Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:34, 9 July 2008

--Rockybiggs (talk) 08:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC){| style="background-color:#F5FFFA; padding:0;" cellpadding="0" |class="MainPageBG" style="border:1px solid lightgrey; background-color:lightgrey; vertical-align:top; color:#000000; font-size:85%"|

Hello, Rockybiggs! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Misplaced Pages. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Misplaced Pages you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! -- Jza84 · (talk) 15:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

|}

MilHist welcome

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, article improvement contests, and other tasks.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention.
• The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Woody (talk) 22:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

user:Desione on Talk:British Raj

It's probably best not to feed Desione on Talk:British Raj, something I've only just realized myself. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Indian Rebellion of 1857

Thanks for your comment (and your edit). The article does need a bit of a clean-up! --RegentsPark (talk) 23:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandal patrol

Thanks for helping out on vandal patrol. I thought you might like to take a look at WP:WARN for some helpful templates you can use when alerting users about vandalism. Ronnotel (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Rocky, I appreciate your input at Indian Rebellion of 1857. However, given the charged nature of the discussion, I urge you to focus on content, not the commentator. In particular, your point about the predominance of the English language is well-taken, but I consider it unlikely to reduce tensions in this situation. Ronnotel (talk) 13:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mia Sara9.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mia Sara9.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Malia nightlife.jpg

Hi Rockybiggs!
We thank you for uploading Image:Malia nightlife.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Misplaced Pages.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

London Meetups - Sunday May 11th

We're hoping to have regular meetups in London. The next one is on May 11th Misplaced Pages:Meetup/London 9. Another Sunday lunch in Holborn. Come along! -- Harry Wood (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/RedHeffer

Hi I notice you reverted some of this users edits. All of their edits back to September 2007 have been vandalism but crazily admins are refusing to block- I'd appreciate your comments on this here. Thanks Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 13:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Bromley et al

Hi. I notice that you're seeking some assistance with the Bromley article. You've requested assistance at the Reliable Sources noticeboard, which is the correct place to ask questions about what is or is not a reliable source. However, two hours later, you've filed a request for arbitration on the matter. While you are certainly free to do so, I would strongly recommend that you withdraw the request, for several reasons.

First, Arbcom is intended to be the last step in dispute resolution. The first step is engaging in discussion with the parties in the dispute. I note that you've left messages with the other user on their talk page, but you have not notified them of the Reliable Sources noticeboard post or the Administrator's Noticeboard post. If discussion fails, then asking for outside opinions - as you have done at the RSN - is the next step. Failing that, Mediation is available. If all else fails, then and only then is an arbitration case warranted. Since many of these steps haven't been taken, it is likely that your request for arbitration will be declined.

Second, it's only been a couple of hours - given that the other editor has not edited in over 24 hours, surely there is no urgency in getting outside input on this matter, is there? Misplaced Pages has no deadline; There is no purpose served in applying undue haste to the question. I'd recommend you give the RSN some time to discuss the matter and provide clarification, and then go from there.

I hope this helps. Please feel free to ping me if there is anything I can do to be of assistance. Best, UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 12:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate that - thank you. I'll see if I can't stir up some eyes to have a look at this issue for you, and maybe we can resolve it. Best, UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 12:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Darren M Jackson

please calm down a bit, I take it you must be new, and we do want your input on wikipedia, but be clear what do first it no good just spouting rules, due to fact that you dont fully understand them yet.

What ? whats being new got to do with anything, (not that i am) wikipedia doesn`t detract whatever any users joining date. My understanding is fine thank you.--Rockybiggs (talk) 15:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment

I think we have got off on the wrong foot, may I try now to clear a few things up, the source added on the DMJ page is a reliable source and I and most editors except RHS journel as a RS, also you have now reverted my edits, may I just say that a editor can blank he/she talk page, this is what I do on a regular basis, i choose not to archive unless important. I hope you execpt my explaination and that we can now work together for the good of wikipedia and the Bromley page which we both have an interest in, I am will ask nicely if you will not revert when I have blank the page Thanks again.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 10:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Photo-naming

Hi, I noticed you uploaded a photo to Greenwich and River Thames - better to give them a descriptive name rather than keeping the name assigned by the camera - sod's first law of photography is someone is going to be using the same make of camera as you, and so have a similarly named file. Even if you keep your local filename, you can give it something more descriptive in wiki. HTH and good luck with adding pix. Kbthompson (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I usually do, but forgot in this instance, and the photo had already been saved by the time i relized.--Rockybiggs (talk) 08:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Rockybiggs for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

After the checkuser came back as confirmed with your accounts, I have blocked this account for three months. SirFozzie (talk) 01:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Rockybiggs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please note i have no control over my work place internet system where multiple people log in to the internet.(considering my work is based in Croydon, there are alot of palace fans) Please also note i also log in on a different ip address also, as well as the one ending 99, which an admin can quite clearly see (as i have forgot the exact number at this moment). You have also not looked at the positive i have brought wiki, like Recruitment in the British Army which i basically created from nothing, and many other contrubutions, I feel this ban is harsh (3 months) and should be reviewed. In the space of 20 minutes i was decided of being guilty and punished with no opportunity to respond. The user HACKNEY also mentions `as evidence sock puppetry in a disruptive edit `pair`, i can assure you this is not a disprutive edit, i just logged out with out knowing my hitting the back button on internet explorer. this user has obviously made this a personal crusade to have me banned without looking a positive edits of user: rockybiggs. Further point, please also note i have never made any edits on irish affairs either. In short to be handed such a ban when i have given wikipedia positive edits, and i have never been banned before is quite unbelieveable, and this surely a unjustified and over the top

Decline reason:

I'm glad you've made some productive edits. However: (1) you and the IP editor are obviously the same person, and in addition to that you made an account User:Irishrscum that beyond being a blatantly offensive username, was used only to try to cover up your misbehavior. Yes, you didn't have an opportunity to respond, but Alison has access to the IP numbers you connect from and after her confirmation there was no doubt about the use of multiple accounts. Ok, that said, it isn't actually such a bad thing to log out and edit anonymously that you should be blocked for 3 months. But that's not why you are blocked: you are blocked for disruption and trolling: examples of this include your many anti-IRA comments and personal attacks noted on that page, and the real sockpuppet you created. SirFozzie carelessly mentioned only sockpuppetry in your block summary, but the real reason is written in the WP:SSP report. We can't tolerate inflammatory behavior like yours: if you want to be unblocked before the 3 months are up, you will have to somehow convince us that it won't continue. Mangojuice 15:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Rockybiggs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Some of the abuses here are related too just two days on irish related pages, i don`t know where these `many` disruptions you mean, are ?. If this is the case i propose a self-ban from editing on all irish related issues (or imposed) by myself. I wish to proceed with the projects i have started and wish to continue and apologize for any mis-understanding. (A further request if a ban is upheld; and to save admin`s with another request i would also like to say if the ban is upheld i would will retire from wikipedia, and will ask for all the photos i have added to be removed, as i remove the right of wikipedia to publish them). Thank you, and hoping for a positive outcome.

Decline reason:

Confirmed by checkuser. — Ѕandahl 17:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Rockybiggs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thanks to the admin Sandahl for the expansive answer. I can`t believe i have been blocked for so long, when other edits seem to be banned for a matter of days and weeks. As i have no other way of doing this I now no longer wish wikipedia to publish my pictures due to the way i have been treated on this site. Please explain how i go about this while being banned.

Decline reason:

This isn't a reason for unblock, and as to the images SirFozzie is correct ... you can't revoke the GFDL grant. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock|As per my talk page, Community consensus of Athaenara, SirFozzie, and others, Indicates this ban iS too long, even the imposer of this ban SirFozzie indicates this. Please reconsider the length or total striking of the ban and i will conform to a self imposed PERMANENT topic ban for Irish articles, which has been seen as suffient by the community.}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Per the agreement between you and the blocking admin below, the block is reduced to one month, and you are subject to a topic ban from all Ireland-related subjects for at least two months after the expiration of the block. The ban may be lifted by the blocking admin or through community consensus on WP:AN or WP:ANI. Any ban or block evasion, or sockpuppeteering, may result in an indefinite ban or block. Request handled by:  Sandstein  11:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just adding my bit. I think the three month block may be somewhat harsh if the user is willing to keep away from Irish articles, and maybe others relating to the British Empire. Rather than just dismiss him with a three word response, perhaps an admin might want to communicate with him regarding terms of an earlier unblock? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hackney, thank you for your comments, if you look at my edits regarding the British Empire they are wholey positive as its a field i am greatly interested in and have had nothing but positive edits towards, please see my history page and i think you will concur. This also applies to other empire related articles, such as Indian empire redirect, which i believe you mentioned as my edit war but in fact User:El C an admin gave everyone immunity from 3 reverts due to constant edit war by a user, Please see User talk:El C#Semi-Protection--Rockybiggs (talk) 19:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I haven't looked in depth, but I was definitely concerned at many comments you made here, where you said that comments made by the Cypriot president shouldn't be included as they were "Greek POV", and also that sources must be in English which isn't true. If you have made worthy contributions in other areas relating to the British Empire then I stand corrected, but your behaviour on that particular article and talk page gives me cause for concern. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

(Please note the other use was accusing me of British POV, not an excuse i know) I still feel the Presidents comments should not be there, as this is British Sovereign land, and whether he wants it back is immaterial, but this is my POV. But you will see the talk page, and an agreement/consensus was made between myself and the other user and he changed other comments and importantly it was resolved in a professional manner.--Rockybiggs (talk) 19:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who's been knee deep in many nationalist arguments, it's best to leave your opinions at the front door whatever they may be. Now, where's an admin when we need one? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Without commenting on the whole sock-puppetry thing, I can vouch for the fact that Rockybiggs is a generally serious contributer to wikipedia. A 3 month ban may be a tad excessive. --Regents Park (sink with the skaters) 22:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not a ban but a block, and I somewhat concur with Regents Park and One Night in Hackney. Would a 1 month block be more appropriate? — Athaenara ✉ 23:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Only if he sticks to his proposed topic ban regarding Irish articles. We have enough bad hand accounts as is, and the Irishr account was very incendiary in an area where we're trying to put out fires, not create new ones. By the way, you cannot revoke your permissions to the submissions you have already made. They're covered by the GFDL policy. SirFozzie (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I presume "you" refers to user Rockybiggs... To clarify my own post further: I support a topic ban (see Misplaced Pages:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions) of at least three months. The userblock itself need not be so long, I think, but as I knew nothing about this before seeing it in Category:Requests for unblock I hesitate to suggest any specific timespan. — Athaenara ✉ 04:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm willing to reduce the block to one month, if Rockybiggs agrees that he will observe a topic ban on all Irish related articles indefinitely. That means he has to specifically request on WP:AN or WP:ANI, to have this removed. Say a mininum of three months? (that is, two months after his block expires?) SirFozzie (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments SirFozzie, i still feel one month block is a tough punishment, and would like this reduced. I am of coarse willing not to edit/comment or have anything to do with any Irish Articles not just for a short while, but forever, and therefore will have no need to have this topic ban lifted.

Rockybiggs (talk) 10:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)