User talk:Isis

Anyone know why Isis left exactly? For wikihistory.-戴&#30505sv 05:30, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)

Did she leave because she doesn't agree with WP's legal future? From my understanding, she left because she thinks that Tarquin insulted her and her ability as a legal worker (re: copyright status of an uploaded image). Subsequently, she attempted to sue Wikipedia for this, but the matter was inconclusive. The attempts to resolve the incident was private, by a couple of representative Wikipedians. Consequently, there was no trial, but no public reconciliation either.

--Menchi 05:39, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

IIRC it started with this diff: [1] (http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Talk:Juliette_Binoche&diff=634635&oldid=620871). Tarquin said "Isis' interpretation is mistaken. Photographs are covered by copyright". Isis saw this as a slanderous accusation that Tarquin knew more about law than she. She demanded that Tarquin retract it, and when he didn't, she stated her intention to sue. She was obviously in a litigious mood since her 6 month suspension for bad behaviour had just finished and she was allowed back in the courtroom again. Anyway, the discussion spread to about half a dozen different places: User talk:Tarquin, User talk:Isis, User talk:Jimbo Wales and wikien-l. Tarquin declared that he'd had enough and he was leaving Wikipedia, which prompted an immediate community response now in User talk:Tarquin/Archive 3. Isis left at about the same time, saying that she was going to file a lawsuit shortly thereafter. If the lawsuit ever materialised, I didn't hear anything about it. Tarquin came back after a short time. -- Tim Starling 06:14, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)

I understood User:Eloquence mentionned once to me that Isis admin status was not volontarily removed. ?

Suing just because someone implied he knew law better than her ? My...

what do you mean 6 months suspension ? on wikipedia or in real life ? Anthère

As a lawyer in real life. --Menchi 06:33, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I'd better get my facts straight, hadn't I? I don't want to get sued as well. I seem to remember there being a suspension that ran out a couple of months before the event in question, but I can't find it at the moment. There was this (http://www.cjnj.org/html/sanctions/166NA558.pdf) one year suspension, this (http://courts.state.de.us/supreme/ordsops/178-2000.pdf) three year suspension, this (http://www.courts.state.md.us/attygrievance/sanctions01.html) reciprocal action, this (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/delawarestatecases/391-1998a.doc) one year suspension... Nope, can't find it. -- Tim Starling 07:01, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)

Oh. Well...I read the archive at Tarquin. I remember part of the story for what I read on the ML. Then left for holidays, and never really understood what really happened in the end. I think that if a contributor was legally threatened by another contributor, that is something that should be mentionned in the history of Wikipedia. It certainly could happen again. But not if it pains Tarquin. I am glad he came back :-) Anthère

I was also interested in looking over this incident in Wikipedia's history. However, perhaps someone should look through these "deleted" materials before publishing them again publicly or summarizing them to make sure there is no defamation or personality/privacy rights violations. While any disciplinary decisions that are published are part of the public record commenting on them may require tack and deference to the unreolved nature of allegations (i.e. wait until any claims have been permanently extinguished before writing the history on them). Alex756 10:08, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Guys, if you think it's useful to document the whole sorry affair, then go ahead. As far as I am concerned, the matter is ancient history. -- Tarquin 10:15, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Ok, I guess I'll close the thread I started-- thanks Tarquin, and Alex, well be looking fo'wad t'yer brief on the matter ;). -戴&#30505sv 17:40, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC) ps.I wouldnt be too worried about defamation suit, just simply for archiving the legal argument --keeping any speculation about "reasons for leaving" separate.-SV

Contents

1 If you ever return... 2 Unverified images 3 Unverified images 4 Unverified images 5 Star Trek: Insurrection

If you ever return...

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

1. ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
2. ...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit&section=new)| talk) 14:30, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Iditarod_map.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the imagesand I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 01:53, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Imperial_regalia.JPG

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 03:24, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Ditto_machine.JPG

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 05:47, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Star Trek: Insurrection

I replaced your by a cleaner version of the DVD cover, hope you don't mind --Astrowob 04:22, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)