User talk:Piepie

Hello Piepie and

Because your took a screenshot or edited it in some way doesn't mean it's not fair use anymore. ' 14:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

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. 06:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mudkips_copypasta.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 09:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

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. 09:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that if you don't cease adding your bullshit to my page, I'm going to have to whine

]

Sockpuppetry

case

You have been accused of

The Artic Monkies account is blocked for username vio and socking. Limit yourself to one account. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what a "fanbio" is, but I'm pretty sure that it ain't me. I don't care about the guy, I never even heard of the guy before editing his article. For some reason I wondered onto the page, and I probably would have went further had the weird looking pic not caught my attention. Whether he's a villian or not isn't the point because as stated at Wikipedia:Verifiability The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Notice that I didn't touch the legit sourced negative info and I didn't add any positive info. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 08:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. You may not know that Wikipedia has a

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how unusually hard it is to establish fair use for certain subjects on Wiki. No need to fret, there is a 100% public domain image of a Mudkip that I produced, Image:Mudkip-with-scrunchie.jpg with regard to discussing the Mudkip Recall, due to dangerous metal objects inserted into Mudkips to hold their headfins erect. In the image, a scrunchy of similarly safe material is shown providing the necessary support without the addition of any hazardous metal parts. So, the image is both on-topic for wiki, and since I did release it into the public domain, I certainly cannot prevent you from making a "this user" tag out of it! In fact, I just noticed that someone else already has, LOL. Zaphraud (talk) 22:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you can't use copyrighted images on your user page. Maybe you could make a drawing of V? maybe make your own version of the 4chan logo? in any case, you have to remove them. Cheers! --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 00:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but they are uploaded and used under a claim of

WP:USER#Images on user pages. You can use images that have been released into the public domain and are free, like this one of Hugo Weaving. You can also found some great images at Wikimeda Commons. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 00:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

No, there is no point in uploading an image like that. But there would be high relevance in uploading an image that said the site was unavailable at a certain time. I'll be doing that shortly. Cirt (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Do you happen to have a screencapture image with a timestamp and the message from Prolexic.com saying "Site Temporarily Unavailable" ? I have an image, but I got it from an NBC story, and now I can't find that story to cite it. Cirt (talk) 04:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nevermind, found it, added it. Cheerios, Cirt (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Please do not add new content to this article without citing a secondary source. Citing something directly like YouTube isn't in accordance with

• Okay, no worries. Trust me, I'd love to add the new info to the article that it crossed the 1,100,000 mark as well - but we need a good
  WP:V source... Cirt (talk) 05:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Already in the article, albeit under a different article title, but it's the exact same article text. You can check the refs sect. Cirt (talk) 05:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, TorrentFreak actually does look like an exclusive, which is cool - but it's not an acceptable source for this project. Cirt (talk) 05:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of this sort of stuff. Thanks. --JustaHulk (talk) 05:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Yes, that is a

• Got anything better than that? Reports from a secondary source that satisfies
  WP:V? Cirt (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Digg.com in and of itself is not an acceptable source on Wikipedia. But you're showing a good effort. Cirt (talk) 22:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Post to Wikinews talkpages related to Wikinews stuff. Cirt (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered,

• If you made it yourself, and are willing to release an image to public domain, and it has no copyrighted logos in it (and it's an accepted used logo for the organization) then that's fine. Cirt (talk) 12:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you find an image widely used somewhere by "Anonymous" and get permission for it to be freely-licensed either as public domain, creative commons or GFDL? You would have to get them to put a notice to that effect either close to the image or at the bottom of a website page, e.g.: "All images on this page are hereby freely licensed to (either public domain, GFDL, creative commons attribution, whichever they pick)" - or right next to an image: "This image is freely licensed under X license" (again, pick one of the aforementioned three, from above.) Cirt (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Best not to use a "fair use" pic, but a free-use pic. Cirt (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • See my comment above where I explain exactly how to get a free-use pic. We need something that is either
        GFDL, public domain, or Creative Commons attribution licensed. Cirt (talk) 15:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]
• Tell you what - I know a thing or two about images, but I am not the foremost expert on them. Why don't you create an account at Wikimedia Commons, and ask for help from an Admin over there about how to upload something that is A) verifiable as representative of Project Chanology, and B) allowable for uploading to the Commons. -- If it is allowable on the Commons, we can use it in articles here on Wikipedia. Good luck! Cirt (talk) 06:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please wait on adding this new stuff until it gets coverage in secondary sources? Can you please revert? Trust me, you want to hear this coming from me as opposed to someone else, and it will come from someone else, if not now, then later. We want this article meticulously sourced, and to avoid primary sources as much as possible, to make everything in the article as cited/sourced/iron-clad as possible. Cirt (talk) 12:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hai.

It's like you're just trying to have some fun, and some people who stalk their watch pages want to go and ruin it all for you. Vael Victus (talk) 00:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi i heard you like wiki Apelike (talk) 01:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thumb|adopted

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, removed that last bit because it was unsourced and looked like a

That was so long ago, I don't even recall at this point. Cirt (talk) 01:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

the subculture section was 100 percent fact end of story —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.139.130 (talk) 17:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you're not afraid of death, you're older than your years. After all, you're not that old, only like not even 50 yet. Some people are still doing their thing decades after that... but I guess that isn't you as a person.-Proactive primrose (talk) 21:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I userfied the requested material to the above page under the following conditions:

1. It will be deleted by me in 3 days, unless you request deletion earlier
2. If it is moved to the mainspace as an article, it will be deleted and so will the userpage

So the upshot of this is, do a textual transplant of this material (rewriting in your own words) by 5pm UTC on 5th March 2009. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 17:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder that the userspace page will be deleted today. Of course (see below) it may be undeleted altogether, but either way, the userspace copy will go, unless you ping back and let me knwo that edits are imminent. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 08:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a

Hi! As a member of the WikiProject:The Clash, I thought I would draw your attention to a discussion about the articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for the offline release of the encyclopedia. If you get a moment, could you please pop in and give your opinion? Thanks!!! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 13:14, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WikiProject:The Clash

Hi PiePie!
Thanks for your message. There is no problem for your contributions and participation to our project. Our project is your project. Feel free to contribute when and where you can. A great part of the work is done by some bots automatically.
I saw Hell W10 10 times or more. It's so good, fantastic music and they are there, and you too. I would like to start the article for this film. Unfortunately, there is not much material about it and I really need more time at my disposal. Maybe one day.
The message that I sent to you and to other participants to our project is not only about the project itself, but it's about the offline edition of the encyclopedia. The 1.0 editorial team has selected 8 articles from our project (to be more precise their revisions) and asked us to do a general check on them and if there are other unselected articles to include. For more information please see: The Clash articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release.
If you need help about our project or Wikipedia, ask me on my talk page.
Cheers, thank YOU... and STAY FREE! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia citations

Sources and other materials from the Internet can hardly be considered reliable sources, while in most cases books, magazines, and other peer-reviewed publications are (reliable sources.) Sources from the Internet are easy to find and sometimes can help articles that are largely lacking sources. I don't have that book yet, but I hope to get it very soon. Thanks for the suggestion. I saw Hell W10 for the first time in 2004/2005 when I got The Essential Clash and it was a super-fantastic surprise because I didn't know about it before. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]