geni wrote:
On 10/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email)
<alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You, we don't. Commons routinely deletes
things which are being used as
"original research". Please stop your trolling.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Stroudwater_Canal_Bridge.JPG
The caption is original reaseach (it is also wrong but that is do to
someone removeing so called POV from the original)
How so?
How so? And please note that you're accusing an en: Arbitrator of
"original research", so you'd better be damned sure you want to make
that claim.
You're wrong, as usual. "Primary source image" isn't the same as
"original research". An example of something that /is/ "original
research" and was deleted as such is
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Img052.jpg
I'll ask you again, for the second time, to stop your trolling, or, as
you call it, "rules lawyering". If you're so proud of being a rules
lawyer, you'd better remember that the lawyers will be first against the
wall when the revolution comes. And believe me, the revolution is coming
sooner than you think.
--
Alphax -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP