Archives
Archive 1 — January / February 2006 Archive 2 — March / April 2006 Archive 3 — May / June 2006 Archive 4 — July / Aug / Sep 2006 Archive 5 — Oct / Nov 2006 Archive 6 — Dec / Jan / Feb 2007 Archive 7 — Mar / Apr 2007 Archive 8 — May / Jun 2007

I have reuploaded with a high quality .png shot so dont revert please. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamieostrich (talk • contribs) 10:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Warren, havent seen you around for long. Taking a wikibreak? Anyways, if you are around, could you please put your thoughts on Talk:Windows Rights Management Services#Article name. --soum ^talk 15:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows 2000 Professional.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Window Snyder, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. mms 01:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows XP Home Box Shot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Jim Allchin.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 01:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I'm more than happy with your original screenshot. No clutter, no fuss. - Ta bu shi da yu 09:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Explorer folder thumbnail.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot 14:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Explorer task pane.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot 14:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Event Viewer.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot 14:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows XP Event Viewer.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot 14:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prevailing sense in the Vista edits on MiB vs MB. peterl 22:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Windows Vista topics, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Windows Vista topics. Thank you. soum ^talk 11:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Disk Defragmenter.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh...my...god....your name is Warren and you live in Ontario, Canada? Dude! My name is Tyler Warren and I live in Niagara Falls, Ontario. How creepy is that! Tyler Warren 08:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There are still no sources to back up the claim of a Crestline chipset being present inside the new iMac. Instead, the disputed info about the new iMacs being Santa Rosa (supported by many sources) is being relied upon by editors who actually disagree with that info to draw the (so far un-sourced) conclusion a Crestline chipset lives inside the new iMac. It would be cool to have some reliable sources for this latter claim if it going to be found on Wikipedia. -GnuTurbo 16:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed a compromise for the Apple hardware since 1998 template. -GnuTurbo 17:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's an ongoing dispute with an anon and myself regarding the correct terminology (Santa Rosa or Crestline) for the MacBook Pro's and Intel iMac's. If you have a second read over the last few replies on the Intel iMac talk page and let me know if I'm being ridiculous or not. However in summary, the anon feels even mentioning Santa Rosa is wrong, though his Wikilink for Crestline links to the Santa Rosa platform. Other points are made on both sides, just have a look as I value your opinion on other matters in the past. Cheers mate. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Windows_Server_2003_EE_Box_Shot.png. 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 non-free media 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. Rettetast 19:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You write articles like a fanboy obvious Microsoft is paying you amount of money to push positive view of Windows. Wikipedia is open source philosophy and Windows should be attacked and criticized for the good and free sake of computing. Linux on the way die M$ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.83.121 (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia might have been born out of an open source philosophy, but the views it holds promotes a neutral point of view, nothing else. As such, biased information is not tolerated here. And editors as biased as you are have no place here. Go troll elsewhere, or you will be blocked from editing here.

And for your information, neither of us, who keep the Microsoft articles free of idiotic open source zealotry and pointless bashing, are paid by Microsoft. --soum ^talk 12:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely your time would be better spent improving your English grammar than criticising people you don't know. Also, Microsoft doesn't pay me, and I use Macs for most of my personal stuff. -/- Warren 03:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need a bit of help; I'm what some would call a "wiki noob". Ekkusu 18:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Microsoft Update on Windows XP.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot 19:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted a couple of comments on Windows XP talk page.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Windows_XP#Service_Pack_2_external_links... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Windows_XP#User_Interface

Need your views on this... Mugunth 18:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://radiohead.com.hk/

Go to that link, and why don't YOU read, before saying I'm making stuff up, douchebag. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.

Eeeh? I don't grok your argumentation. Nobody claims that Windows Server 2003 comes in a workstation variant. The subsection clearly stated that there was no such variant (EDIT: The exact wording is "Windows Server 2003 does not come in Workstation editions, but..." - Dylansmrjones 02:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)), so your argument is moot. Do you have a relevant objection or perhaps even a suggestion on how the information can enter the article? If not I'll revert your edit in 6 hours (that'll be 10:49 local time in Denmark). Dylansmrjones 02:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is it misleading? The proposed text clearly states that Windows 2003 Server DOES NOT come in a Workstation variant. So the text does not claim anything like you describe. Could you come with an objection which is related to the actual wording and not something unrelated? I disagree with your assertion that it is unimportant. It is clearly not as http://www.google.com/search?hl=da&q=windows+server+2003+as+workstation&btnG=Google-s%C3%B8gning&lr= clearly shows. 680.000 hits for Windows Server 2003 as Workstation is clearly enough to make it notable. NB: I will not re-add the subsection under "Variants" since it would merely lead to a stupid edit war. I will however work further on a section for such modifications and add an independent section outside "Variants". Adding such a section will not happen without prior notice. I will post it at the talk-page 48 hours before adding it. Is that good enough? :) Dylansmrjones 03:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Would you mind self-reverting this change. There is an AMG review now. (I'm trying to keep my revert count down because I find it hard to keep track of for fast-changing articles such as this.) Thanks in advance. --PEJL 10:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a review on allmusic's web site at the provided link, so, no. -/- Warren 13:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe your browser is over-aggressively caching the page. The review is up. It starts with: "In Rainbows, as a title, implies a sense of comfort and delightfulness. Symbolically, rainbows are more likely to be..." --PEJL 13:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not an issue with my browser. The review isn't there. If it was there, it's gone now. Continue this on Talk:In Rainbows, please. -/- Warren 14:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm posting this here because it's not related to the article. About the AMG review, have you bypassed your browser's cache? That could explain why you're not seeing the review. And I agree that the quality of the review is ... odd. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the thread above... sorry about that. Remove if you'd like. Anyway, I'm using Firefox, and I see the review fine today, although it wasn't up about 10 hours ago. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally I'm with you on using is instead of was. However, I think that particular sentence doesn't make scan for me this way. I don't think the tense needs to change, but something else needs to change as a result of the tense change. Maybe the sentence needs to be broken up. I'm not actually sure, or I'd just do it. Can you have another look, please? --Steven Fisher 16:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've generally been in favour of lead sentences in the format: [name] is a [description] that was [timeline]. It's kind of inspired by how we do biographies, where we give birth and death dates right in the first sentence (albeit in parentheses). I've gone back and forth in my head a few times on the idea of splitting this format into two sentences, but then the sentences end up being really short, which is something I'm not a fan of. Another possibility would be something like [name] is a discontinued [description]. ... the challenge is that we really want to nail that first sentence as a very succinct and highly readable statement. In one sentence -- what is the PowerBook? What is Mac OS X? Try to do it in twenty-five words or less. This is not that easy! :-)

Compare Windows 95 and Windows 98, for an example of incorporating the timeline into the first sentence, vs. not.

(And go figure, Someone changed the Mac OS X v10.4 article today to do is -> was. sigh.)

Give it some thought, and maybe poke around some other areas of the encyclopedia for inspiration. Let's see if we can find a good approach that we can apply to hardware and software articles alike. -/- Warren 20:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm just here to tell you that while it is true that it is and always will be, for example, "the fifth release of mac os x," both words (is and was) are true and both are correct. However, the connotation must also be taken into account, and "is" gives the impression of "latest and greatest," while "was" tells the person there is something newer. Also, there is no concern of people thinking that "it was the fifth release but it isn't the fifth release anymore," because this information is self-evident and not stated otherwise. I'm not going to bother reverting all your edits because you might just revert further (even though that would be against the 3-revert rule), but I'm asking you to revert your edits. Just consider the natural flow of reading and writing. Althepal 22:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have considered this, for quite a long time (going on a year and a half), and... well... you're thinking about this wrong. A thing continues to be a thing even if it's been discontinued, or is no longer sold by its creator. That's all that matters. Mac OS X v10.4 continues to be something that is very much in the present tense for the millions of people who use it. Same with Windows 2000. My iBook G4 continues to exist in this universe as an iBook G4, very much in the present tense, regardless of the fact that it is no longer sold by Apple. If a person, place or thing no longer exists at all, then, and ONLY then is it appropriate to use the past tense when leading off a description of it.

While there may be specific elements of a person, place or thing that can be described in the past tense, but we should absolutely not lead an article with that detail -- even if that detail is the most well-known one. For example, you would not lead off the article on Robert Scoble with something like "Robert Scoble was a technical evangelist at Microsoft."... we correctly state who he is in the present tense first (his occupation), then we get to temporal details second (past jobs and accomplishments). This ordering is evident all over the encyclopedia. CN Tower, for example; Commodore 64 for another.

We're an encyclopedia. It's really important for us to be as precise, accurate, and consistent as possible. -/- Warren 00:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, but if it is an article about someone who is no longer alive, yet who's works are continued to be read, you use the past tense. Even if Tiger is still used, it isn't still in production. I see your point, and I can tell you see mine, but I still feel and think that "was" would be more appropriate for a non-current OS, for the primary reason that it makes it clear at the start that it isn't the most recent one shipping with computers (and it isn't incorrect either). If it says "this is the fifth release," I think it is the current one. If it says "this was the fifth release," I understand right away that it's not the latest release, and I bet that's the way many people think. It's more likely to give the correct impression, and it is accurate, and perhaps even more precise than "is" (because it limits the time). That's my view. Perhaps a vote can be held somewhere. Althepal 02:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added this section back and started this section on talk page... Please respond... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mac_OS_X_v10.5#Criticisms Mugunth 11:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The Java story was a leading article on Reddit, YC, and Digg, and was commented on in Daring Fireball.

• The APE crash story is probably the most widely reported problem with Leopard.

How do you want to resolve this dispute?

Can we start by not conflating the two issues? What cause do you have for removing the Java thing? It's a common critique of Leopard.

--- tqbf 00:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do we resolve this problem without posting something to the 3RR noticeboard?

I understand that you disagree with the edits I've made to the page. I'm making them in good faith. Instead of fixing the content, you're simply erasing it. You're also conflating the Java critique with the APE critique. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tqbf (talk • contribs) 00:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You stop making edits that clearly contravene WP:V, and I'll stop reverting them. How's that for a solution? -/- Warren 01:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, since we're not going to resolve this ourselves, I've simply referred this to the 3RR noticeboard; your last rv was your 4th in 24 hours. Sorry for not signing the previous comment! --- tqbf 01:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warren, you're being attacked here. None of your reverts qualify under 3RR rules. Give it a break Tqbf. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, assumed from the barnstars he could find the 3RR noticeboard himself, but was probably bad form not to cite it. --- tqbf 01:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please brief me on the situation there?--soum ^talk 14:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be the editor to ask about Apple/Win32 stuff. I rewrote Ioctl (WP has a bad habit of presenting cross-platform API stuff as if it was Unix-specific.) Can I get your take on it? In a perfect world, which I have no business demanding from you, you'd litter the article with redimprove tags so I know what needs to get cited in an article like this.

Thanks; no response necessary if you're too busy.

--- tqbf 23:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. As I read your comment, you're saying that because the name is deprecated since it is incorporated into later products which do not have "NT" in their name, it was never a true statement. Tedickey (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there's no single correct name for it. "New Technology File System", "NT File System", "NTFS File System" and "NTFS"-with-no-acronym have all been presented by people at Microsoft as the correct name over the years. Because of this, Wikipedia should either explain all this (though not in the lead... it's not that important) or skip the issue altogether. -/- Warren 18:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hmm - with the material existing in the article now, the natural order of presentation would seem to put it near the beginning where it deals with the origin and contrast to FAT (both of which are a little underdeveloped). However, the rest of the second paragraph doesn't seem to flow well for that purpose. Tedickey (talk) 20:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. A new section near the top to cover naming and initial development would be great. There are some good external links on the talk page to get that going. -/- Warren 02:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Disk Defragmenter.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting comments. :) --soum ^talk 15:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows XP has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey just wanted to let you know you were right about Criticism of Windows Vista. I was new to Wikipedia so I didn't quite understand Wikipedia's policies, and now I feel like an idiot for arguing the way I did about the article. Hope there's no bad feelings, Merry Christmas. Chetblong^Talk_Sign 04:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and...

Happy New Year! -- Chetblong^Talk_Sign

Thanks for uploading Image:Visual Studio 2005 Team Suite with a bug rate report.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think, that Microsoft, maked Vista forgot eliminate on one error: Vista no turn on, because Vista for turn on in 900Mhz, so I front page Windows Vista. Thank you very much and good night. Alden(Sharon boyfriend) or talk 22:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm forgot: I has got Vista in my computer, but I'm unistalled Vista, and now I have again Windows XP Professional. I'm saw with your userpage, than you deploy Windows Vista. IMO Windows Vista, is bad sistem, so I front page Vista operating system is..bad and, he has many errors. I'm waiting for your anwer on my talk page.Cheers Alden(Sharon boyfriend) or talk 17:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I know. I wrote you, because I wont, damn you my opinion and you knew, reason my edition. Thanks.Alden(Sharon boyfriend) or talk 21:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:C_Sharp#Platform_criticism AlistairMcMillan (talk) 16:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mac OS X 10.1 Puma screenshot.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for removing trivia, but the majority of what I removed was from articles about movies. A lot of that trivia is from IMDb which, from what I've been told, is an unreliable source. If you like, I can revert all the deletions I did. Pinkadelica (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed this editor's trivia deletions going back to December 1, 2007 and reverted the deletions (but kept the useful edits) as I considered appropriate - the issues is further discussed at Wikipedia talk:Trivia sections. Wikidemo (talk) 20:33, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

W, I took nearly all the information you queried, including the EFF quote from a New Scientist article and my notes (written down at the library) didn't include the vol/nr/page info. I was the despair of my high school research report teacher, and college profs weren't too happy with me either. I've been considering ending it all for decades as a result.

Anyway, it was from the middle of (now) last year though, as I was chasing another article from about that time. I suppose I can find it again, though not for several days yet. I had hoped someone would know the source and fill in the details so lamentably lacking in my mental makeup. ww (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Warren, I've blocked this user for persistent insertion of inappropriate material. It is obvious that he/she is trying to push an agenda and was not going to discuss this. If they start again after the 24 hour block expires I will block them for a longer period. Thanks for your help and diligence, Gwernol 20:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this a final warning for edit warring on Mac OS X (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Such behaviour and editing is detrimental to Wikipedia as a whole, and I am willing to block in order to prevent further damage. Please seek dispute resolution with the other parties: discuss with them the issues, file a Request for Comment, seek a third opinion or seek informal mediation. No matter what, this cannot continue. I have protected the article for a period of 3 weeks; if this dispute is not resolved by that time, I still do not expect to see edit warring of any kind. Anthøny 17:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean for the articles on the games themselves (it wasn't apparent which articles you referred to)? Yes, I agree with you that what you addressed is in fact an issue. I noticed that myself and have nothing against your edits. For the other Ultima articles, however, I think the sidebar is very suitable. Regards Miqademus (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, where is it said that templates like the unreferenced one should go on top of infoboxes? I changed it so it didn't overlap the infobox and space the article so that the template box touches the infobox at the top, it definitely looks better. Is there an MOS page or something that specifies that the unreferenced should go above it? -Mike Payne (T • C) 20:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Warren, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 19:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows2000.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Longhorn build 4074 screenshot.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Server 2003 New Connection Wizard.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Task Manager Performance.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Setup.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Vista Speech Recognition Tutorial.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:GC An Evening With Wally Londo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:GC Occupation Foole.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:GC On The Road.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Windows Longhorn Build 5048.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Alexfusco⁵ 23:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Longhorn Build 5048.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. BetacommandBot (talk) 04:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is starting to get very irritating Warrens. Appearently, you are very mistaken about this whole thing. First of all, Windows 2000 is still a supported operating system. This means that it still is still recieving security updates and phone support from Microsoft. An example of a "Discontinued Product" is one like Windows 98. Not only is Windows 98 no longer sold in stores, but it is also no longer supported by Microsoft. We had settled this during the summer, however, you still do not seem to listen nor care. Look at the discussion page for the article and read what it says. I seem to recall that we had settled on the fact that Windows 2000 is still considered a supported product, thus it is not discontinued. I also do not agree that this product is no longer available on the retail market. I recently have come across several copies of Windows 2000 Pro for sale in a few local computer shops in my area including Micro Center, don't know if you have ever heard of it, but it is a well known store. It is also is still avaiable from Microsoft as a download for subscribers of the MSDN Academic Alliance, so I really do not think it is discontinued. Also of note, I think we should stop using the term discontinued. Yes, it is correct in its usage which is what you seem to be stuck on. Yes, you are using the word correctly, but it is not the correct word to use in an article like this. Microsoft themselves do not use this term. Look at the Lifecycle Website. They do not even use this term. To Microsoft, a product is either supported, whether that is mainstream or extended, or end of life (unsupported). This term is really of little relavence, Microsoft still provides some support for the product and it is still avalable in limited quantities. You are wrong on this one buddy. It looks to me you have way too much time on your hands. Is Wikipedia your life, or do you have a real job? For some reason, I feel that you have a strong dislike for Windows 2000 and this is your reasoning, but I really do not know you so I could be wrong. Please take this all into consideration, and accept that you are wrong in this circumstance, and move on. Thanks. Jdlowery (talk) 01:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a settled issue Warrens, you just do not listen, did you even read the message I left here above? If not, go to the discussion page for the Windows 2000 article and read what is there. to me, you seem to not even care to take notice of the evidence I have given you. If you can't agree, than just leave the article alone, and I'll do the same. I really do not know what else to say to you. Jdlowery (talk) 23:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]