| Revision as of 01:46, 12 June 2006 editZer0faults (talk | contribs)5,735 edits →Thank you - U.S. FAC← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:52, 3 May 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (533 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{User:Rangeley/Top}} | |||
| == Pope == | |||
| <!-- Start below this line! --> | |||
| ...and keep up the good work keeping our ] up to date. I hope you stick around. ;) -- ]] ] 02:33, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC) | |||
| == Cantus == | |||
| ==Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Israeli M109 howitzer fires into Gaza.jpg== | |||
| An admin needs to stop this guy. Please tell whoever you know about this user messing with the images of Pope Benedict. I've already reported it as vandalism in progress. Thanks for your help! -] 03:50, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale. | |||
| If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> ] (]) 10:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == His Holiness == | |||
| ==Orphaned non-free image File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg== | |||
| I won't change it again, but I still disagree with "His Holiness". People address ] as "Mr. President..." -- however that's not how the page starts. It also doesn't start with "President..." It starts with "George Bush, blah blah President." I think something similar would be appropriate here. ] 05:49, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| <span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
| If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 10:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == BoR == | |||
| Hey...is this the same Rangeley from BoR? This is Y2A. It's really is a small internet. ] 07:59, 5 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I'm watching that page and I think your edits are good. ] 04:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disputed non-free use rationale for File:BattleofAmarah.jpg== | |||
| Thanks, its getting rather annoying (along with the ] article). I wish there was a way to lock just that portion so people would stop messing with it. ] 05:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale. | |||
| If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair --> ] (]) 17:35, 4 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Just now, I made a 3RR report on Gulliver. I think he's a vandal troll. Look at his edits. ] 05:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Please identify ] == | |||
| Yea, he has made 4 edits that were all reverted in the article so far. ] 05:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out ] summaries, and/or marking them {{tl|copytocommons}}. | |||
| I wanted to drop in and say your reasoning persuaded me to do furthur research and I came across the actual resolution through a website from there you can look up "H.J.Res.114 - Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)" The terminology "War on Terror" is used 2x in the document. I have since changed my vote without removing the old one, not sure if I should. Just stated I changed the vote from the one below. I do not agree politically with it, but factually you were indeed correct. --] 22:52, 5 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| As part of this I have come across your upload, ], which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image. | |||
| Thank you, and rather then remove your first vote, just <s> strike it out</s>, I dont know how to show the code without it striking something out, so just edit this post to get it that way. ] 22:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :You can use <nowiki><nowiki> ~~~~ etc.</nowiki></nowiki> to show code. ] 07:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (]). | |||
| == RfC == | |||
| If you haven't done so yet, please go to: ] right away and add your perspective. ] 17:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you, ] ] 06:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == your voted needed == | |||
| Please go here: ]. I voted for '''delete'''. You may also want to (if that's your preference). ] 08:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Please identify ] == | |||
| ==Warning== | |||
| is a gross offense of wikipedia policy. As are your repeated personal attacks. Stop immediately. ] 01:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out ] summaries, and/or marking them {{tl|copytocommons}}. | |||
| Removing of the NPOV tag was unintentional, I was restoring content that was removed (from an old version) and did not think to add the tag. For this I apologize, however, I do not beleive I have ever personally attacked you or anyone else. If I have, please show me where so I can adjust my behavior. ] 01:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Wow, ]. Two articles protected now to stop your edit wars , even in spite of a clear consensus against you: . Some of them broke ]. ] 07:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| As part of this I have come across your upload, ], which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image. | |||
| :Do you use the ? ] 08:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (]). | |||
| No consensus has been reached, because the debate has not concluded. And remember, ]. A consensus is not the results of a poll. Further, ]. You appear to be attempting to intimidate me because we disagree. I have come to this conclusion by your general attitude towards me, but I may be mistaken. Either way, I think we could both get farther if you lightened up a bit, perhaps not saying my every word is innuendo like De Mortuis did. I know what innuendo is, and this is not innuendo. To answer your final question, no, I do not use IP's to duplicate my edits. ] 16:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you, ] ] 06:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :You reverted again, this is obscene. I do not intimidate you, I just tell you that wikipedia does not work if single editors like you decide that all others are stupid and should be ignored. ] 16:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Please identify ] == | |||
| I do not beleive you or anyone here to be stupid, however I do beleive that Misplaced Pages is meant to represent the truth. When a large group of people is working to silence this truth, this is no reason to give in. I do not beleive you stupid, but merely wrong on this contested issue. ] 16:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I award you this picture for your 25th revert on a single issue, something I have never seen before, and I encourage you to take the middle monkey as an example, not only the other two. ] ] 16:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Alright, I will continue my policy of speaking no evil. Also you will note that this incident began 12 days ago, on the 26th, roughly making it 2 reverts per day. ] 16:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Have you ever thought about the possibility that the 3RR does not mean "please revert 2.99 times per day"? ] 16:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out ] summaries, and/or marking them {{tl|copytocommons}}. | |||
| Indeed, it says no more than 3 a day, something I have tried to keep track of throughout this entire time. ] 16:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| As part of this I have come across your upload, ], which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image. | |||
| :Irony was not your strong subject at school, was it? ] 16:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I cannot recall ever taking a class on irony, nor am I in one now. So no, it is impossible for it to have, or currently be, my strong subject in school. ] 16:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (]). | |||
| ::So maybe we try it with ]: Have you ever thought about what would happen with wikipedia if every user reverted 2.99 times per day on every page where she or he disagreed with consensus? ] 17:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you, ] ] 06:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
| That is a mischaracterization to begin with. If everyone reverted 3 times a day edits that were done without base, we could have likely prevented the John Seigenthaler scandal - which came from a lack of reverting a false edit. There is no consensus in this issue. A preliminary poll, even when concluded, is not a consensus. This poll is not even finished. Consensus? Hardly. ] 17:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] missing description details == | |||
| :We are getting closer. Have you ever thought what would happen if everyone would just edit with the attitude "even if many are against me I am for sure the one who knows best and can decide on my own which edits have a base"? Have you ever thought what would happen if all discussions were ignored until all sides give in that there is a consensus, including sides which generally think that what others do is without base? Have you ever thought how in such a wikipedia a consensus could ever be reached and how much time would be lost? ] 17:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;">'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you uploaded as ] is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. | |||
| Those who are right should never give up merely because the side that is incorrect has, at this time, more people. Obviously if everyone merely assumed themselves right, we would get nowhere. But I am not merely assuming I am right. After debating for such a long time, I am more sure than ever that it is a part of the campaign. Can you say the same? Are you more sure than ever that it was not started as part of this campaign, or are you just banking on the fact that you have more people on your side? ] 17:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for ], | |||
| :Who do you think sees clearer, those who make most edits or those who just think calmly? As the other side keeps telling you you are wrong, have you thought about the possibility that we are already getting nowhere with edit wars? After so many edits you still have not gotten the point that the debate is not about what the US government says what the Iraq war is but what it should be neutrally described like in an encyclopedia? ] 17:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided. | |||
| If you have any questions please see ]. Thank you. ] (]) 12:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:Add-desc --> | |||
| :I have been calm throughout this entire 'edit war' as you call it, and have not resorted to calling anyone names, or claiming anyone suffers from a mental illness. Most certainly we are getting nowhere when the page is merely reverted on no basis, something that others have frequently done. I agree 100% that we are not, as an encyclopedia, aiming to present everything any government states as fact. However, I understand that when a government begins a program, or campaign, and then carries out different things under these programs or campaigns, it is not biased or POV to recognize that the actions are part of these wider programs or campaigns. It is not POV to recognize the rounding up of Jews and the concentration camps are linked. They were part of a Nazi program, in which many different things were carried out. Most people today call it the holocaust. When you look at each thing seperately, you fail to see the intent behind it, and you might get the idea that it was a mere coincidence that the events happened. But they were carried out under the same program, as such, today we can recognize the true scope of the destruction. | |||
| == File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg listed for deletion == | |||
| A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] <sup>]</sup> 20:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| :In this issue, the US Government and allies began a campaign, under which different things are being carried out. When you put them together, as they should be, you understand the true scope of them, rather then beleiving that its a mere coincidence that they happened at a close time. They cannot be looked at seperately, because they were carried out under the same campaign. It is our job, as an encyclopedia, to recognize this. ] 17:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::If you refuse to accept anything dozens of others tell you does it really mean their edits are without base? If the Nazis' term Endlösung der Judenfrage (final solution of the Jewish question) had been popular at the time should an encyclopedia have used it without quotation marks or comment as captions and tagged it on dozens of articles? ] 18:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::We can deal with the name, and whether or not it should have quotes, after this one part is settled. Do you agree with me on my point, that it is neither POV or biased to recognize that the different components were part of the campaign they named Endlösung der Judenfrage, which most of us call the Holocaust? ] 18:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=691988767 --> | |||
| == ]: Voting now open! == | |||
| ::::Progress, wow. It should have quotes at least. Cool. And we can deal with the name. Great. That is all I ever wanted. Dealing with you seems ''rather'' tedious though. But there is something good in everyone. I agree that rounding up and concentration camps were part of the campaign the Nazis called Endlösung. A term equally inappropriate for wikipedia template titles or captions as "''war on terror''" as both are inherently not neutral and widely criticized. ] 23:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, Rangeley. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. | |||
| :::Alright, so if that is settled, then we now agree that it is not POV or biased to recognize the Iraq War as part of the conflict in question. Now, if we are to analyze it, the name Holocaust portrays a POV, and will always create negative imagery. So the reason we use this name is not because it is perfectly neutral, but rather that it has become the common word for the event. The War on Terror is no different. It portrays a POV, however this is as much an issue as it is with the holocaust, or the new deal, and a great many other things. For instance, Christianity. The name, Christian, means follower of Christ. But the problem lies in that Christ is not Jesus's last name, but rather, it is the term for 'messiah' or 'savior.' Some people do not think Jesus is the savior/messiah. Does that mean we cannot use the term Christianity? No, it does not. When Misplaced Pages uses the term Christian or Christianity, it is not saying it to take a point of view that Jesus was infact the savior, but rather it is recognizing that Christian and Christianity are the most commonly used terms for the followers, and the religion itself. Again, the reason we use these terms here is not because they are perfectly neutral, but instead because they are the most common terms for their respective things. This, too, is why we use the name War on Terror as the conflict in question. When Misplaced Pages uses this term, it is not taking the POV that the war is right, but rather, it is recognizing that this is the most commonly used term to apply to the conflict. This is not POV. ] 00:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| ::::] portrays the POV that what was done to the jews was a disaster or catastrophe. Given that courts decided that there was a ] and a ] this POV is widely accepted. The POV that the Iraq war was on terror is not. Thus, using a propaganda term that implies exactly this is unacceptable. And please stop telling me that the Iraq war is most commonly called part of a war on terror. An overwhelming majority of the part of the world population that is aware of it would not agree. And even if it was the most commonly used term, should the article ] become a redirect to ] if it was found out that the latter was used more frequently? ] 00:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| But its POV just the same, no? Again, dont muddy the issue. It has been agreed that the Iraq War is part of the campaign, no disputing this. The press, and a majority of english speaking individuals refer to this conflict as the War on Terror. Iraq War = Part of Campaign. Campaign = War on Terrorism. Therefore, Iraq War = Part of War on Terrorism. Its simple logic. ] 02:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/6&oldid=750545473 --> | |||
| ==Orphaned non-free image File:Uncyclopediamainpage.png== | |||
| <span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
| Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 20:21, 31 January 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :It is not the same. As I wrote a dozen times now, the term is not universally accepted but clearly favors one side and is heavily criticized by many. Show me ten pages where holocaust is put in quotation marks in the same way. The majority of English speaking individuals are not American neocons, and even if they were, it would still violate NPOV to use their propaganda in captions and template titles. ] 10:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disputed non-free use rationale for File:BattleofAmarah.jpg== | |||
| ] | |||
| Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by ]. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from ] is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale. | |||
| If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale-notice --> ] (]) 20:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Reverts without even a summary are not helpful == | |||
| ==Orphaned non-free image File:Transitional Federal Government soldier (Somalia) on a technical at the Battle of Jowhar.jpg== | |||
| ] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
| Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 21:12, 5 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
| ] 23:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] of ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The article ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
| I was under the assumption that vandalism was not helpful. I know you have an issue with the term. But here is your problem. 1. No consensus exists stating that the Waziristan War is not part of the war on terror, in fact, your own argument in previous places, that the War on Terror is against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, should make it clearer than anything in your mind that it is indeed a part of it. 2. Questions of POV go on the article in question, not everwhere else. For instance, if the article on ] were of questionable POV, such template would be placed on the article itself. Not in every article linking to it as something in (parenthesis). | |||
| <blockquote>'''Useless article. Lacks sources and notability. Has two sentences.'''</blockquote> | |||
| While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
| I couldnt easilly fit that in a summary, but I thank you for coming to me so that now we are both on the same page. ] 01:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| :Didn't fit is the lamest excuse I have ever heard for not writing a summary. Summary means summarized. Pointing out that a term is criticized is not vandalism. ] 00:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 23:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
| Indeed it is not vandalism to place an NPOV notice on the page itself. But putting it in parenthesis after it is linked to is vandalism. ] 01:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I just tried to make it as small and specifica as possible. It is ridiculous to post an NPOV tag on a whole article just for one phrase. Your definition of vandalism ignores wiki rules. ] 01:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thats not what I said you should do. An NPOV tag should be placed at the War on Terrorism page as thats the article in question. But just like we dont say ] (this article is locked due to vandalism) or ] (this article is featured), we do not put (this term's neutrality is disputed) after any disputed term when it is linked to. ] 02:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :The neutrality of the article "War on terror" is not disputed by me. I dispute that using the propaganda term without quotation marks and a comment as a header elsewhere is neutral. ] 08:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::As Rangeley pointed out adding (this term is disputed) after every single mentioning of "war on terror" is quite inappropriate for the reasons he has mentioned above. Also if you feel the term is propaganda and should be used in a certain way, then that is a discussion best left for the page where the term is linking to, not every page the term appears on. Having 8 discussions all taking place on the same topic is not efficient as centralizing that discussion to the ] page. Also please see ] as to what POV tags are, and how you are leaving commentary, not a tag. --] 14:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::As I already explained above, the appropriateness of a propaganda term in an article can only be discussed in that article. It is an entirely different question whether a propaganda term should be used without quotation marks and comment in an article about something else or whether there should be an article about the term. I see no way to add the tag into the box and I regard it as inappropriate to add an NPOV tag to the whole article if only one term is disputed. ] 18:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Unfortunatly, just because you "regard it as inappropriate" does not change the Wiki Policy which is linked above. Please follow the appropriate using of POV tags as stated in the policy article. Thank you --] 13:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::::As you know very well, I am not the only one who regards propaganda terms inappropriate in such cases, and NPOV tags should be as specific as possible, otherwise the reader has not much benefit. ] 10:59, 24 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I am not sure why you are still arguing this after you have found the correct tags, which means you were using the wrong tag before. I agree they should be specific, which is why they have tags that accomplish that, only you asserted that the whole article needed to be tagged, and then you went ahead and did it. Noone todl you too, in your haste to tag the topic, perhaps you just skipped over the correct tags. I am glad you found the correct ones, if I can be of any other help, please use my talk page and not poor Rangeley's --] 11:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Can you do me a favour== | |||
| Please spreading dirty lies that Referendum won,because it far from over unofficial results vary from 54-46 to 55.5-44.5 but it seems like croocked dirty independists failed,so please dont be saying its over until 10 am when we will get official results.Thank you very much] | |||
| I know that this is obviously a personal issue for many people, and I have reverted several edits made by those stating that they are now independant. However, this is not because I beleive the projections to be wrong, but instead because regardless of whether it has won or not, the two nations will remain together until they officially seperate. When and if this happens, that is when we should state Montenegro as its own nation. So again, if I have offended anyone it was completely unintentional. ] 03:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The reason I spoke to you is this sentence :"Likewise, while this referendum has been won by the independence movement, it has not yet been put into action." | |||
| I just wanted to point out to you that "this referendum has not been won" and with Gods will,if results stay as they are,referendum lost,but your sentence presumed its all over and thats why I spoke to you.You should be carefull,because just a couple of words can offend people.Thank you | |||
| ] | |||
| ==Response== | |||
| Although I feel multi-ethnic states and unity are preferable to division amongst ethnic lines I also acknowledge that people have to be pragmatic and take things as relevant to the situation they face. Western Sahara and Kurdistan are currently based in oppresive areas where the people are punished and would be better protected if independent yet this is not the case for Serbia and Montenegro. Ultimately my dream would be to see the world unified in one state but I accept that is extremely unlikely and at the moment I look at things in relative terms. {{User:Horses In The Sky/Signature}} | |||
| == ] article on featured candidate nominations list == | |||
| ]<br> | |||
| Cast your vote! The more responses, the more chances the article will improve and maybe pass the nomination.--] <sub>]</sub> 01:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Thank you - U.S. FAC== | |||
| <div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 1px #5566ff; background-color: #00ffff;"> | |||
| ] | |||
| Hi, | |||
| Thank you for supporting the recent ] of '']'', but unfortunately it failed to pass. However, I hope you will vote again in the future. In the mean time, please accept this ] as a token of my gratitude.--] <sub>]</sub> 15:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)</div> | |||
| ==Welcome Back== | |||
| Did not want to edit the WOT page while you seemed to be on vacation. I see you have been made aware of the situation with Anoranza, I have a RfC open against me now, one filed after the AN/I post I see you found. ] If you do not want to get involved I completely understand as things have escalated since you were last editing, even Nescio is choosing not to get involved. --] ] 01:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:52, 3 May 2022
Archived Discussion
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Israeli M109 howitzer fires into Gaza.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Israeli M109 howitzer fires into Gaza.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:BattleofAmarah.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:BattleofAmarah.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:35, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Please identify File:DSCF1465.JPG
Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out Template:Information summaries, and/or marking them {{copytocommons}}.
As part of this I have come across your upload, File:DSCF1465.JPG, which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image.
Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (File:DSCF1465.JPG).
Thank you, Sven Manguard Wha? 06:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Please identify File:DSCF1482.JPG
Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out Template:Information summaries, and/or marking them {{copytocommons}}.
As part of this I have come across your upload, File:DSCF1482.JPG, which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image.
Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (File:DSCF1482.JPG).
Thank you, Sven Manguard Wha? 06:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Please identify File:DSCF1487.JPG
Hello. I am going though all files with names starting with DSC and where applicable renaming them, filling out Template:Information summaries, and/or marking them {{copytocommons}}.
As part of this I have come across your upload, File:DSCF1487.JPG, which does not have description information on the file description page and is not used in an article. Therefore I cannot on my own identify the subject of the image.
Please insert a description of what the image is at the file description page (File:DSCF1487.JPG).
Thank you, Sven Manguard Wha? 06:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
File:Islrebmap.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Islrebmap.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Israeli soldiers in Southern Lebanon.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly 20:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Rangeley. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Uncyclopediamainpage.png
Thanks for uploading File:Uncyclopediamainpage.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:BattleofAmarah.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:BattleofAmarah.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Transitional Federal Government soldier (Somalia) on a technical at the Battle of Jowhar.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Transitional Federal Government soldier (Somalia) on a technical at the Battle of Jowhar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
_on_a_technical_at_the_Battle_of_Jowhar.jpg){kind=link}
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Operation Northern Lights
The article Operation Northern Lights has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Useless article. Lacks sources and notability. Has two sentences.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC)