User talk:71.195.135.161: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:55, 9 October 2022

Unregistered editors using this IP address received messages on this talk page years ago. Since users of the IP address have likely changed, these messages have been removed. They can be viewed in the page history.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Blanked IP talk}}
-{{whois|Comcast Cable Communications  Inc.}}
-== Blocked ==
-This IP has been blocked for one month for violations of Wikipedia's [[WP:BLP|Biographies of Living Persons]] policy, particularly on [[Twink (gay slang)]].  You were warned. [[User:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#600">Neıl</u>]] [[User_talk:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#226"><B>龱</B></u>]] 10:15, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
-{{unblock reviewed|Firstly, I wasn't warned. Secondly, how is an image that is on Commons and freely usable and with no copyright, a BLP violation???? Thirdly, a month seems rather long for a first block, does it not?|decline=You're not a new editor; you have plenty of experience as a registered user, as well as plenty of warnings and blocks there. --[[User:Jpgordon|jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710;]]</small></sup> 15:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)}}
-{{unblock reviewed|1=Again, the issue hasn't been resolved or answered. How is an image that is on Commons and freely usable and with no copyright, a BLP violation????|decline=The ''image'' may not be a BLP violation, but your use of it in that article was.  Plus, you're a sock. — [[User:Blueboy96|Blueboy]][[User talk:Blueboy96|96]] 19:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)}}
-{{unblock reviewed|I'm not a sock since my main account is retired and has a big freaking box that says so. Duh. Again, the image is not a BLP violation. Further, a month is a long time for an IP address that could end up belonging to someone else.|Clear breach of [[WP:BLP]] and vandalism. Further abuse of the unblock request will result in this page being protected. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 21:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)}}
-:The warning was on [[Talk:Twink (gay slang)]].  I didn't even know this IP related had an actual account, but have figured out now.  As regards the reason for your block - the image is not a BLP violation, and nobody said it was.  Placing it on [[Twink (gay slang)]], however, is.  Your IP appears static, with all edits on it coming from you. You are posting a lot of unblock requests - someone will probably end up protecting this page if you carry on. [[User:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#600">Neıl</u>]] [[User_talk:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#226"><B>龱</B></u>]] 21:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
-::This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen on Wikipedia. A '''month''' block for restoring a free image to an article that had been there for months. What about all the other images of people on Wikipedia that are being used. [[Autofellatio]] is a good example. What about the guy in the article sucking his own cock?? Or [[Bear (gay slang)]] which features free pictures of people. I mean seriously, this is total bullshit. The only thing I'm guilty of is not knowing that a free image of someone can't be used in an article per BLP and that sure as fuck doesn't warrant a month block. You just came along and removed the image from the article, citing BLP but not explaining on the talk page or in the summary why it was a BLP violation.. so for people who don't know that a free image can be a BLP violation, how the hell are we supposed to know if you don't give a reason why. All you said on the talk page was BLP APPLIES but BLP doesn't say SHIT about images anywhere. This is a mountainous pile of bullshit because fuck, [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]] doesn't have the word '''''image''''' in it anywhere. Total total total bullshit. And Gwernol called it vandalism?? WHEN the fucking image has been in the article for MONTHS????? Did I mention this was total bullshit?? [[Special:Contributions/71.195.135.161|71.195.135.161]] ([[User talk:71.195.135.161#top|talk]]) 01:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
-::::The fact that your immediate reaction upon seeing an edit marked "BLP" was to revert it speaks volumes. [[User:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#600">Neıl</u>]] [[User_talk:Neil|<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#226"><B>龱</B></u>]] 07:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
-:::::It speaks volumes because I didn't agree that it was BLP. I didn't agree because BLP doesn't say '''anything''' about images and because it's a fucking free image with no copyright, freeable to be used however wherever, hosted on Commons. Had you took the time to explain why it is BLP on the talk page, this could have been avoided. It was just quicker to remove the image and block anyone that reverted. [[Special:Contributions/71.195.135.161|71.195.135.161]] ([[User talk:71.195.135.161#top|talk]]) 19:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
-::::::Yikes. Here's a good case where a short explanation of ''why'' [[WP:BLP]] policy was cited would have benefited all involved. God forbid anyone be mistaken for a gay person! Seriously, I can see the stretch of how BLP ''can'' cover this but there isn't a scrap of information at [[WP:BLP]] that seems to connect that this image was in some way violating policy. If I'm missing the obvious please let me know. Perhaps the policy should be spelled out a bit better for those who are trying to understand the nuance. Also simply stating in the edit summary "article requires self-identified or RS identified "twink" rather than someone who fits the description" would have at least helped explain the deletion. ASE may get a bit heated at times however hard to see the overall contributions as anything but welcome - the vandal clean-up alone is significant. [[User:Benjiboi|<small><u style="text-decoration:none;font-family: papyrus;color:#CC00CC">Banje</u></small>]][[User_talk:Benjiboi|<u style="font-family: Zapfino, sans-serif;color:#8000FF">boi</u>]] 13:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)