User talk:Lucid

Although I understand the need to prevent people from including each individual edit in this article, the two that were removed do add weight to the arguments that the BBC is biased against America and appears to want to minimize any negativity against Islam. I've also done a whois on 132.185.240.13 and 132.185.240.120 and they both belong to the BBC (inetnum: 132.185.0.0 - 132.185.255.255; netname: BBC; descr: British Broadcasting Corporation) so please consider re-including those edits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Devnull82 (talk • contribs) 18:58:56, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Sorry for that. I thought the one before my edit was vandalizing. So I undid it. And I didn't check it. I apologize my fault. Please don't think it is a vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.78.30.109 (talk) 06:46, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

== MAFIAA

My IQ is higher than yours, BTW. xoxoxoxo, -- 67.161.150.171 14:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it is. #12 here and #1 here should answer your question --lucid 15:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a filthy, filthy lie. Either cite relevant policies, or put in an RfC, or get off my back. – 67.161.150.171 17:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. You have been warned multiple times and shown the exact policy that says this. Just because you disagree with it does not give you an excuse to vandalize Wikipedia. --lucid 04:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, see WP:NPA and WP:CIV, which you have broken multiple times --lucid 04:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Would you cut this out? I have to see "You have new messages" everytime I log on to wikipedia now. All of my edits were/are good faith. You've cited no wikipedia policies to support the "no fair use images in blp" articles. It feels more like you're harassing me than anything else -- which is not only uncivil, but also a personal attack. Can you either put up or shut up? xoxoxoxo -- 67.161.150.171 04:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The messages thing is a known bug that happens to IP users. Creating an account and logging in will fix it, you might also want to see WP:WHY. It has nothing to do with harassment, I have no control over when that box shows up or doesn't, and a software bug annoying you is not the same as a user harassing you. Anyway, I have shown you the exact policy that deals with this, that you do not like it is not my problem. --lucid 06:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing in here or here that forbids fair use images in blp articles. I don't want to login and create an account. Posting threatening warnings on my IP's talk page for an non-existent policy feels pretty harassing to me -- especially after I've asked you to stop. -- 67.161.150.171 13:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, yes, there is. Read them again if you must. While you are perfectly welcome to not create an account, you should not complain about the consequences of not doing such. And again, see WP:CIV, repeatedly accusing me of harassing you is very much against it --lucid 13:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, no, there isn't. I've read them three times now. There is absolutely nothing in them forbidding fair use images from blp articles. If there was, you would have quoted it, but there's not. You're gaslighting me, it's wrong, it's uncivil, and it's harassing. Stop it. -- 67.161.150.171 04:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Loholt, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/bios/loholt.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 17:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the tip. I got scolded for removing talk page comments when I first started, and I generally thought it went for ALL. Now the talk page looks way better. Thanks again! -- Tommy Boy ♪ ♪ 02:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your speedy tag as unless it is a hoax, that article is not "nonsense". Please be more careful with your use of speedy tags. --Dweller 11:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a hoax? --Dweller 11:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(NB that particular article hasn't previously been created) The article doesn't read as nonsense, and makes enough of a claim for notability for AfD or prod, rather than speedy. --Dweller 11:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestions are reasonable. I've userfied it. I'll also keep an eye on the user. --Dweller 11:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that's uncommonky kind of you... thank you! --Dweller 11:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know approximately how far in he makes his statement regarding open source being the only good way to do software on the vid at [1]? I don't really have an hour to spare watching the whole thing (as git isn't really of much interest to me personally), but I would like to confirm the information -- not because I don't believe you, but because I find it interesting to see how much becoming a millionaire has changed his views of the world, despite constantly saying "Oh now it's not going to change me, I swear!". spazure (contribs) (review) 12:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Conversation concluded on my talk page, positive outcome obtained. Thanks. spazure (contribs) (review) 05:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A while back you agreed on the Talk:Wii Menu talk page that the firmware updates section should be moved to the Wii page. It was moved, then moved back when a user disagreed on the issue and stated that there was no consensus on Talk:Wii talk page about moving it. If you still feel that the section should be moved, I invite you to say so on the Wii talk page. Thank you. Zomic_13 21:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]