he's gone and done that... Thanks, and happy editing! Lradrama 09:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and you're welcome. Seems he just created a new account (to zap into oblivion), though. Oh well, these things happen ... :-) --Pekaje 09:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

high-res

There was a reason why I changed Image:Avatar Wii.JPG. It was too high resolution for a fair use claim, and it was watermarked. Please don't revert it again, as high-res fair use images are eligible for deletion. --Pekaje 16:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:Non-free media rationale ^ Images must generally be of low resolution. The rule of thumb for raster images is no more than 300 pixels in width or height, which ensures that the image's resolution is less than 0.1 megapixels. If you are using an image of higher resolution, please explain why.

it's okay to have a big pic.Just-fix-it 16:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC) i didn't see the watermark. my bad.Just-fix-it 17:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

that wasn't nice :( I do verify the Sources of what I post. i do make Mistakes but I'm learning as i go. maybe you can help me. how do i replace a bad image? see Image:Cars-Wii.jpg :)Just-fix-it 18:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reducing some of image files used in the Suzuka (manga) articles. Now they better meet the non-free content criteria. (Duane543 19:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC))

No problem. If you find any others that need reducing, don't hesitate to tag them with {{non-free reduce}}. --Pekaje 19:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Image troubles

Hi! Yeah, I noticed you having the same problem, too. To be honest, I'm not actually comfortable digging through and reverting a bunch of ^demon's actions before he logs on, lest I be seen as wheel warring; technically, I probably should have held off on reuploading those other images, but I forgot about the rule until I was done. I'm confident that this has been a mistake, though, and have offered ^demon my help for when he logs on and sees what's happening. Hopefully we can get this all sorted out ASAP. --Masamage ♫ 22:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's just that people are starting to notice, and to be honest one never knows when an editor or admin will be back to check messages (though I doubt it will be too long). In this case, I'd say abandon the rules and do what's best for the encyclopedia. If the deleted image description page was using the {{non-free reduced}} template, then it's a fair bet that it was a mistake to delete it. Your choice, of course. If the problem is what I think it is, then it certainly won't be fun to undo the work of ImageRemovalBot ... :-/ --Pekaje 22:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, you have a good point. I've just checked his user contribs, and it looks like he logs on pretty reliably most every day; I expect we should be seeing him again some time this evening. If not--if I log on in the morning and he hasn't popped up yet--then yeah, I think IAR may apply, and I can start in on helping. I might check over at the Noticeboards first, probably before I go to bed. --Masamage ♫ 22:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Your message

The pair of cases you referred to in your post ("Recent Username violation reports") were nominated based on the following rationale:

1. deznuts05: As Bongwarrior pointed out, the term is a slang for a part of the male anatomy. From what I gather, the username policy states that any offensive slang used in reference to genitalia is in violation of this policy. Much of what turned up in a search engine query using that phrase supports Bongwarrior's assertion.
2. stupid100: The {{uw-ublock}} tag states that any username which includes rude or inflammatory language may be blocked. The definition of stupid appears to meet this criteria.

I hope this answers your questions. --Aarktica 01:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Category:Rescaled fairuse images more than 7 days old

Quick question - how does it work? Because I'm going through the undated category now and there seem to be a few that should be in the dated category, but aren't, eg Image:SouthernLeague.png? I'm pretty shocking with templates and categories and stuff so please be gentle :) ~ Riana ⁂ 13:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that as well. I'm digging into why it isn't working. I suspect either a database glitch (since the images do show that they belong to the category) or a coding error on my part (might be something with pipes in ParserFunctions conditionals). Both have happened to me before ... :-) --Pekaje 13:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, OK. I didn't understand that, but OK. :) There's no rush, either way. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, they're there now. Either by some strange coincidence the database glitch disappeared right around the time I changed the {{non-free reduced}} template, or the thing I mentioned about ParserFunctions really was what caused it. But if that was it, I'm surprised any images ever made it into the category. It seems pretty arbitrary if that was the ultimate cause of the bug. Do let me know if you notice any other cases like that. Whatever the cause may be, the category seems to have repopulated, so you can delete away! :-) --Pekaje 13:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

NOT INAPROPRIATE!

You delete dmy pages LittleFIsh Productions and Danielle Kreppel. These pages were wrong fully deleted because they are both real things. I was not vandalising, but making pages for things not there. LittleFish Productions is a real company and should be treated as so. If you would like to contact me, visit the site: http://littlefishproductions.wetpaint.com/ and leave a comment. As for the artical Danielle Kreppel, I was not finished editing this page and I wish you would not delete it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleFish133 (talk • contribs) 01:27, August 10, 2007 (UTC)

First I'd like to point out that I did not delete the page, merely tagged it for consideration. I am not an administrator, so I could not actually delete anything, but I may suggest that an administrator takes a look at it. As you can see in the logs, it was deleted three times by two independent admins. The reason I tagged the article is that the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia is not simply that something exists. When describing people and companies, the subject must be notable for something. Your article did not even lay any claim to notability, so was deletable under speedy deletion criterion A7. Even if some claim to notability had been placed, the subject of the article leads me to believe that it has little chance of getting through a deletion debate. The style and tone of the article was also not appropriate for an encyclopedia, but reads like an advertisement, which can also be grounds for speedy deletion. One final point I would like to bring up is that it is generally inadvisable to write about yourself or your company. The reason for this is that it introduces a conflict of interest, and tends to prevent an unbiased coverage. --Pekaje 10:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Thanks for doing such great work with rescaling non-free images, and putting up with the bogus deletion notifications you get as a result. Your work is often underappreciated, but critical to Wikipedia! Videmus Omnia Talk 01:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, when I started this work I didn't think far enough ahead to realize that I probably would be getting some image-related notices that were not intended for me. I think the best way to prevent it is for me to make sure that there is a good and solid fair use rationale in place for everything I rescale. --Pekaje 09:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Fergie single fergalicious.jpg

Image:Fergie single fergalicious.jpg has been undeleted. Please add a rationale in accordance with WP:FURG as well as source information (which is also missing). —Angr 16:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I added what I hope to be a sufficient rationale. The only trouble is the source, since it could have been downloaded from any number of websites. I do, however, feel that specifying that it is a scan of the cover is enough of a source description. Just as screenshots of TV series should specify what episode something is from, rather than where it might have been found on the Internet. --Pekaje 16:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The album itself should be fine as a source. I don't think it matters what website it was downloaded from. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Game box resizing

The only reason I won't go ahead and outright say that I'll do that is just that I'm not sure if I'll remember in that instance. If I remember, I'll certainly make a point to do that, though. --fuzzy510 22:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Image size discussion

Please see this, thanks! Videmus Omnia ^Talk 00:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:EvelynEvelynBrent1.jpg

Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_August_21#Image:EvelynBrent1.jpg. This image is in the public domain. Just thought you'd want to know. Regards, Kenosis 15:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Help me

Pekaje i am Migssant19 talk in an other user, if you don´t remember me, i´m the guy that had problems with the photo copyrighting with pictures of Santiago de los Caballeros Dominican Republic. The thing is that i was bocked by an other user because he thinks that i still uppoadding images with false copyright and all the images are created by me so what you think can i do?

Chezllan619 talk 14:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have been blocked again. You should under no circumstances create a new account to evade a block, as that will just get blocked again (see WP:SOCK). I know that you have some difficulties with understanding the various policies, because English is not your first language. Particularly the rules regarding copyright, which is taken very seriously here. I still get the impression that you mean well and that you do in fact have some freely licensed images to contribute. I would be willing to coach you on the specifics, but first I'll have to see if I can convince the blocking admin to give you a (quite possibly, final) chance. --Pekaje 12:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

How can you coach me? it would be great but look i don´t know if the problem is the tipe of copyright [PD-self] that i use to put in ma pics or what because i made some of the erased pics in my coputer and others i taked it with my father so i don´t know what is wrong in it......--Chezllan619 1:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, part of the problem was that you originally labeled pictures you had found on the Internet as PD. I trust you learned why that was not allowed. There were also some instances of derivative works, where you in some way modified another copyrighted work, but you still also marked PD. This is also not allowed. Because of this, you have lost the trust of a lot of editors, and they have no choice but to assume that even the pictures you do have the legal right to release (the ones taken by you or (by permission) your father) are also copyright infringements. I think you also had some routes plotted into a copyrighted map, but there is a way to provide similar information without infringing (there are freely available maps on Commons). What I suggest we do if you get unblocked is that whenever you want to create and upload something new, we talk about it first and take the relevant policies as they come along. I've asked the admin, but it may be an uphill battle because of the loss of trust. --Pekaje 14:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

OK i understand. --Chezllan619 14:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Werdnabot

Hi,

I saw your comment on the Help Desk and I entered your code like this :

"

Did I do it right ?

Can you check ?

It is on my Talk Page.

Thanks,

Tovojolo 09:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

For some reason it's come out as a label, if you click edit, you'll see the code.

Thanks,

Tovojolo 09:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)