Googology Wiki
Googology Wiki

Archive 1

Archive 2

Purge this page:

Request of restoring

Could you restore this template as I requested in its talk page? Also, could you revert this page as I requested in its talk page? Both deletions are done without any arguments, although they are not violating site policies. In addition, could you please notify Cloudy and Username that what they are stating are violating FANDOM's rules?

p-adic 22:54, February 2, 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't want to start an edit war, so before doing it, I think it may be better to contact FANDOM's staff and verify that namely their actual rules are indeed violated on our Wiki. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 05:41, February 3, 2020 (UTC)
OK. If the problem will not be solved, I will ask FANDOM staff to show their opinion. (I hope that it will be solved by arguments, because I guess that they are not glad to involve FANDOM staffs in this problem.) Thank you.
p-adic 07:03, February 3, 2020 (UTC)
I asked FANDOM staff whether we are allowed to upload materials which we do not have permission by the copyright-holders. The answer is no. Also, we voted on these issues here. Now you can see that the deletion of the two contents above is not the dicision of this community. Could you revert the deletion this time?
p-adic 05:25, February 17, 2020 (UTC)
Yes, done. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 05:40, February 17, 2020 (UTC)
Thank you!
p-adic 05:59, February 17, 2020 (UTC)
Cloudy176 deleted this template again, and removed all deletion tags again. Could you revert them, and tell Cloudy176 not to abuse the user right of an admin? What Cloudy176 is doing is not following the decision by the community, but is based on his personal purpose to ignore copyright according to his comment. An admin does not have a user right to decide to do something ignoring a decision by the community according to FANDOM's guideline and another help page.
p-adic 22:39, February 17, 2020 (UTC)
Already it has been said in Discord. From Discord: he said that the reasoning why he reverted edits because he is worried that many images may disappear from pages if we'll enforce copyright strictly. So if I'll revert the changes, he will revert them again (that's actually an edit war, which isn't good either). I don't think that reverting makes much sense. Cloudy is the current owner of this Wiki, there is not much we can do here. Probably just we don't need to care about it too much: if you're personally worried about copyright, just don't upload copyright-protected images and it will be fine. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 05:08, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
> Cloudy is the current owner of this Wiki, there is not much we can do here.
No, you are wrong. As the page which I referred to above, there is no owner of this wiki. Admins are not allowed to own a wiki in FANDOM. Don't you think that it is an obvious abuse of the user right? If an admin persuades him in a reasonable way, then he might understand what awful he is doing. (If you have already tried to purshaded him, then please tell me.) Since Cloudy176 refuses to have an argument with other members, it is not an edit war but a vandalism by Cloudy176. Without arguments, I do not understand why Cloudy176 worries about it although he does not worry about the serious abuse of the user right, which is awfully problematic.
p-adic 05:45, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that it might be not correct because it's not followed by some laws. But we already had a conversation in Discord and he said that he won't change his opinion about copyright. This is because, as I said above, "the reasoning why he reverted edits because he is worried that many images may disappear from pages if we'll enforce copyright strictly". What do you want to do in that case? Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 07:03, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. At least, I clarified here that I am mainly putting deletion tags on materials uploaded by a blocked user. Could you tell him that I am not offending his personal belief? Also, could you persuade him that it is really awful to keep harassing materials to actual users, trolling materials, and fake screenshots which states as if Jonathan Bowers described kind of a racism number? Deleting them by suitable reasons does not mean deleting almost all images. What I do not understand at all is that he is removing deletion tags on such materials, although they have issues other than copyright. If he just wants to reject copyright, then he does not have to revert the deletion tags on images marked as harassing materials. Does Cloudy want to openly permit harrassing and racism in this community? Sorry for bothering you so much, but I honetly ask you to persuade him again.
p-adic 07:49, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Harassing and trolling materials should not exist here not because they're unlicensed, but because they're offensive. The reasons are quite different. I can just delete them, but keep normal pictures that are used in articles. I'll do it later when I'll have a bit more time. I don't think that Cloudy's personal belief will be offended by it. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 08:03, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
But Cloudy actually reverted the deletion tags on those halmful materials, although I clarified the reasons for the deletion. It means that Cloudy's reasoning on copyright is not true. He is just stating anything which justifies him in that point. In order to avoid an "edit war", which is just a vandalism by Cloudy, could you block him one day? Then he might consider what he has done. You have already persuaded him carefully. If a user continues to vandalise a wiki after warnings by other users, then we need to block the user. Also, FANDOM's help page says that abuse of user right is a common reason to be blocked. After then, please revert his deletion. At least, please revert the halmful meterials and this template, whose existence itself is meaningful.
p-adic 09:07, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Blocking an admin doesn't make sense at least because admin always can unblock himself. Also, why we need tags to delete it? If the material is harmful, then I'll delete it immediately. I'm going to delete all harmful materials which bothers you. But I also want to respect Cloudy's opinion. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 09:16, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
I've deleted the pictures which you flagged that I found unacceptable here. If you think that other pictures are bad, use this template. I hope we'll reach some compromise between you and Cloudy. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 09:32, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
> Blocking an admin doesn't make sense at least because admin always can unblock himself.
I am not requiring as a solution. I am requiring it in order to have him understand that other members are working with our appropriate user right unlike him. I hope that he will notice that what awful attitude he does, i.e. the abuse of user right, through the block. If it did not make sense, then why do we vote or discuss on how to keep this community good? An admin can delete anything that he or she dislikes, but it does not mean that voting or discussion is meaningless.
> Also, why we need tags to delete it?
It is because it does not violate any policy. As I clarified here, allowing an admin to delete anything which he or she dislikes is one of the most awful handling ways of a community. When I commented there, I thought that it would be an extreme imagination, but the case occurred. Therefore I sincerely ask you to revert the deletion.
> I've deleted the pictures which you flagged that I found unacceptable here.
Thank you!
> If you think that other pictures are bad, use this template.
I did, but Cloudy reverted them. The point is not only about copyright, but the attitude of Cloudy.
  1. He reverted/deleted what he dislikes without explaining the reasons in the summaries, the talk pages, or his blog posts, even if I requested so many times.
  2. He intensionally kept harassment, racism, and fake screenshots which seriously caused damage to the honour of Jonathan Bowers.
  3. He deleted a site policy, which is decided by a community in a legal and reasonable way.
  4. He deleted copyright warning, which is protected so that others cannot revert, and delete a template which does not violate any policy.
  5. He repeats the abuse of user right.
If he just wants to keep images, then he can ask members so in his blog post or talk pages together with a reasonable explanation. But he has never done so. We love him as a polite admin, and hence if he were asking sincerely and gave another solution, then we would listen to him. What we know is just that he is silently reverting what he dislikes. Is it sound?
p-adic 12:17, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
I see that it is right from some vision. I've personally asked Cloudy to talk with you. Please, wait for him. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 12:36, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the effort. I am sorry for bothering you so much... I appreciate your honest works to maintain this community sound.
p-adic 12:41, February 18, 2020 (UTC)
Now we see that Cloudy is not willing to be cooperative at all. Then could you revert the deletions of this template and this page by him? If he continues vandalism, please block him. It is not meaningless by the reason above.
p-adic 15:28, February 21, 2020 (UTC)
The template was already restored, and I reverted the Copyrightwarning page. Still waiting for Cloudy's opinion. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 15:38, February 21, 2020 (UTC)
Oh, sorry for being unaware of that, and thank you very much!
p-adic 23:24, February 21, 2020 (UTC)

Question on TREE

I submitted a question on the first source of TREE at its talkpage. I guess that you know something about it. Could you answer at the talkpage? Thank you.

p-adic 03:51, March 26, 2020 (UTC)

Please add license information

Your work here was tagged as "candidate for deletion" because it does not have license information. It appears that most images that you uploaded have no license information, and might be deleted. I suppose they are mostly made by yourself but as there is no information, they will be deleted in the current policy. I ask you to add {{selfcc}} tag or {{self}} tag with license description to the files that you uploaded. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 16:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding him or her instead of me. (I am sorry to forget noticing the uploader perhaps due to being so sleepy. Although Ikosarakt1 knows this issue because Ikosarakt1 did his or her best when we discussed the licensing issue, it was good for me to remind it.)
p-adic 22:48, 10 June 2021 (UTC)