User talk:JarlaxleArtemis/Archive II

Installing… please wait

Installing… please wait

Archive I

Chinatown, Oakland inuse?

Hi, you've placed an inuse template at 17:29. Just wondering when you will be done so I can also do some edits. Thanks Petersam 05:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I removed the inuse template to do some edits Petersam 07:04, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I have no plans to edit that article. I saw your notice at the top of the article, and I replaced it with the inuse template. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:22, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Latest news on image copyrights

FYI, there's been a change in the allowed uses of copyrighted images. "Non-commercial only" permission is no longer allowed, per Jimbo Wales himself. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-05-23/Noncommercial images. I don't know how this will effect your attempt to get permission from the Wizards of the Coast. -Willmcw 06:32, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I have already read Jimbo's statement regarding that issue. I think that is a very stupid change. What's wrong with Jimbo? If Wikipedia has the copyright owner's permission, then the images should be allowed. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:22, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it is a difficult policy because images are hard to "paraphrase." Well, I guess we could sketch. Or go take our own photographs, when that's possible (not easy to photograph an orc). So, did the Wizards ever even respond to your letter? I recently asked for a GFDL license from a group for a news-type photo, using one of these Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission, and they gave unlimited permission. You might ask again. Maybe someone in the marketing department would see value. Cheers, -Willmcw 06:43, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

No word from Wizards yet. They are a huge corporation, so it's not a surprise that they haven't answered yet (if they ever will). → JarlaxleArtemis 22:20, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Do you mind if I try? -Willmcw 23:36, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Not at all. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:38, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Non-commercial only and By Permission Only Images to be deleted

Why are "non-commercial only" and "by permission only" images going to be deleted? If one has the copyright owner's permission to use the images, then one would think that using the images is okay. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:56, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Our goal is to create a _free_ (in the sense of GNU) encyclopedia. Non-free images are contrary to that purpose. When we accept non-free images, we make our work proprietary, that is to say, we change our work so that only Wikipedia may use it, no one else can use it. This is contrary to our fundamental principles.

The Four Freedoms of free software apply to Wikipedia. People should have the right to copy our work. They should have the right to distribute our work. They should have the right to modify our work. And they should have the right to distribute modified versions of our work.

There are a great many complexities and borderline cases associated with this. "Fair use" presents a challenging example, and I think that we rely far too heavily on fair use and that virtually all (yes, virtually all!) of the images which are currently tagged as 'fair use' should be deleted. But this is a grey area and so at this time, I only urge people to be cautious about those.

But "by permission only" and "non-commercial only" are not grey areas. They are clearly non-free images which hurt our work. The examples I gave on the mailing list show why -- we are in some cases using non-free images when it would be trivial to get a free image. This means that people who want to use our work get a broken work. This is bad.

--Jimbo Wales 13:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

imho its hypocritical to allow fair use images which are of virtually no use to commercial reusers due to variations in copyright law and which can only be used in context whilst not allowing images with permission that is simarlarlly restrictive. I do agree about the non commercial and wiki(m|p)edia only cases though as theese prevent commercial reuse completely. Plugwash 20:27, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. Let's rebel against the system! Screw copyright, lawyers, and all that other beaurocratic crap! We can move the servers to China, where they don't have copyright. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:34, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Drizzt Do'Urden

Hehe, yeah I was impressed by that user's edits too. Sadly I haven't read any of the later Drizzt books so I wouldn't be able to contribute anything like that :P Thanks anyway -Erolos 11:16, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

You have been impersonated

• User:JarIaxIeArtemis
• User:JarIaxleArtemis
• User:JarlaxIeArtemis

These accounts appear to have been created to impersonate you. (The names replace one or both ells in your name with capital eyes.) I've reported them on WP:VIP and WP:AN/I. FreplySpang (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

• They've been blocked indefinitely. FreplySpang (talk) 20:09, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

File:Rwl.gif Sorry for all the trouble you've gone through to report that, but I actually created those accounts in order to prevent impersonation. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:03, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

That's great - I'm glad there's a non-vandal explanation! Thanks for letting me know, and of course thanks for taking these steps to ward off the "DoppeIganger." I hope the false alarm hasn't been too much trouble. FreplySpang (talk) 01:09, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

GM vs. Microsoft

Sorry to be a wet sock but that joke was circulating more than 5 years ago. Also, it really isn't relevant to be put on the main page talk page (so I removed it). You could have just provided a link to the joke (which is plastered all over the internet. such as [1]). BrokenSegue 02:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Damn, I had no idea the joke was that old. I just received it yesterday. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:07, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

I'll post it right below this line. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:18, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Bill Gates vs General Motors

For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on. At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If General Motors had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:

If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part):

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive -- but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.

Please share this with your friends who love -- but sometimes hate -- their computers.

Darth Benedict

This is the truth about the pope.—This is hilarious! → JarlaxleArtemis 23:41, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Stop adding BS to the Benedict XVI talk page. The is an encyclopaedia, not a game. FearÉIREANNFile:Ireland flag large.png\^(talk) 23:58, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is a talk page about an article, not a scribble box for bullshit. Keep it somewhere else, not linked to a page about a serious issue. FearÉIREANNFile:Ireland flag large.png\^(talk) 00:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Blah, blah, blah. Everyone knows that link is just a joke. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:06, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

If you don't know what people are trying to do there, find a different website to play games with, or keep them on your own pages. Putting that stuff on a talk page just trivialises the serious work of people on the page. FearÉIREANNFile:Ireland flag large.png\^(talk) 00:18, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image deletion

Hi, I stupidly deleted an image that you uploaded , cropped from the Birth of Venus. Do you still have the image, or do you remember wher you got it from, if so could you please ipload it again, it was here : Image:Birth of Venus.jpg. Sorry --nixie 04:22, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No problem; I uploaded it again. Just took about 30 seconds. → JarlaxleArtemis 22:54, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

From the Bank of Wikipedia. Your account is opened

I opened your account. Our bank applied Rule 3, and now you have 166.67 initial coins. You can use these coins as a medium of exchange here in wikipedia. For example, you can ask another wikipedian to make specific contributions, deletions, or cast votes for a subject, or pay him with your money for whatever reason. Its not bank's job to punish you in case your transactions are against wikipedia policy. But have in mind that if you are doing illegal transactions, you may be punished by admins. The bank is going to pay you 2 coins for each person you are going to introduce to the Bank.

Whatever transactions you are doing with other wikipedians, please do them in User_talk:Bank_of_Wikipedia. The trusted employees of the bank are going to confirm the validity of your transactions, and they are going to copy them (after a short delay) to your official account that resides in User:Bank_of_Wikipedia userpage.

You are welcome! Bank of Wikipedia 06:45, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Other coins

You ask: "I would also like some coins from Sphere Break in Final Fantasy X-2. I'd prefer a Seymour coin and a few Omega Weapon coins. Oh, and can I have about 100,000 Orion credits from Star Trek so that I may purchase an Orian female from their slave trade". Unfortunately our bank is not online whith the above mentioned banks, there is a network connection problem. Our technicians are doing their best to fix the error. Exchange rates will be defined as soon as connection is established. Bank of Wikipedia 07:00, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You gave 23.81 coins to newbie account User:Wragge

This is because of Rule 3. In case you dont like this rule, please express your opinion about it. Yours truly. Bank of Wikipedia 06:37, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You gave 17.86 coins to newbie account User:Y0u

This is because of Rule 3.1. In case you dont like this rule, please express your opinion about it. Yours truly. Bank of Wikipedia 08:03, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You gave 13.88 coins to newbie account User:Hall_Monitor

This is because of Rule 3.1. In case you dont like this rule, please express your opinion about it. In case you think you are giving a lot fo money to newbies, you may ask the amount given to newbies to be diminish (propose another A value in Rule 3.3). In case you think this newbie is a sockpuppet then, according to Rule 3.1, you have the power judge (together with the rest bank accounts) and expell him/her/it from the bank.

Please inform the bank in case you dont want to receive furhter messages from the bank concerning newbies arrival and payement.

Yours truly. Bank of Wikipedia 05:53, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your User page

Hi JA...it looks like a vandal defaced your User page and replaced it with a personal attack and some personal information. I've reverted the change, but you might want to change your password if someone is misusing your account in this fashion. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 23:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's not any personal information about me. (I'm a guy.) In fact, it's personal information about a teacher at my school. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:42, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

In that case, then you really ought to go back to your old page. Wikipedia User space isn't meant for launching personal attacks on other people. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 23:47, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What about other people who don't use Wikipedia? → JarlaxleArtemis 23:48, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Yep, them too. If you want to launch your own personal vendettas, get a free web host somewhere else. Wikipedia is for writing an encyclopedia. It doesn't need to expose itself to potential libel suits. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 23:54, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Whatever happened to freedom of speech? → JarlaxleArtemis 00:00, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

You have freedom of speech, your're welcome to go start your own website and say whatever you want. You 00:09, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

File:Moon.gif Wikipedia also has freedom of speech, as it's based in the U.S. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:14, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the creators of Wikipedia could allow any speech they wanted here, however, they choose not to. However, you do not own Wikipedia (and neither do I.) If you started your own website, you WOULD own it. You 00:19, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, but this is semi-my user page. → JarlaxleArtemis 00:22, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

It is only "semi-your". You are free to tell about yourself, etc, but not to place personal attacks on it. I'm sorry you're so mad at your teacher, but Wikipedia is not the place to vent. However, if you were to say that you disliked your teacher and why, I would see that as your opinion, and would not remove it (although I cannot promise that others wouldn't.) You 00:25, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

whats up with the user warning-flooding?

You seem to be using some kind of script or something that is flooding the users you are warning. Look at your contributions...

Just in case you didn't know... ;-) Shanes 02:56, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oops… I was clicking the save tab several times because Wikipedia has been acting very slow lately. Didn't know it would do that. → JarlaxleArtemis 02:58, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the idiot

Hi, I'm the editor you so tactfully called an "idiot" on the Darth Vader article. As I've been working on that article for months and intend on going for Featured Article status after the editing calms down, I'd like to know why you consider Wikipedia's spoiler policy to be "idiocy". I think if we're going to have spoiler warnings at all, we should put that spoiler warning before the single biggest spoiler in movie history, don't you think? Or is that just "idiocy".

You got a lot to learn about being part of the Wikipedia community, pal.

— Phil Welch 03:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)