User talk:Briantist/Archive2

see also User talk:Briantist/archive1  BRIANTIST  (talk) 09:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:UK_Digtal_TV_platform_growth_Q3_2006.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:UK_Digtal_TV_platform_growth_Q3_2006.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 16:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It's out of date.. no problem...  BRIANTIST  (talk) 09:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Freeview retro logo 2006.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Freeview retro logo 2006.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Also, fair use requires low resolution images - do you want to re-upload this image at, say 300px across?   REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ  10:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect I got it from the Freeview press office. I'll check and get back to you.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 14:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:C4 share of viewing 1992-2007 v2.png. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:C4 share of viewing 1992-2007.png. The copy called Image:C4 share of viewing 1992-2007.png has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 15:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:BrightonGreenway line image.png. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:BrightonGreenway.png. The copy called Image:BrightonGreenway.png has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 16:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Five graph

I have just noticed the graph on the Five article and at the top it says 1992-2007, and as you know Five started in 1997. So I hope you can find time and fix it. Thanks. AxG ҈ ^►talk 21:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll sort tomorrow am when I'm back on that machine.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

TV Barnstar

tgheretford awards Briantist this TV Barnstar for all the excellent image contributions made to Wikipedia --tgheretford (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there.

I noticed all the contributions you have made with the self created images you have made for Wikipedia. So, in recognition of all of your hard work and valuable contributions, I have awarded you this TV Barnstar. Congratulations. --tgheretford (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks  BRIANTIST  (talk) 12:51, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:BBC Logo 1997-Present.png

Hi. The image listed above has been listed as having no source or fair use rationale, though I know you got it from the BBC Media Bank didn't you? Could you just put this on the image page and then delete the warning boxes; the copy of the email you got from them will do. Cheers. Wikiwoohoo 17:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Mouse (disambiguation)

Please stop trying to put some minor subsection of an overall article about the Hitchihiker's Guide near the top of Mouse (disambiguation). Also, we do not generally put pipes on names of articles on disambiguation pages. We can put a pipe if the link goes to a subsection of an article instead of the full article, but in that case it would confuse people into thinking that there was a whole article instead of just a subsection. The fact that it is only a subsection means it's only of minor importance and perhaps shouldn;t be listed at all, but it absolutely, positively should not be shoved at the top of the list. DreamGuy 21:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:BBC Logo 1997-Present.png (size)

Hi Briantist,
Thanks for sourcing/enabling use of the above. I was wondering, however, whether much/most/all of the space around the logo itself might be cropped, to avoid spacing such as in the infobox here...?  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 15:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Space around is part of the design, the linked page looks superb to me.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 08:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

So it does... Well, I'd swear the logo was smaller with wide margins around it when I posted the above, but maybe there was a rendering glitch in the browser or my brain!  Thanks again, David (talk) 07:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have a few problems like that from time to time.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 07:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Viewing figures

Hi Briantist, thanks for the UK TV viewing figures. May I suggest that the image summaries e.g. BBConeshare Summary contain the source of the information? Regards. PeterGrecian 10:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for violating 3RR on Gillian McKeith for the second time

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

--Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 10:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Briantist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The user ElinorD did four reverts of my edits and ignored the comments pages. Please unblock me, I was following the rules as you can see from the comments page

Decline reason:

Even if true, this would not be an excuse for you to violate 3RR. — Yamla 13:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

For any admin looking at this, the article is Gillian McKeith, and ElinorD did not revert four times. She reverted three times, then posted on talk that she wasn't going to revert anymore, pointed out to Briantist that he had violated 3RR (four reverts in around one hour), and asked him to self-revert. [1] He chose not to, and so he was reported on AN/3RR 45 minutes later. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

What is "self-revert"?  BRIANTIST  (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

For the record, the other user kept reverting whist I was editing and they ignored my requests. Please check the actual times. It would be helpful if these uses didn't revert edits within minutes of them being posted - at least not without discussion.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 13:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

BBC Wales

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from BBC Wales. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you. Angmering 10:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the duplicated page, as there was already a set of pages covering the item. Please don't duplicate content.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 10:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

No, you redirected the page on BBC Wales, the regional branch of the BBC for Wales, to the page on BBC Wales Today, which is simply one of many programmes produced by BBC Wales. Angmering 10:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

You did the exact same thing with BBC Northern Ireland, redirecting the page to BBC Newsline. Wikiwoohoo 14:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

And all the other Beeb regional headquarters, it would appear.Zir 17:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I know, I was sorting out the arrangement so there wasn't a duplicate set of pages, but I got blocked in the middle of the process. Otherwise I would have sorted it out by now, but I've got two Gillian McKieth lovers on my back. Sorry.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 14:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Could be worse. Could be two Gillian McKeiths. Wikiwoohoo 15:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • You are so right. I'll have another go at fixing the pages later in the week. We apologise for the inconvenience.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 16:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Zir: Yes, I know, I've explained why and I will finish them later. I'm sorry but I got banned for posting four words - veil of questionable science - on the Gillian McKeith page. The structure of the "BBC region" pages is 100% fictional, the regional graphics were 100% fictional, the BBC structure is 100% fictional, so I was editing them back to being "well sourced"....  BRIANTIST  (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not fictional at all. BBC Wales, BBC Northern Ireland etc are distinct regional branches of the BBC that produce several programmes and operate with a degree of autonomy; redirecting them to the local news programmes they produce is bizarre, misleading and inaccurate. Please don't do it again. Angmering 18:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm sure you will provide the required evidence then. Also, I will do what I like when expunging utter crap from Wikipedia.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 07:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

No, you won't do what you like, Brian. You're editing disruptively, and moving the BBC articles around like that borders on vandalism. You'll save yourself a lot of grief if you start editing within the policies. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

What a dumbass you are "SlimVirgin" (which makes me realise that you are obviously a fat slapper). I *DO* stay within the rules, it's you who makes up their own.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 08:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

There's plenty of evidence for the various BBC regions existing and being producers of more than just a single local news programme, as your redirects implied. Take for example the BBC Press Office biography of Controller of BBC Wales Menna Richards: " As Controller of BBC Wales she is responsible for all of BBC Wales' services in English and Welsh on radio, television and online plus a staff of 1,200 people. BBC Wales produces a number of successful series for the BBC's networks including Doctor Who; Tribe and A Year at Kew." Or this press release about BBC East moving into their new premises at The Forum in Norwich back in 2003: "Radio Norfolk, Inside Out, The Politics Show, News Online and the website team have already relocated to the Forum in a staggered move, started in June." Those two come from a very quick Google search. I'm sure equally valid results can be found for all of the other regions.

I doubt there could have been too many complaints had you justifiably tagged the regions pages for lacking sources, but to redirect them all to the local news programme articles was just inaccurate. Angmering 17:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh No, please don't suggest even more tagging! Methinks we're all agreed on how the regional structure evolved in BBC English Regions (another overly-reffed article due to citations being demanded for every-little-thing) - NPCs in Manchester, Birmingham & Bristol (based on the old regional radio structure) with island sites producing only local programming elsewhere.Zir 10:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay, sorry, I haven't been involved much with these articles and hadn't seen the BBC English Regions page. Its existence and referencing makes Briantist's edits all the odder, really. Angmering 13:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Now blocked for a week

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for a personal attack. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

--Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 10:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Briantist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Why? Isn't a Jeu de mots allowed? I've been banned for adding FOUR WORDs to an article which were fully referenced and agreed upon on a chat page. Is there someone who I can appeal to who will actually look at the logs?

Decline reason:

The comment made by you to SlimVirgin above, at 08:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC), was totally inappropriate. I endorse the block generally, and although the length may be a touch too long in my opinion, it is certainly within administrator discretion (and I'm not inclined to change the length only given this). Daniel Bryant 12:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

That's ridiculous! Have you never read Viz? Look there's even a wikipedia page on it! The Fat Slags  BRIANTIST  (talk) 11:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the last laugh is mine!  BRIANTIST  (talk) 11:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

R.I.P. BBC New - The Fat Slags Movie - Fat Slags at IMDb and View it

Fair use rationale for Image:01-Bow_Down_Mister_(A_Small_Portion_2_B_Polite_Mix).ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:01-Bow_Down_Mister_(A_Small_Portion_2_B_Polite_Mix).ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:01-No_Clause_28_(Emilio_Pasquez_Space_Face_Full_Remix).ogg

I have tagged Image:01-No_Clause_28_(Emilio_Pasquez_Space_Face_Full_Remix).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Eat_Static_Eat_Static.ogg

I have tagged Image:Eat_Static_Eat_Static.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 09:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:From_Hammersmith_to_Tokyo_and_Back_(Live).ogg

I have tagged Image:From_Hammersmith_to_Tokyo_and_Back_(Live).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 13:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Digital TV (UK) Q4 2006 All sets.png

This image (Image:Digital TV (UK) Q4 2006 All sets.png) was removed by another editor from the Freeview article and could be listed for deletion at any time. You may discuss the decision to remove the image on the relevant talk page. Thanks --tgheretford (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Marvin_Marvin.ogg

I have tagged Image:Marvin_Marvin.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 17:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Power_of_Love_Peel_Sessions_1983.ogg

I have tagged Image:Power_of_Love_Peel_Sessions_1983.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 21:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Prodigy_G_Force_(Energy_Flow)_from_Kaos_Theory_Volume_1.ogg

I have tagged Image:Prodigy_G_Force_(Energy_Flow)_from_Kaos_Theory_Volume_1.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 21:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:UK TV viewing figures

Template:UK TV viewing figures has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Please note: another editor nominated your template for deletion, I am just placing this template on your talk page out of courtesy. tgheretford (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rage_Hard_Freddy_Basstone_Mix.ogg

I have tagged Image:Rage_Hard_Freddy_Basstone_Mix.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Reg_Nullify.ogg

I have tagged Image:Reg_Nullify.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Relax_(16_Minute_Sex_Mix)_-_12ZTAS1.ogg

I have tagged Image:Relax_(16_Minute_Sex_Mix)_-_12ZTAS1.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Relax_(The_Last_Seven_Inches)_-_ZTAS1DJ.ogg

I have tagged Image:Relax_(The_Last_Seven_Inches)_-_ZTAS1DJ.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Relax_Cassette_version.ogg

I have tagged Image:Relax_Cassette_version.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Relax_Demo_tape.ogg

I have tagged Image:Relax_Demo_tape.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Relax_New_York_Mix.ogg

I have tagged Image:Relax_New_York_Mix.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

MFD for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Hitchhiker's/Media

FYI, I have nominated Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Hitchhiker's/Media for deletion. --Abu badali ^(talk) 20:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Briantist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm banned for a personal attack that was in fact a simple cultural reference to The Fat Slags, well know Viz (comic) characters that have appeared in books, on television and in movies. It was *not* a personal attack. I really would like an apology.

Decline reason:

I can find no evidence that you provided any context for this comment, nor any evidence that SlimVirgin would be aware of that. Please do so, then re-request an unblock. If you are unable to provide this, though, I'm afraid I would find it inappropriate to lift your block. — Yamla 22:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Briantist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Isn't calling yourself "SlimVirgin" just reversing the phrase, where else would it have come from? The cartoon has been around for a few more decades than the user has been registered on this site. SlimVirgin is in the UK and would have to be less than five years old to not know about it. I really can't belive that I have been banned FOR A WHOLE WEEK for a "personal attack" that consisted of two words which were a reversal of a username. It was, perhaps, a mild insult but to call it a "personal attack" is enough for me to sue you in an English court for deformation.

Decline reason:

Again, there was no context. Surely you realize you cannot make assumptions as to how another person will perceive a comment containing colorful metaphors such as dumbass and fat slapper. Also, as to your allegations of defamation (I'm assuming that's what you meant)... no legal threats. They only serve to undermine your case for an unblock; seeing as how the block will expire soon anyway, I would take it easy with those. --Kinu ^t/_c 00:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Briantist (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not making a legal threat, just a contrast. If I had called SlimVirgin a 'dumbass' you MAY have a point, but I did not, I humoursly negated the two parts of the name to a very, very, very well-known cultural reference. It was not a PERSONAL ATTACK, it was simple a play on words. Why will noone investigate this SlimVirgin user and his/her abuse of the Gillian McKeith page? Looks like an inside job from my POV. Can you show me the rule please where two words can consitute a personal attack? As I have never met this user and have no idea of his/her gender or age or build, how is it possible that a The Fat Slags reference consitutes a personal attack? According to Ofcom Language and Sexual Imagery in Broadcasting: A Contextual Investigation Research Study conducted by The Fuse Group on behalf of Ofcom Date issued: September 2005 p83, Slag: "Most women find this moderately to strongly offensive - like all words referring to sexual behaviour", which is hardly "personal attack" terratory. From where I am from this word refers to the spoil out of a colemine. Thanks

Decline reason:

Two words can constitute a personal attack: "Fucking retard". I'm not saying that that's what you said, but I'm saying that that's the boundary of personal attacks. And the Wikipedia definition is distinct from anything that Ofcom or The Fuse Group may release; each editor has various levels of sensitivty. And the definition of "slag" does include the leftovers from smelting; however, it's pretty clear that that's not what you meant. When somebody calls someone else "gay", the usual meaning is not 'happy' or 'homosexual', it's a general derogatory statement. — Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 02:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Image:Two_Tribes_(Hibakusha).ogg

I have tagged Image:Two_Tribes_(Hibakusha).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Two_Tribes_(We_Dont_Want_To_Die).ogg

I have tagged Image:Two_Tribes_(We_Dont_Want_To_Die).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Two_Tribes_Annihilation.ogg

I have tagged Image:Two_Tribes_Annihilation.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Two_Tribes_Carnage.ogg

I have tagged Image:Two_Tribes_Carnage.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Two_Tribes_Peel_Sessions_1982.ogg

I have tagged Image:Two_Tribes_Peel_Sessions_1982.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 07:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Warriors_Attack.ogg

I have tagged Image:Warriors_Attack.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Welcome_To_The_Pleasuredome_(The_Alternative).ogg

I have tagged Image:Welcome_To_The_Pleasuredome_(The_Alternative).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Welcome_to_the_Pleasuredome_(The_Alternative).ogg

I have tagged Image:Welcome_to_the_Pleasuredome_(The_Alternative).ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Whale_Theme_from_HitchHikers_TV_series_sample.ogg

I have tagged Image:Whale_Theme_from_HitchHikers_TV_series_sample.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

BBC One

I have just removed a schedule from the BBC One page, there is one on the talk page see Talk:BBC One. I want to know whether I was right to remove it. Thanks. AxG ҈ ^►talk 20:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is clear that schedules are copyright and therefore banned. WP:NOT#DIR  BRIANTIST  (talk) 09:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)