User talk:Episcopus

Hi Your Reverence. Please don't replace stuff that's referred to without consultation as you did here. 10:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Episcopus, I took the link you provided and added it in addition to the other blog link. We need both blogs linked, since the article makes references to one you had previously deleted. Thanks for the suggestion. If you are Bishop Manchester it may be worth commenting on the Talk page in order to avoid possible conflicts of interest, and avert the possibility that we'll end-up in a revert war. -- 10:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * CR: You reverted my undo[[image:Laughing.gif]] 11:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, apologies for that. I must have edited an earlier version. -- 11:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Copyright
From the image page: Fair use rationale for use in the article Fun:Sean Manchester

Even though the media Manchester cos play.jpg is copyrighted and not released under a free license, I, Concernedresident, feel it is covered by fair use for at least one of the following reasons:

* No free alternative exists. * There are no free alternatives in existence, and this image is necessary for the purposes of criticism and parody. * The placement in a RationalWiki article is being used for informational purposes only, and its use is not believed to detract from the original copyrighted media in any way. * A free alternative may not exist now, but in the event of a free alternative being located for Fun:Sean Manchester in the future, this file should be deleted as soon as possible. 11:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see my comments on the talk page, and I invite you to email me at seanforums (at) me.com. I've more than a passing familiarity with UK copyright legislation and would be happy to work to address any concerns you may have. However, it's important that we work within the framework provided by law. I'm sure that you're aware of the legal consequences of unfounded legal threats - particularly if you're acting as counsel for Bishop Manchester. -- 12:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh! Streisand effect or what. I wasn't at all interested in this rubbish until "Episcopus" started pissing about. 13:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I didn't even consider writing the fun article until I saw his exchange with Mustex. I'm hoping that the good Bishop will take heed of Matthew 5:39-48, and work with us to fix any incorrect information we may have in the articles we've written. I find it encouraging that he appears to have registered an account here. -- 13:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Anagram
Episcopus = spice soup. There you go. 15:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Episcopus = I scope pus. I drive a Piss Coupe. Yalp! 16:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Episcopus = Pus Pies Co. Not that I'd eat one. 16:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Episcopus=coupes pis French for "cuts worse."  Touche, magical anagram, touche.   21:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Spellign
I'm curious, should it not be spelled "Episcopos?" Corry (talk) 18:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a common Latinized form of the Greek επίσκοπος. Sokay. 18:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It is the correct usage, although there are some variations on the translation that are acceptable to grown men who dress up in funny costumes and pretend that the recent Lord of The Rings movie adaptations were actually a series of documentaries. -- 00:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

You...
1. are not a bishop...or a priest. 2. are not Catholic. 3. have no clue what the fuck you are talking about. 4. are batshit insane. 5. are incredulous for even attempting to threaten legal action. 6. have no clue what the law says, let alone means.

And if I be wrong, smite me with all you vampire-defeating might. 21:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)