User talk:Cduke250/archive1

From DreamHost
< User talk:Cduke250
Revision as of 19:19, 16 December 2007 by Mousee (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Regarding Your Edit of Talk:DHSOTM - Request and Warning

Please see my copmments in response to your most recent edit of Talk:DHSOTM, paricularly the final paragraphs:

"...regarding your closing remark of "to be continued...", please note the tag placed at the top of this page, and respect the policy that discussion pages in the wiki are for discussion of the *article*, not DH policies, in general or particular, but *articles*. You are welcome to take the discussion directly to Dreamhost Support, or to the Forums (even though the whole issue has already been pretty thoroughly discussed there) where ongoing discussions of policies and procedure are appropriate. Do *not* attempt to continue *this* discussion here, as it is no longer about the *article*, but about the policy and Josh's action regarding the reward.

Continuing to discuss *that* here, after you have been asked not to, is not only counter productive, but could result in temporary of permanent banning of your user from editing the wiki. Let it go, or discuss it elsewhere. Thanks!" -- Rlparker 00:22, 26 June 2007 (PDT)

Your Edit to Talk:DHSOTM

Do *NOT* place ad graphics linking to your site(s) *or* links with embedded functionality to manipulate DHSOTM votes on pages in this wiki - even in the guise of a question. Ask your question directly to DH, as it relates to the use of such an ad on your own site, but do not put it here. I take the position that anything that is not illegal is suitable for your user page, and have not touched it there. That said, other sysops may feel differently about that, and if they object to the ad's presence on your user page, they may well remove it from there also. There *is* an argument to be made the DH Anti-Spam policies may prohibit such a posting. --Rlparker 02:04, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

Ok sorry, I didn't realize it was spam to upload an image to the wiki that linked directly to the dreamhost panel, and that was the purpose of the external article as well. I removed it from my userpage and theTalk:DHSOTM page but please point me to documentation that details your above Talk. --Cduke250 04:03, 1 June 2007 (PDT)
No problem, and thanks for starting to police your links, but spare me the "I didn't realize" nonsense: the "image" was an ad promoting voting for your site, and the link to the panel was only to facilitate the message of that ad. The "link" with the "ad" was different in each instance - Embedding the vote itself in the link is another matter altogether, and *that* was the point of the article. I've already pointed you, via the forum, to the DH TOS and the Anti-spam policy. You do good work and have a useful site; why ruin it with spammish stuff like this? --Rlparker 04:49, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

One's account gets disabled for using PHP FastCGI with a custom php.ini? Really?

Why did you say that on PHP FastCGI? It sounds pretty ridiculous. I removed your warning pending confirmation. (Also added this to Talk:PHP FastCGI; let's discuss it there.) --Matt Nordhoff (talk) 02:08, 15 Feb 2007 (PST)


Oh I said that because I had a lengthy discussion with the DreamHost staff after my account (50+ domains) was completely shut down for this very reason. I think you should de-revert (sp?) it. --Cduke250 02:14, 22 Feb 2007 (PST)

External links

Welcome, and thank you for adding to the DreamHost Wiki. The external links you added do not conform to our policy for external links, and they have been reverted or removed. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

Many of your recent edits have centered around adding external links of questionable value to link back to websites you run. Apart from in certain special conditions (documentation, official specifications, copyright issues, etc.), external links are not expected to link to sites which appear to exist to generate revenue for the owner. This is just a low-key, first time warning because the administrators have not had time to flesh-out the policy page on external links; however, be assured that sysops patrol recent changes and will be monitoring external links very closely. -- Scjessey 04:23, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

Link policy clarification

Just to avoid confusion, I wanted to let you know that you are free (within reason - obvious spam will still be removed) to put whatever links you wish on your user page as long as they aren't misleading. Direct links to positive votes for DHSOTM or Suggestions on the Control Panel are not acceptable, but "campaigning" for a vote is perfectly okay. Obviously anything that may be in breach of copyright can't be used either. We like to allow users plenty of free reign with their personal name space. For example, I have a Pink Floyd article here: User:Scjessey/Pink Floyd

My articles

I have written numerous articles on various subjects, but mostly PHP-related. Rather than linking to them on my own site, I duplicated them on this wiki. I did not seek attribution (although this sort of exists because of page history data), and many of the original articles have now been improved upon. This sort of thing is definitely the preferred method of contribution, and I hope that you will consider doing this with some of the excellent work on your own site.

If attribution is your goal, then perhaps making contributions in your own name space is the way to go. For example, you could link to your .htaccess information by creating a page like this - User:Cduke250/.htaccess - and these articles can be categorized and linked-to just like any other, as long as they follow the same policies and guidelines as regular articles.

-- Scjessey 05:35, 1 June 2007 (PDT)

Editing of comments

The editing of existing comments on article talk pages is discouraged. In the case of Talk:DHSOTM for example, the removal of your earlier comment results in following comments not making any sense. -- Scjessey 08:50, 27 June 2007 (PDT)

Thanks for the discouragement :), I removed the comments because I read the Guidelines and Policies and decided my comments were a little too personal and not helpful to resolving anything. They make sense to anyone who already read my comments, or if someone is that curious they can read the history. Cduke250 09:02, 27 June 2007 (PDT)

Temporary Block

Because of repeated vandalism, this user has been temporarily blocked from editing by decision of administrators.


You have been warned before about adding link spam (which falls under the umbrella of vandalism on this wiki). Please read the section entitled "My Articles" above. -- Scjessey 13:33, 10 July 2007 (PDT)

Block news

After discussing the issue, the sysops have agreed to lift the temporary ban. It has been determined that the external link policy (which is still in the process of being written) is ambiguous enough for your recent edit to not breach any specific policy; however, the sysops would ask you to refrain from posting any external links until the EL policy has been finalized. It is expected that the policy will strongly promote contributions by article, rather than contributions by external link. Work on the external link policy will be given a high priority. -- Scjessey 08:44, 11 July 2007 (PDT)

External Link reversion on PHP.ini

While I agree with Scjessey's determination of the appropriateness of linking to a comment, since the *page* linked *is* (somewhat) relevant to the article, and your comment on that page is useful (even if it *is* "polluted" by linkspam - I know you and I will never agree on the propriety of that), I have inserted an external link to that *page* (without the anchor), as well as other php.net resources I though to be relevant, into the article. While it may not be as desirable to you as linking to the anchor, I think it is a good compromise that is consistent with our external linking guidelines. Along those lines, I have also deleted the link that was on the page linking directly to a DH Forum post/thread (which is also discouraged). Regards - Rlparker 15:22, 9 August 2007 (PDT)

Dual-licensing /multi-licensing on the DH Wiki

Unlike WikiPedia, or some other wiki's, the DreamHost wiki has chosen to remain wholly licensed under the GFDL. This is actually only of concern in article and/or article talk pages, and is done primarily to prevent possible contention over the licensing status of edits. I see no reason to care *what* license a user wishes to claim on their talk page, as long as that license does not attempt to preclude copying/use for the purposes intended (education) by DH users. It is worth noting that, whatever license is "claimed" by a user here, the GFDL can be considered to still be controlling in that the user is advised of that fact very clearly when "saving" any and every edit. Short version: claim any license you want on your user page; the issue is moot in a practical sense.

That said, please refrain from creating categories, based solely on a claimed alternate license, for claimed alternately licensed (dual-licensed / multi-licensed) material. As no material licensed under other than the GFDL will be collected in articles or their talk pages, such a category is meaningless on this wiki. Thanks! -- Rlparker 12:23, 16 August 2007 (PDT)

Last edit

I've just reverted (rather than rolled back, so that nothing was lost) your last edits to KB / Web Programming / CGI, PHP, and Databases / PHP because they seemed to have broken the page. It is clear that you were trying to improve that article, but the result was just a mess of preformatted text. Can you take another look your version and see if you can fix it? -- Scjessey 05:30, 10 October 2007 (PDT)

All I did was delete the incorrect and misleading line about not being able to use custom error documents, see so&so's comment for a workaround. 10 seconds, thats all. I'd say its the wikiware. Cduke250 05:57, 10 October 2007 (PDT)
Er. According to the diff, you edited a lot more than just "a line". Are we even talking about the same thing? -- Scjessey 06:54, 10 October 2007 (PDT)

Final warning - Temporary block notice

Regarding your last edits of Talk:DHSOTM - "Just wondering ... ":

The DHSOTM winner for May, 2007 was announced by DH Honcho Josh in the newsletter, at the same time he disqualified your site from consideration for the award. Since that time, this subject, your opinion of the disqualification, and your repeated linking to articles on your site that are perceived to be primarily promotional in nature, have been discussed repeatedly and at length. This discussion is available for review by interested parties in the history of the Talk:DHSOTM page, and others, and the DreamHost Discussion Forums. Your actions in these areas have already resulted in one "short-term" ban.

While I recognize that you perceive yourself as being persecuted unfairly over this, DH staff has also previously indicated that "spamming our wiki with thinly veiled promotional links is absolutely not allowed" (Talk:DHSOTM/Archive_1). This most recent linking, again, to an article on your site (now bearing links to your rants about how the matter of your disqualification was handled), after it has been repeatedly removed in the past, is simply not acceptable conduct.

I can only view your continuing to link to your own site's article on this matter as a blatant disregard for the history of the discussion on this subject that constitutes vandalism. I have rolled-back your edit. I have also banned/blocked your user/IP for a period of thirty (30) days. If, after that period of time has passed and you are again able to edit pages on this wiki, you again link to that article on your site, any other "off wiki" content discussing the DHSOTM and/or your site's qualification, or disqualification, for the award, or other "thinly veiled promotional links," I will permanently ban your user and lobby DreamHost staff to refrain from lifting that ban.


If you wish to continue to participate as a contributor to this wiki, I respectfully suggest you review the copious discussion on this wiki's talk pages, and in the DreamHost Discussion Forums, regarding your linking practices and endeavor to respect, or at least comply with, the position that has been taken on this matter. -- Rlparker 02:10, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Temporary block removed

I am removing the temporary block after reading your apology. I believe you are sincere in your desire to contribute honorably and sensibly. Please don't make a fool out of me. -- Scjessey 14:22, 29 November 2007 (PST)

I support Scjessey's action in removing the temporary block "early", and am also hopeful that this is truly behind us. -- Rlparker 05:58, 30 November 2007 (PST)

Thank you for the edit to Crontab

I just wanted to drop you a line to thank you for the helpful edit you made to the Crontab article. You have improved the article significantly and I, and I'm sure others, appreciate your effort in doing that. -- Rlparker 13:06, 8 December 2007 (PST)

Edits to PHP_5_install_script

Your edit(s) to the PHP5 Install Script page contains inappropriate links to not only your own personal site, but references to it as well (ie. "askapache_grab"). It seems you can't help but continue with the self-promotion. I will be forwarding this and future edits to the sysops if such before continues. I was hoping to see you turn over a new leaf and you seemed to have been doing so recently.. please ask on the discussion page next time if you plan on posting references to your site or other such affiliations in the future so that way it won't be looked upon as spam. Many thanks and kindest regards - Mousee 19:19, 16 December 2007 (PST)