User talk:Mike Nobody/Archive2005

This is an archive of discussions/messages/notes which formerly appeared on my talk page. Please visit that page to start a new discussion - do not modify this page!

===
 * Hi Mike, I guess this is kindof flattering... I see you also liked my memory-alpha  banner I found on the site. :-)  I'm getting quite good at the codes to use for different colours and background stuff, so if you need any help, just shout for me.  Zsingaya  Talk 17:03, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't speak which-ever language that was... I've just created my own geocities site with those gifs on, so I'm no longer hotlinking from that other site, but from my own site. Zsingaya  Talk 17:30, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Duplicating articles
Hi I noticed you created a couple of articles, Scotch and Tilonius IV -- these articles, however, already exist -- Scotch whiskey and Tilonus IV (i'm not sure but I think Tilonius is an incorrect spelling). I'm setting them as redirects back to the pre-existing articles.

Please try our search feature to try and see if an article already exists before you create a new one. Also, try using the "what links here" link to make sure your article isn't an orphans -- an "orphan" article is an article which has no links to it. Please try and make sure that at least one other article links to the new article you make -- or else no one will ever be able to see or find the one you created. Also, if you check to see if anything links to an article when you make it, it could give you an idea whether the name is spelled right -- for example, absolutely no articles link to Tilonius IV, so that's a good clue it might be misspelled, but if you were interested in visiting, you'd see the correct spelling.

Try to read the Memory Alpha:Manual of Style for more ways to format your articles rather than creating stubs. Thanks for your contributions! -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 13:10, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)


 * I was filling out the requested subjects with active links, not really creating from scratch. However, yes, I noticed some of the misspelling but wasn't sure how to correct it..besides starting over with a new page. I was going to get back to what wasn't already covered.--Mike Nobody 13:19, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

If there's a page or link that you think might be misspelled, you can always move the page to the correct spelling, or fix the link to point to the correct spelling. Starting over with a new page can make it difficult to do either -- you can't move a page to a new location if someone created a new page at that location, and if you created a duplicate page at a new location, we have two of the same article, which gets in the way of building the web because other users aren't sure which one to link to.

Even if a subject is "requested" somewhere, that still means you have to follow Memory Alpha:Policies and guidelines and make sure the links to and from it are in order, and that it is tagged correctly.

If you ever see something you aren't sure how to correct, feel free to ask Memory Alpha:Administrators or Memory Alpha:Archivists how to fix it... thanks for your time! :) -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 13:31, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)


 * I would like to add to that Particle Synthesis-- since particle synthesis already exists. Also please watch your capitalizations of words. These terms "Particle Synthesis" and "Legal Intercessor" are not proper names. We actually have a link somewhere in this site that explains that and if I get some time later, I will point you in that direction. And once again, please don't forget to cite your sources and begin your articles with something similiar to "A legal intercessor is a.... instead of just jumping into the article mid-thought. --Alan del Beccio 07:13, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Memory Alpha:Naming conventions
 * Memory Alpha:Cite your sources

Highlighting text
Your contributions are extremely appreciated. However, please try to use ' to highlight text, rather than .

From Memory Alpha:Follow highlighting conventions:

The first introductory sentence of an article should include the title word or phrase that the article is about, and this title should be boldfaced. This highlighting convention makes it easy for the casual reader to identify the topic.

Don't highlight every single use of the word or phrase, though — just the first one. After the first time the word is seen in bold, the reader will know what the article is about, and so any further highlighting is unnecessary. --Defiant | Talk 09:53, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Images
If you could, please be careful naming images you upload; specifically all Caps, and that you don't need to list the image source (movie/ep) in the title, just in the description. Also, please list the main thing in the pic first, as somewhere we have a list of images categorized in Alphabetical order. Just a reminder. - AJHalliwell 01:42, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * I would just like to reiterate what AJ said, by adding a link to our image description name and content help page. File:Ent 1x063 silent enemy.jpg clearly does not fall within the confines of proper naming conventions. Thanks. --Alan del Beccio 22:38, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Better with images, but the names are much to long. You may want to look over some of the other uploaded image names on the New images gallery. - AJHalliwell 03:00, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * I hate to sound repetitive, but you don't need all that info in the image title. IE, File:Starbase lounge star trek III the search for spock.jpg would be better as Starbase lounge.jpg. All that info in the title makes it more difficult for others to utilize your images. If you notice, AJ has gone and reuploaded some of your images under better titles and deleted the originals. -Platypus Man | Talk 04:41, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Dude, you're just not listening. Don't put the episode title in the image title! It doesn't help! -Platypus Man | Talk 06:19, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

re:Picture Names
The source is needed in the description in the page, not the title. As for your Search for Spock thing, the only reason I don't think it is a screen cap is because all of the people and the scene look animated. Yes, I remember the scene, but it looks more like someone drew it, rather than did a screencap. If it's animated, that should be stated and the source should be given. -Platypus Man | Talk 19:19, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Image Descriptions
OK. I know I said that you should remove the episode titles from the image title, but that doesn't mean that you should remove it from the description. That is where it should go, or else you can get a slapped on it. Also, a more thoughtful description would be nice. For example, look at your File:Model starship 22nd century.jpg. Nice image, but your description of simply "model starship 22nd century," like the title, is simply insufficient (insufficient description, fine title). Instead, look at what I put: "A model starship flown by a young Jonathan Archer in the 22nd century.  Also, when the image is used on a page, another description should be used (unlike the same one you used on model). I hate to keep complaining to you like this, but someone has to do it. No hard feelings, I hope. -Platypus Man | Talk 19:50, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Memory Alpha is not a place for politics. Also, as I assume you intend to use the simpsons and bush pics for your user page, we don't allow pictures solely for user pages. Try going to (or googling) Photobucket, and upload a picture there, then you can use the code on your user page. - AJHalliwell 02:11, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Reiterating, as you've uploaded another image under these terms: Personnal images aren't allowed to be uploaded on Memory Alpha, and will be deleted shortly (especially the Bart Simpson one, as "The Simpsons" is owned by a company other then paramount) Try uploading images here:, and using the code on your user page. - AJHalliwell 02:34, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Unagreed upon Categories
Please stop adding categories that have not been agreed upon at Memory Alpha:Category suggestions. Especially ones such as "Bynar" or "Kataan", as they have so few articles related to tehm there is little point to have a category for them. - AJHalliwell 03:13, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Should I just skip putting categories at the bottom? I haven't been keeping up with voted-on criterea.--Mike Nobody 03:15, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * I think the best course of action is to either go check what you missed and/or suggest whatever category you used that hadn't been approved, and maybe check Special:Categories to see what's what. Weyoun 03:52, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Contributions
Hey there. I just wanted to say I think you're doing a great job with the articles you have created and edited, especially those for performers. One thing I wanted to mention, though - when linking years (i.e. Vic Tayback's death year of 1990) you should link it to a production timeline article (i.e. 1990 productions) rather than a Trek timeline article (i.e. 1990), since Tayback was never actually mentioned in the fabric of the Trek universe. Also, as for birth years, in most cases dealing with actors on the original series (born before ), those should be left unlinked for the same reasons - there were no productions prior to 1964, so real-world years prior to 1964 should be left blank. (I know Star Trek birthdays and some other pages don't follow this, but that's just because those have yet to be fixed.) Again, though, you're contributions are excellent and much appreciated. Keep up the good work! :) --From Andoria with Love 13:09, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Quick question:
 * Who originally wrote "Lysergic acid diethylamide, commonly called LSD, LSD-25, or acid, is a powerful semisynthetic psychedelic drug"? Because to me, it looks exactly like the first sentence of the wikipedia entry of the same name. --Alan del Beccio 06:11, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * It's also the first sentence on LSD in my chemistry book. Should I alter the chemical composition of an article to submit it, too?--Mike Nobody 06:18, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

How about writing it in your own words? And since we are at it...your page on hippie also appears to be a heavily plagerized copyvio. This isn't some sort of game where we try to see what intellectual property we can get away with stealing. Because this is the third time I, personally, have caught this, I am giving you fair warning that as according to our policies: "In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project." You've had plenty of time to think about this since my last post regarding your previous copyvio, so consider this your last warning. --Alan del Beccio 06:23, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * The link you posted was a re-use of the article in question. Which, by copyright law makes it fair game. You cannot allow one person to use your copyrighted words and not someone else. But, just to hedge my bets, I've written the author to get his blessing. Actually, his theory on the subject is the same as mine, which I've said for years. He just put it on a webpage first. When I get a reply, where do I send it? What do I do? And when do I get my article back?--Mike Nobody 06:57, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I posted more than one link, each of which contains several sentences that are word for word (or damn close), makes it a copyright violation. The fact that I copied an entire sentence from "your" article into a google bar and got a near identical return in the results confirms that much. For that matter, and really, the fact of the matter is, is that ZERO of that was referenced from Star Trek, was terminology used on Star Trek, nor bears any revelance to Star Trek. So even if you got the blessing from the blog site poster (or whatever), that doesn't excuse the fact that it has nothing to do with or no origins in (terminology or otherwise) from any Trek source. --Alan del Beccio 07:59, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * Mike, Alan is completely right here. It's a simple rule: Don't copy from other pages (with some small exceptions detailed on the page Alan already linked to several times). If you think this rule is wrong for whatever reasons, you may want to discuss that on Memory Alpha talk:Copyrights instead of simply ignoring the rule. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 11:09, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

RE: Roses from the South. For the final time, I strongly suggest you contribute original content when writing "real world" articles.--Alan del Beccio 17:42, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Performer articles
Hey, Mike. I know the extent of information to put on performer's articles is currently in debate, but that doesn't mean you can't put anything at all. The information is still valid, it's just that it will probably be slimmed down later (depending on the extent of the info). Just, you know, don't go too much into it, because the more you research, the more it'll seem like a waste of time if it has to be slimmed down later. Know what I mean? :/ --From Andoria with Love 03:10, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Reversion
Mike, we have already been through this: major works are not irrelevant. Removing info and claiming it is irrelevant just because you are angry about the current debate is not acceptable, and could be considered vandalism. --From Andoria with Love 04:33, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, please don't forget to sign your comments in talk pages. Also, further explanation on your comment -- for example, what on the article is/was irrelevant -- would be helpful. I can understand why you are dissatisfied with the idea of limiting article information, but that is no reason to wipe out valid information of an actor's major works, especially when that actor has few works to begin with. --From Andoria with Love 04:43, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

''How little or how much I contribute is my business, knowing it will be edited again later. If my research is not appreciated, it won't get done. I see no reason to work in futility, seeing that work dismissed as irrelevant and deleted, when it is not irreleveant. My time is only wasted when my work is destroyed.''
 * You are correct in that the amount of your contribution is your business. I was only informing you just in case you thought NONE of your contributions were appreciated (which, judging from the rest of your response, you do). Also, you must understand that anything you submit becomes the property of the community and can and will be edited either slightly or mercilessly. So if you do not wish to contribute further because of this, well, then that is your decision.

''Ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. Just who considers what vandalism? You?''
 * The repeated removal of relevant information can be constituted as vandalism, especially without a clear explanation as to why it was removed (see next response). And, no, I do not decide what is vandalism, but removing what could be relevant (there's that word again) information out of anger seems to me like vandalism. (Note that I probably would not block you for doing this, although I would be forced to protect the pages if it continued.)

''The information deleted makes clear what is irrelevant. Quantity of works is beside the point. There is no cited Star Trek related information in my omissions. Hypocrites make poor judges.''
 * I fail to see where I have been hypocritical. I stated that an actor's information should include major works for which they are known and any works in which they worked with either major Trek folks or several Trek folks. Looking at the information for the actors I recently edited, that's pretty much all I see - their major works. Also, you must keep in mind that a decision regarding the amount of information has not yet been reached -- in the end, the community may choose your style. Who knows? And lastly, while the information you deleted may have made clear what you believe to be irrelevant, how is that going to help someone who comes in later, looks at the talk page, and just sees "irrelevant" (for example, Broik)? This is why you should always explain youself, as well as sign your comments.

And, I'm spent. :P --From Andoria with Love 05:45, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Compromise
I don't need to refamiliarize myself with the policies -- I just did about an hour ago. :P However, I believe I have reached a compromise; see here. --From Andoria with Love 07:08, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Gorshin's voice work
Hey. Just curious - where did you learn that Gorshin replaced Mel Blanc as the voice of those cartoon characters? Also, what do you think of the compromise? Does that sit will with you? Feedback is important if the community is to function normally. :) --From Andoria with Love 07:46, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * That's all I was trying to convey. The information may seem minor to some but of more signifigance to others. I know noone wants a cluttered page. But, that's why we need to find ways to make this work. His voice credits are on IMDb, but I'm considering looking further into it. There's no info on that site to say if Mel Blanc's son quit completely or if Warner Bros. just needed someone else to do certain voices.--Mike Nobody 07:53, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Ahh, I see it now... don't know how I missed that. Anyway, I'm not sure if those would be something he would be well remembered for, but it's a nice lead-in to his portrayal of George Burns, so I'll leave it as is. But Noel Blanc (Mel's son) only voiced his father's characters for a short time after his father's death. They only produce the cartoons once in a while now, so they probably just had Gorshin do those three then decided to use other voices. Anyways, I'm glad we could reach an understanding, and good luck with your cartoon search. :) --From Andoria with Love 08:27, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

re:Administrator
See Memory Alpha:Nominations for administratorship. There's a link explaining what is expected from an admin, and if you want you can suggest yourself on that page. Just edit the page and you will find some commented code which you can just copy, paste and edit. -- Cid Highwind 11:51, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

reply to comment on Cid's page
No, actually, I didn't miss the point; I knew what you were getting at, which is why I suggested the compromise. Anyway... (searches comment at Cid's for signs of a fit) Nope, only sarcasm. (Searches for signs of personal attack) Nope, only explaining myself. (Looking for recently discovered copyright violations) found one! :-P --From Andoria with Love 12:19, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

re:Technical Question
You should be able to resize an external image by using HTML code directly (see below): Please keep in mind that both HTML code and external images should be avoided on article pages, but you could still use it on your user page (sparingly, MA user pages are not meant to be personal homepages). Also, check if hotlinking the images is allowed by the source site.


 * < img src="FULL_IMAGE_URL" width="123px"/ > (minus the blanks inside the brackets)

--Cid Highwind 16:38, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Apparently, that didn't work. I tried some other variants, but couldn't find a solution yet. Sorry. -- Cid Highwind 21:51, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Mike, thanks for the question. I've always struggled with this... now I've got incentive to try and find a code for it somewhere on the site! I'll get back to you if I find anything.  Zsingaya  Talk 22:24, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)



OK, I give up... theoretically, and according to this website:, this should be the correct code, but for some reason its not working... Zsingaya Talk 23:08, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... I think the problem here is that MA seems to show a picture even without writing any HTML code at all:

http://www.echoecho.com/rainbow.gif - see, all I did here was write the address. I'm stumped... anyone else have any ideas? Zsingaya Talk 23:14, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm having a converstation with an HTML expert on the main wikipedia site here, if you want to see what he says. Zsingaya  Talk 06:47, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Folks, why so complicated? The Bart-image is hosted on photobucket.com, so just open it with MS Paint (or something better) and resize it to the appropriate width - then upload it again and that's it. (Btw: there's a "stair effect" with the new "Shortcuts" sidebar) --Memory 20:15, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Mike, it doesn't look like theres a way to resize externally hosted images on MA. The only way I think you're going to get round it, is if you copy the image, make it smaller and then host it yourself on a geocities site or something like that.  Obviously, you can't upload it onto the MA server, because its nothing to do with Star Trek.  See you around.  Zsingaya  Talk 19:14, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

From Memory's talk page:

Hi there. On Mike Nobody's talk page, you mentioned something about "stairs effect", or something. Whats that about? Also, where is this shortcut toolbar? Thanks. Zsingaya Talk 19:16, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd already considered that option but not really happy with the results of the tools available to me. As for the "stairs", I've been working on that. I haven't had as much of a problem. You must have a HUGE screen, man, to get it that bad! Wow!-- Mike Nobody =/\= 01:29, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Look at this:

http://foto.arcor-online.net/palb/alben/58/3652258/1280_6332326630366238.jpg

--Memory 23:04, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

User:Mike Nobody
Memory Alpha:What Memory Alpha is not:
 * User:Mike Nobody : This page contains several dozen links to off-site mp3 files. I don't feel like checking any or all of them, but judging the file names, at least some of them seem to be from published artists without being properly attributed or anything (see: Memory Alpha:Copyrights). On top of that, it is a big frakking list of files that have nothing to do whatsoever with Memory Alpha or Star Trek. User pages are not storage space (see: Memory Alpha:Your user page), so even if this not considered a copyvio for whatever reasons, I think it still needs to be removed. Note: Since this is a user page, I did not edit it to remove content or put a copyvio message on it, but instead left a note on the user talk page. -- Cid Highwind 10:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed (per below) --Alan del Beccio 21:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * #5 Storage space. Do not use Memory Alpha for storing material unrelated to the project. (This includes your personal User: pages.)

There is no non-Trek material being stored on my Memory Alpha userpage. All non-Trek related files are hosted elsewhere. It was Captainmike who originally pointed out I could host such non-trek images and files on sites like www.photobucket.com, whom I hadn't even heard of before he recommended them. I was under the impression that a userpage wasn't about Star Trek anyway, and it was available to the user to pretty much communicate as they wish. I was under the impression that it is personal space to share interests with other users, tell a little about yourself, etc. What's the point if they're not?-- Mike Nobody =/\= 04:33, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sheesh. This page definitely needs a cleanup... --Memory 22:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Based on the guidelines I posted above, "the point is" to store material related to "the project." Additionally, the issue here is the huge list of links to copyrighted music more than the images.  It's a profile page on a Star Trek wikisite, not a MySpace or Friendster profile. --Alan del Beccio 05:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I hope we're not talking about deleting the user's entire page here. Just remove the copyrighted material. Which is pretty much everything on the page, so... I dunno. Regardless, I agree that the page is a series of copyright infringements and should be dealt with in any way possible. --From Andoria with Love 16:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I think we're not talking about deletion. First, this is about potentially copyrighted material which would have to be removed - and I think we already agree on that. The best solution would be for Mike to do that himself soon - otherwise, one of the admins would have to do that. Second, I think a clarification of our policies is necessary. The copyrights policy should make clear that even externally linked pages or files should not infringe any copyrights (otherwise that link should be a candidate for immediate removal), while the user page policy should list filetypes that are "allowed" to be externally linked from a user page. We should restrict ourselves to weblinks and image files only. -- Cid Highwind 17:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Re:Mike: There's still some discussion about what exactly is or isn't "allowed" on a user page - but what should be very clear is the simple fact that no user should be allowed to post direct links to copyrighted material (exception: material is related to Star Trek AND fair use guidelines apply) on Memory Alpha. A link to an mp3 file by a well-known, published group is neither the one nor the other - and since we can't be bothered to check every single file a user want to link to, I think we should disallow direct links to mp3 files completely. Additionally, it isn't necessary to have these file lists of you only want to "share interests". -- Cid Highwind 18:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've had mp3 files and images linked to my userpage for several months without any complaints. What suddenly brought this on? I have a definite feeling this is politically motivated, since I'm only getting all this after my recent additions. I couldn't contribute for awhile, after some computer problems. The last wiki upgrade seems to have cleared it up. I came back, added some links, and all of a sudden I feel like I've been dragged to an intervention. What's the deal?-- Mike Nobody =/\= 22:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

The "deal" is that I just found out about those links when I checked your last edits to your page. This is neither "personal" nor "political", and I apoligize if my earlier comments sounded like it was. Still, the fact that this is copyrighted content remains. -- Cid Highwind 22:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * And, I'll repeat, all non-trek content is not on Memory Alpha servers. Captainmike had this discussion with me when I first started contributing to Memory Alpha last year. he (and a few other administrators) made me take the Bart Simpson picture down, but recommended hosting elsewhere. If its not on M/A servers, where's the justification to take down "links". It isn't true that you "just found out" I had these links either, since we've communicated many times before. So, something's instigated this recently. The only recent thing I've done is add a few more links and take down my "away" notice.-- Mike Nobody =/\= 01:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's an aweful paranoid response. The fact is, at least in my case, I don't ever read user pages, but "just found out" about yours recently, as well. It sort of stood out after you made a good dozen edits to it in one night, yet no actual contributions to the site-- which in itself seems a bit odd. That's when I decided to see what was going on with it. Unlike Cid, I didn't mention anything about it becuase I really didnt want to deal with this otherwise prime example of your overreacting to "the Man" -- this entire conversation seems to be coming across as. I suspect Cid "just found out" about it under the same conditions. --Alan del Beccio 01:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Memory Alpha:Your user page

''I don't know if this is M/A or just me, but, sidebars aren't showing on my screen. The code is still there and seems OK. I may be having problems with my computer, but it seems to only affect M/A. Please reply.-- Mike Nobody =/\= 21:04, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)''
 * Hi Mike. All I can definitely say is that it is not MA - the sidebars work just fine for me. It sounds as if the page doesn't load completely, which could have a variety of reasons, including temporary issues with MA's servers and/or your internet connection. It might also be a problem with the CSS files: click on the following link and force a reload of that page (Ctrl+F5, probably): . If all this doesn't help, perhaps you can describe your problem in more detail or make a screenshot? -- Cid Highwind 21:51, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

And what has this to do with anything? Fact is, I talked to you in the past. Fact also is, I don't have to visit your user page to do so. Additionally, while I might have had a short look at your user page in the past, just now I had a look at a diff of your recent changes to it, where all those filenames were nicely marked in red (while the filenames themselves are not directly visible by just looking at the page). So, basically, my story is very similar to the one Gvsualan already told you. Don't accuse me of lying or having any hidden agenda.

Anyway, let us now leave this tangent - your user page still contains links to copyrighted mp3 files. Do you want to remove these links yourself? -- Cid Highwind 10:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I am not accusing you of lying. You are. You've since deleted some of our discussions on your talk page regarding external links. The one I posted is just about all that's left on mine. So, the evidence of most of your lying is now deleted. But, however you want to distort this, there is the issue of what is M/A's policy toward user pages actually is.

According to M/A policy, "your user page is yours. No other user is allowed to edit your user page. If another user edits your personal user page, it might be considered an act of vandalism. An Administrator may edit an external link to avoid linking out to sites which are classified as "spam" ''.Uploaded files that are not directly related to an article will be deleted immediately.


 * So the question is "Have I linked to sites classified as 'spam'?" and "Why?" and "Have I uploaded files not related to the project?" The answers are "No." and "No." If I uploaded Mp3s or images unrelated to the project to M/A's servers, you'd be right that I was violating M/A policy. But, I haven't. If it's on my page it's my business, not yours. If it's on another server, it's their business, not yours. And drawing this arbitrary line between copyrighted Mp3s and copyrighted images makes no sense at all, since it's arguable that the whole site is violating copyright law every day. "Fair Use" law has been weakened so much over the last decade or so that it is meaningless as a defense. You're allowed to do what the copyright holder allows you to do. It's simple as that. Get on their bad side and they'll yank everything, no matter how much anyone tries to claim "Fair Use".


 * Is there a bureaucrat to consult on this?-- Mike Nobody =/\= 23:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Although not listed as such, Cid is a bureaucrat here, which is probably a good reason why he started this discussion, and is consulting you on the subject. And I ask again, what is with this "conspiracy theory" talk? Seriously. You of all people should be arguing violations of copyrights due to the simple fact that you should have been suspended quite some time ago for your numerous copyright violations that you clearly committed, and that I need not remind everyone about. Yet for some reason you are still around and continue to tempt fate and continue to kick and scream and call us "liars" like an 8 year old would about us enforcing anything against you and this thin line you like to walk that everyone else here seems to understand.
 * For one, why are you even here? You clearly have more interest in writing a personal webpage here than actually contributing to the progress of this site. In fact, in the past 5 weeks you have made 0 (that is "ZERO") contributions to any Star Trek articles on Memory Alpha. However, in the same period of time you have made 35 edits to your user page. Take a step back from that timeline two weeks and you may notice that in the past 7 weeks you have made all of 15 minor Star Trek article contributions to Memory Alpha, yet have made almost 90 edits to your user page!! Clearly this is an abuse of the space this website is offering you and clearly this goes beyond the point intended in having a user page.
 * Secondly, "Your user page is not storage space"/"Do not use Memory Alpha for storing material unrelated to the project." Storing material or using storage space constitutes more than uploading images or files to...but also includes large amounts of text and links. The simple fact is, your user page is 45 kilobytes long, it rivals in length for the 13th longest page on this site! So despite the fact that, yes, your user page is yours, you seem not to have taken the time to ask yourself how related to the project your user page is.
 * Thirdly, one can clearly see that only a relatively small section of Star Trek related info on the page and the rest has nothing to do with this site, your contributions to it, or Star Trek in general, whatsoever. Somehow I don't see how the inclusion of links to copyrighted songs on your user page, which implicate this site for providing links to illegal songs, constitutes matters related the topic. This is quite clearly an abuse of the user space this site has provided for you. (I also highly suggest that you read this page to better understand that there is more than an "arbitrary line" separating what you argue and what this website is established on.) The music industries crack down on the illegal downloading of songs wasn't just for "shits and giggles," it had everything to do with copyrights, one should clearly see that your version of "song sharing" here is no different. You neither own the rights to the songs, nor did the Beatles (among others) likely give you permission to post them here.
 * So despite what Memory Alpha:Your user page says, Memory Alpha is not here to help you create free webspace. Keep in mind, too, that our regulations are not static. "We should continue to add to this list as we discover interesting new ways of not writing encyclopedia articles!" Your 0:35 ratio of "not writing encyclopedia articles" in combination with violating music copyrights seem to firmly define a new discovery for us to address, and thusly have. Otherwise, I think Cid asked you a question (several, really) that you have managed to reply to with everything, short of an answer. --Alan del Beccio 03:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Mike, I think the community has made up its mind, that your page doens't fit according to our current policy. My suggestion to you is to delete your page, save it as a txt on your computer, and debate our policy in the appropriate places.  If you win, you have your archive to back up your old page.  Either way, this has got to end. Jaz 04:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Alan, take a chill pill, please. You'll give yourself a stroke. Breathe slowly. Breathe. There. You OK?
 * My computer has been acting funny in the last few weeks, as noted above. So, I went a long time without contributing. Prior to that, I had a lot of my work destroyed. I believe that you, Al, were one of the culprits in chopping down my contributions. That's why, before the computer glitch, I spent more time working on my page than other articles. The contributions weren't being appreciated and, according to stated policy, my page isn't really anyone else's business (unless you want to drop a compliment, those are gladly accepted). Talk of "conspiracy theories" comes more from guys like yourself, Al, than me. I simply pointed out that the chronology of events fit a particular pattern. If you want to call that pattern "The Man", that's your conclusion not mine. I'm more interested in what can be done while some only see what can't.


 * If this is such a big deal, I'll archive the links that connect to questionably copyrighted mp3s until the matter can be brought up with someone with more authority over this site.-- Mike Nobody =/\= 06:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, that's all we really wanted in the first place, so thank you. However, I would just like to remind you as to the reasons your contributions were being chopped down -- they were either, A.) unneccessary to the purposes of this wiki, B.) non-canon or irrelevent (i.e., not cited anywhere on Trek), and, of course, C.) copyright violations. The only reason we "culprits" chopped down your contributions was because they were against policy -- a policy you seem to love bending and shaping to fit your needs, or ignoring completely. For example, you have again stated that what is on your user page is not of your business. As Alan has pointed out, this is not true; he quoted the following policies: "Your user page is not storage space"/"Do not use Memory Alpha for storing material unrelated to the project." Yes, this means your user page, as well. And as for anyone having "more authority" on this site -- the community IS the authority. And, as Jaz pointed out, the community is in full agreement that the content of your user page is way out of line and is an extreme violation of copyright. Lastly, patronizing Alan isn't going to win you any hearts or minds, nor will it make your case any stronger. If you cannot accept the truth, then perhaps it would be best if you leave. --From Andoria with Love 07:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, Charles, you're not one to talk; ''Trotter had a less-than-auspicious start as a named member of Memory Alpha. Unfamiliar with the rules and policies of this wiki, he began by adding useless nonsense to a few articles and also blanked articles. However, he was quickly set straight by the likes of Alan del Beccio, and has since become a valued member of Memory Alpha -- or so he likes to think. He also likes to think that he's become an expert on the Star Trek universe; however, he admits that he is always learning new, interesting details... but he wouldn't have it any other way. '' Should we delete your unrelated items as well? I don't remember that pic of you in any episode, or your personal views. Also, starting off with that passive-aggressive beginning and then attacking me again reflects more poorly on yourself than me.

I've tried to work within M/A policies, but nothing ever pleases you. Even my own userpage. If I'm restricted to only put Star Trek related items on "my" page (as described in M/A policies) then it is not my page anymore. The two objectives are contradictory and self-exclusive. I believed that the goal of M/A was to cultivate a community of people interested in progressing the project. That means more than just showing up for work. It also means allowing for personal freedom and expression (which not everyone is going to agree on). That's how people are encouraged to contribute and get involved. When the joy is strangled out of it, the project loses human resources and just becomes about a small clique who think they know everything. In every social organization (governments, business, associations, etc.) that's the kiss of death.-- Mike Nobody =/\= 20:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Mike, this isn't the government out screw you, or the man out to get you. We are just trying to uphold the rules and regulations that the community has agreed upon.  Don't get angry at people for upholding those rules, abide by them, and then at a later date you can discuss the validity of those rules.  Maybe one day User pages will become a blog of some kind, but not according to our current policies, and those are the ones you need to abide by.  Jaz 20:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course, if you were conspiring against him, we wouldn't expect you to admit it, so the more you deny it and claim this is not a personal matter, the more you incriminate yourselves and make him a martyr for the cause of... wait, what was the cause aain? I forgot, because the entire thing seems pretty silly to me. Let's be honest here - Mike, you wanted attention (why else would you repeatedly edit a user page for an account you've not used in the past month?) and now you got it. Why not just put all that stuff on a subpage of your Wikipedia user page, where the community is way too big for them to give a damn what you do, and put a link to that here?


 * On a completely unrelated note, people need to stop coming into the IRC channel, going "Anyone here?" and leaving five minutes later. Within ten minutes of you doing that, there's invariably someone else doing the same thing. Just open a new tab with IRC in it (or download mIRC and minimize it to the tray with flashing on) and leave it open for a while. :P --Vedek Dukat Talk 21:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I see he has again attempted to twist the subject and the policies to his advantage to no avail and has again used the term "passive-aggressive", likely in reference to his belief we are conspiring against him. Regardless, he has done as we asked (at least, I think he did), so we can let the matter drop now. For the record, Mike, as we have already said, there's nothing wrong with minor biographical info and one or two non-Trek related pics (hosted elsewhere); your page just went way too far with it, to the point of including copyrighted material, so please don't attempt to use that to your defense again as it really didn't work, since the issue here was copyrighted material, not your own biographical info. :P 'See you... out there! --From Andoria with Love 00:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)