User talk:Rusty8

Hi mate, if you're a fan of Aussie rules, I suggest you take a look at WikiProject AFL (join by adding your name to the list of participants). Also take a look at Category:VFL/AFL players and feel free to drop me a line with any questions, or on the WP:AFL discussion page. Cheers!

R o gerthat ^Talk 12:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Rusty8, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Cameron Bruce

I wouldn't worry about it just yet. That user's last vandalism was 2 days ago, and (s)he has been warned since then. As for protecting a page, I can't do that -- only an administrator can, and I'm just an editor like yourself.

This is what you can do in the meanwhile, though. Should you come across anything that looks like vandalism, here's what you do:

First, assume good faith. The edit may be an honest error on the editor's part. I once referred to one such edit as vandalism, and it turned out to be an honest mistake from an experienced editor. So basically, I ended up being the bad guy, not the other editor.
Revert the edit. You can usually do that right away by clicking on the "undo" button for that edit (see the example of your message to me here.) When you click it, Wikipedia will tell you whether or not that edit can be undone that way. If so, then just save the way you would any normal edit.
If it is obvious vandalism, such as inserting nonsense, profanity, racist or homophobic content, etc, or blanking whole or parts of the article, then give a warning to the user. You'll find these warnings at WP:VANDALISM. They are usually applied starting at the first or mildest level, then with increasing severity for subsequent vandalism. But don't feed the troll. Do not call him/her names, be snarky, or use profanity, and especially do not do so on that user's User Page. That last act in itself is usually considered vandalism, and it lowers you to the vandal's level. Besides, oftentimes vandals vandalize to get a rise out of someone; nothing pleases them more than knowing they have p*ssed someone off (pardon my Anglo-Saxon) or upset them. Don't give them the satisfaction; it only escalates the situation, and they'll come back for more. The WP vandalism warnings are polite and neutral, with increasing firmness. It shows the vandal that their actions are little more than minor temporary annoyances, easily brushed aside with the click of a button, that ultimately their attempts will fail and they will be blocked, and the rest of us will just shrug and carry on as if nothing happened.
If, after numerous warnings, the vandalism has not abated, then go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and state your case there, following the instructions on that page. The admins can take it from there; they have the proper tools for dealing with vandals who won't go away.
Protection and semi-protection are usually only done on articles that attract a high level of attention, often on articles about religion, politics, race and culture -- you know, the stuff that causes fights in bars.
Don't forget to sign all your edits on talk pages etc with four tildes (~~~~) after each.
Again, in all your dealings, try to be calm, cool, and professional. It's hard, and God knows, I've failed on occasion. But, one tries to rise above it. And when one consistently answers abuse or vandalism or nastiness with calmness, reason, and politeness, well, it usually pays big dividends both in terms of one's own reputation and in the inevitable retreat of the trolls, either through going to look for someone more rewarding to provoke or being blocked for disruption.

Sorry if I'm being too wordy, or coming off as being preachy: that's not my intent. I just happened to notice that little edit just before your question to me ;). It's obvious you care about the project, so it's important then that you don't become a casualty -- especially a self-inflicted type! :D

I hope I've been some help; if there's anything here I need to clarify, or anything else you want to ask, give me a shout. There are many other experienced users -- editors and admins alike -- who would be only too glad to help out a new editor like yourself. You may want to check out Wiki-adoption -- it looks to me like a good system, and I wish I'd known about it when I joined.

Good luck, and happy editing. I'm sure I speak for all Wikipedians when I say we look forward to a long and prosperous collaboration with you. Cheers! --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 18:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Aloisi penalty.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Aloisi penalty - The Moment smaller.JPG. The copy called Image:Aloisi penalty - The Moment smaller.JPG 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, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself 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 02:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tbg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tbg.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 23:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:EdBang1.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:EdBang1.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) 20:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

NowCommons: Image:01022008(012).jpg

Image:01022008(012).jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Regurgitator performing at the Big Day Out in Adelaide.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Regurgitator performing at the Big Day Out in Adelaide.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 03:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Carsley

Hi, regarding this edit, I think the original research tag probably applied more to the wording "brilliant goal" than the game heading for a draw. I added a match report source and changed the wording to "fine goal" as used by the Observer reporter, anyway. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JOSEMI

Hi there RUSTY, VASCO from PORTUGAL here,

Regarding your edits in JOSEMI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josemi), in which you said "Deleting this conditional-tense NONSENSE", i will only say: i am PORTUGUESE, therefore i will make an occasional mistake in ENGLISH, even though i think "WOULD" can sometimes be used rather than in the conditional. Again, maybe i am not seeing this correctly, but there is no NONSENSE about my edits, EVER, at least intentionally.

Have a nice weekend, keep up the good work,

VASCO AMARAL - --217.129.67.28 (talk) 18:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JOSEMI - Further explanation

Hi there RUSTY, VASCO from PORTUGAL again,

I constructed this sentence for you (not on WIKIPEDIA) that, in case it is good ENGLISH, which i believe it is, may clarify the use of "WOULD" in a tense other than conditional.

"Andrés Iniesta first appeared with FC Barcelona first team in 2003, and WOULD reach his peak the following years, being the only player to play all 38 games in 2004-05's championship-winning squad". I don't think there is anything wrong with this sentence but, as i am not English, there is a chance it is slightly inaccurate.

CHEERS, VASCO AMARAL - --217.129.67.28 (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:MFC AWAY.png

Thank you for uploading File:MFC AWAY.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MFC AWAY.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:MFC AWAY.png

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 00:55, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:MFC AWAY.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MFC AWAY.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:EdBang1.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EdBang1.JPG. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:SO Adel 101107.JPG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SO Adel 101107.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]