Revision as of 14:43, 4 August 2005 editMolobo (talk | contribs)13,968 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:49, 4 August 2005 edit undoGeneralPatton (talk | contribs)5,223 editsm →Why did you erase war crimes of Waffen SS Wiking?: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 266: | Line 266: | ||
And restored that it had no war crimes record ? They killed Jews in Lwow area(source was given) | And restored that it had no war crimes record ? They killed Jews in Lwow area(source was given) | ||
--] 14:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC) | --] 14:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
:I just combined your aditions with the existing intro. Do you see it now? ] 14:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:49, 4 August 2005
Otto Skorzeny image
Could you check out your image of Otto Skorzeny (Skorzeny.png)? I have a few questions about it which I listed on its talk page. Thanks!
Sietse 00:26, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Congratulations, Sir!
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 05:08, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Congratulations. Cribcage 06:21, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Admin Candidacy
Hello, I saw that you raised some objections to my candidacy for admin. I just wanted to let you know that I attempted to discuss what I felt might have been your concern here. Thank you for your time, and I'd be happy to answer any further questions you may have. Páll 09:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
RFC pages on VfD
Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:43, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Posen
Thanks for all your help. Mackensen (talk) 07:59, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Image tag
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following images:
I notice they currently don't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to each to let us know its copyright status?
You can use {{gfdl}} if you wish to release your own work under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{PD-self}} if you wish to release your own work to the public domain, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use of someone else's work, and so on. Click here for a list of the various tags.
If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the image from, and I'll tag it for you. Thanks so much. Denni☯ 03:47, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)
P.S. You can help tag other images at Misplaced Pages:Untagged_Images. Thanks again.
Charles Darwin
User:Fastfission and others have been on a crusade to delete the mention of Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln sharing a birthday. I have remained civil but others have been flaming. FastFission posted a biased comment on RfC which I have made neutral (I hope). Would you be interested in supporting my side? If so, please start at Talk:Charles_Darwin#Summary. Of course, that's my side, but the other side is strongly represented in the rest of the Talk page.Thanks Vincent 04:35, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hello GeneralPatton!
I wonder if you have any knowledge on the economy of the SFRY, if so im trying to setup a good article on the economy of SFRY, but since i was born late in that country, and dont live there now, i dont have much information.
- )
Vojvodina
Sir!
I have noticed your involvement with the Kosovo article. I am not sure about your interest in the Vojvodina article, but I'm having a bit of a problem there. There is a user who's not discussing, but has reverted his own version three times on the last calendar day (27/12/2004). Could you advice me on how to handle this, or perhaps have a look at it yourself? Thanks! --Najroda 01:14, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
fac notice
On Dec 7 you left a fac notice on Talk:Special relativity but I can't find any corresponding entry on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates. Should the fac noticed be removed? 217.94.146.56 11:34, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the link (Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Special relativity). Having seen the discussion there (especially Cadwgan Gedrych) it's probably wise not to feature this article. (Not because of the article ... ) 217.94.146.56 16:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Please tag images of yours
Your uploaded images linked to at Shuttle Buran currently don't have any image copyright tags. Misplaced Pages needs its images tagged to be able to use them in the future. You may want to release it under the GFDL with {{GFDL}}, into the public domain with {{PD}}, or claim fair use with {{fairuse}}. See this for more. 119 19:47, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Image:Hadrian 01.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Hadrian 01.jpg. Please leave a note on that page about where you got the image because of copyright law. If you have any questions, just leave a message on my talk page. --Ellmist 14:49, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Image:Von_Weichs_colorportrait.jpg
How about indicating the source of this image? All images on Misplaced Pages should have a source. Just a license tag isn't sufficient. Especially not if you're claiming fair use. (Yes, I know, WWII image and so on... still, a source is needed!) Lupo 13:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I presume you have seen my note above, since you have edited since I posted it. Please do provide sources for the images you've uploaded. I just cannot understand why you seem to consistently ignore these requests (apparently I'm not the only one who's bugging you to do this...) You self-identify as a member of the Misplaced Pages:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards — don't they advocate to cite your sources? (I must admit that I haven't read the "encyclopedic standards" page.) Also, please note that international copyright law (the Berne Convention) requires proper attribution of sources when quoting. Using others' images is a form of quoting. Note also that sources are mandatory especially for fair use claims. So why not just follow the guidelines shown to you each time you upload an image? I must say I am at a loss as to how to get you to supply sources and have taken the liberty to ask others to comment on this at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Problematic image uploads. Lupo 08:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Von Kleist
Hi. General Ewald von Kleist is sometimes given as Paul von Kleist (e.g. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERkliest.htm) so it makes sense to host his page where I moved it to. Then Ewald von Kleist can host the disambiguation page. Ewald Heinrich von Kleist is still alive. He was prepared to make a sucide attack on Hitler by carrying live grenades and then leaping on the Fuehrer. An interesting fellow. Jooler 18:36, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi again. Regarding Ewald Georg von Kleist. I looked this guy up and his name is given in various forms so I decided to look at German Misplaced Pages and his article is at de:Ewald Jürgen Georg von Kleist, so I'm gonna go with this name. Jooler 23:01, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi. There was another one Ewald Christian von Kleist confusing matters. His dates are 1715-1759. Some sources give these dates for Ewald Georg von Kleist, but I think I have the correct dates for him now. Sure The Field Marshal at Paul Ewald von Kleist kind of makes sense, but don't you think dropping the Ludwig is a bit confusing. You are missing out one of his initials. If you do change it, please change the link on German Misplaced Pages. Jooler 23:52, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- If he were P.E.L. von Kleist, I wouldn't argue with you, but he is P.L.E. von Kleist, which you are proposing to turn into P.E. von Kleist. This is a bit like changing J.R.R Tolkien into R.R. Tolkien. Do you get my point? I think for the sake of clarity it's better to use the full name in this case, because it then avoids any ambiguity whatsoever. Actually some sources put the Ewald in brackets, so it may have been a nickname rather than what he was christened. Jooler 08:29, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Heinz Guderian
Why do you keep removing the link from Heinz Guderian page? Halibutt 09:02, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
Everyking
He's the subject of an RFAr currently. There's some dispute over the proposed decision, though; as a user who hasn't been involved in this dispute much, would you mind weighing in on the talk as to what punishment (if any) you feel is appropriate? In particular, there's been little discussion on the possibility of asking Everyking to reapply for adminship outside the circle of those who were deeply involved here; Reene, Mackensen and I all feel Everyking's conduct is unbecoming of an administrator, while naturally Everyking vehemently opposes us. It'd be a great help if you could share your opinion here. Thanks, and have a great day. Johnleemk | Talk 11:23, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
DU article
Is there a reason why the article:
- is so long
- quotes from the site at such length
- reads like an ad ?
Ollieplatt 01:35, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Suggested Reading re Ollieplatt
Hi, I see you've met Olliepratt. Thanks for the support.
I'm going to go read the article on Heinz Guderian (I already know who he was).
FYI:
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Matters_currently_in_Arbitration
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Libertas/Evidence
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Libertas/Proposed_decision
Note that Ollieplatt has been deemed likely to be Libertas and about a dozen other user IDs by several Misplaced Pages developers who have presented technical evidence. The evidence page cites numerous examples of Ollieplatt engaging in disruptive editing and violations of wikipedia policies. The proposed decisions range up to a one year ban.
— Davenbelle 01:37, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
re:
- I know he's also using User:64.170.195.250, here's one of his "contributions" . Ollie's probably the man behind that IP because when I blocked it, I got e-mails from him asking me to unblock him. GeneralPatton 01:44, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure the arbitrators would be interested in this. Please considerposting this to the above evidence page. Thanks. — Davenbelle 01:49, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
p.s. Ollieplatt just got blocked over Democratic Underground. Thanks for your participation. Now I can go read the piece on Heinz Guderian. — Davenbelle 02:06, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
Group 3RR policy propozal
You wrote you should definitely draft a policy proposal and put it up for a review - could you point me to some example how this was done, so I could base my proposal on this? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:33, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC) PS. Perhaps you would be interested in Request for Comments on Talk:Blitzkrieg - I'd appreciate any input there. This is a good article, close to FAC renomination, but I am so far unable to reach a compromise with user 119 :( --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:33, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
3 revert rule and abuse by the moderators | possible right extremist abuse
Possibly the issues raised in the above link are interesting for you: in essence User:Toytoy is arguing that it is inapropriate and POV to call David Irving a holocaust denier on Bombing of Dresden in World War II, I am arguing that is is NPOV and cogent to that article, and we should be aware of the political context of relating holocaust denial and the bombing, a matter especially sensitive in view of Sunday's memorial. ---- Charles Stewart 13:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Energia images
Greetings. I was image tagging, when I came across Image:Energia 1986 01.jpg, Image:Energia pad 01.jpg, and Image:Energia 1986 02.jpg. I was unable to determine the copyright status. Could you add proper image copyright tags to them? Pictures without tags will eventually be deleted. Thanks, – Quadell 03:01, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
Also, the Image sleuths are trying to determine the source of the Iron cross images you uploaded, Image:EK 1class.png and Image:EK 2class.png. Do you remember where you got them? Thanks again, – Quadell 14:04, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
Edit block for Hitler
Whyc has this article been blocked from editing by User:GeneralPatton with no explanation here. What is the problem? When will it be resolved? Please can we have a debate so this article can again be opened up. --Squiquifox 17:27, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) Also why did you reedit this article after putting the restriction notice on it in breach of Misplaced Pages:Protected page policy? Also should you have put the restriction notice? given you have been involved in the editorial dispute, again against policy--Squiquifox 17:37, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
ok. i'll do comment on my changes in more detail from now on. I am rather new to editing in wikipedia, so excuse me if i don't know some stuff. ben 10:51, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
You definitely ought to take it easy, this is a particularly controversial article, so patience. GeneralPatton 14:26, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Is this not involvement? I would like to see another administrator involved in this case? --Squiquifox 18:13, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
the problem is you did not tell us why you have restricted the article - leaving us to guess. Also editing the photo clearly had nothing to do with the dispute, but it looks as if you are saying others cannot edit but I can, even if this is not your intention. Please can you explain yourself at Talk:Adolf Hitler. Those of us not involved in the dispute but may want to edit in other ways at least have the right of an explanation. Also when do you intend to remove the restriction notice?--Squiquifox 19:01, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have looked and do appreciate the problem. I am not disputing your motives for putting the restriction notice on the arrticle, just the way it was done without reference to other editors; i.e. by explaining what you did at Talk:Adolf Hitler. While I appreciate your responding to my messages, I would prefer to see something in the Talk page, including how long the restriction will last.--Squiquifox 20:54, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Block of Adolf Hitler
Hi GeneralPatton, I have no problems with any of your actions surrounding your protecting the article Adolf Hitler. However I think whenever an article is protected, it is best if an explanation is given on the talk page of that article. I have posted the following on Talk:Adolf Hitler:
- Although I think the block was probably warranted, I would appreciate an explanation here as to what the situation is with regard to the block. Specifically the reasons for the block, and when and under what circumstances the block will be lifted. I think it is always helpful to explain these things on the talk page whenever a block occurs. Thanks. Paul August ☎ 17:27, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind responding there? (In addition, you can, of course, if you like, also make a more personal response either here or on my talk page ;-) Thanks. Paul August ☎ 17:47, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, I have answered your inquiry over at Talk:Adolf Hitler. GeneralPatton 22:50, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Paul August ☎ 23:06, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
Military Collaboration of the week
Howdy Patton. Just thought I'd let you know that we have a Military Collaboration of the week currently up if you'd like to contribute to it. Oberiko 12:14, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Gene Poole is back
I don't think the issues we had three to six months ago with Gene Poole will be a problem today, since the three revert rule now has teeth in it and the remove personal attacks policy has been formulated. In the old days, Gene Poole could not remove a personal attack directed against him without getting in to a revert war. These days, that is no longer the case, and, indeed, I removed a personal attack directed against him on the Talk:Empire of Atlantium/archive page. I think the new policies have greatly improved things, and I don't think the old wars will be around still. Samboy 20:48, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
File:Titan cassini 1.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Titan cassini 1.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.
Image source
Thank you for uploading Image:SkorzenyBW.jpg. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you. --02:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Temporary blocking request
Hallo, can I ask you to block temporarily the article Goce Delchev until the differences between me and the anonymous user who keeps reverting are resolved? I have provided a source list and have asked him to review it before reverting again but he doesn't seem to wanna do it... VMORO 23:42, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Hey, thank you. I'll probably contact you in the next days to deblock it - I doubt there will be any real discussion on the talk page, these are hit-and-run expeditions... VMORO 22:14, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, General, can I ask you to remove the protection on Goce Delchev? We seem to have reached a working compromise solution. Thanks in advance!!! VMORO 23:43, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Horthy photos
Dear GeneralPatton !
Dou You have any COLOR photograph about Hungarian admiral Miklós HORTHY ? If yes, could You send them to me, please ?
Thanks, Tibi (Hungary) tibi.82@freemail.hu
Image:Antonius Pius 01.jpg
Image deletion warning | The image Image:Antonius Pius 01.jpg has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information. |
Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 05:33, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
Image copyright
You know that your eligible contributions to wikipedia must be gfdl, and the same goes for images. Can I change the tags on some of your images to {{GFDL}} from {{copyrighted}}, or do you want them deleted? Zeimusu | (Talk page) 14:17, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Image:Waffen-SSposter01.jpg
Image deletion warning | The image Image:Waffen-SSposter01.jpg has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information. |
question on SkorzenyBW image
Greetings!
I work for a non-profit and am writing a high school curriculum on war crimes tribunals that includes an exercise regarding Otto Skorzeny's 150th Brigade. I'd love to use the black and white image you uploaded of Skorzeny, but can you tell me who owns the copyright, or at least where you got the image from? I'd really appreciate any information toward that end, so I know who to write to for permission to print it in my unit.
Thank you in advance!
Poll
Hey, you may be interested in voting for this Poll Samboy 05:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Skorzeny image
Please see Misplaced Pages:Help desk#Copyright to use Skorzeny image on a new book. Bovlb 14:12:17, 2005-07-27 (UTC)
Erwin Rommel
What is sneaky about the part ? Also what context do you attribute to the quotes ? Since fact of Rommel's presence in Poland as commander of Hitler's personal security isn't disputed nor are the quotes disputed why do you keep deleting them ? So far it looks like whitewashing Rommel. PS:I added the same topic in the talk since edit page doesn't list my previous post--Molobo 00:50, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
It seems(Looking at Guderian and Rommel edits of yours) that you are interested in hiding their misdeeds during the war and promoting a rather whitewashed view of those officers ? Correct me if I am wrong.--Molobo 09:50, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Also you didn't answer my questions.Since you don't argue that the quotes aren't true and Rommel's presence in Poland isn't disputed what is the reason for your deletation of them.The same with Guderian case of taking away property from Polish owners ?--Molobo 09:53, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, Patton! I don't recommend engaging in an argument war with Molobo, since he is blinded by his nationalist views and never, ever cares abour reaching agreements on his POVs. He is currently on a self appointed anti-german crusade, deleting information from nearly every imaginable german topic and staining article with POVs. I already have alerted admins of this and actions will most likely be taken shortly. Meanwhile, allow me to thank you for your valuable contributions to the Erwin Rommel article, and I encourage you to remain vigilant against more possible edits by molobo in his usual POV, disrespectful of others' opinions and anti-german fashion. Let me know if I can be of assistance, and nice to meet you! -- Cadorna 11:00, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Two comments from Cadorna : http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=German_1st_Mountain_Division&action=history "(Removed extreme POV - you call Yad Vashem "trustworthy"??? Oh COME ON!!)" http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=12th_SS_Panzer_Division_Hitlerjugend&action=history "(Serious sources only, please - using www.jewishlibrary.org as a source on this matter is like quoting the KKK on the Black Power article)" Do you symphatise with his views ? --Molobo 16:47, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Greetings, GeneralPatton. Regarding your comment on my Talk Page, the answer is yes, gladly. I also take this chance to say that, being Jewish myself, I don't find Cadorna's comments insulting in any way, I tend to believe they are intended to provide examples of what can be considered unneutral sources on sensitive issues. Shauri 17:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
- As I said, count me in. I'm kinda unexperienced at the arbitration procedures, tho, so I'd suggest that you instrument the steps; I'll be glad to provide my testimony whenever needed. Hugs, Shauri 19:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
User:Cadorna
Sorry, are you trying to talk to me on Cadorna's talk page, or are you addressing somebody else there ? I think I'm not following you. If you're not talking to me then I apologize for this intrusion. If you are talking to me, why don't you use my talk page to avoid such confusion ? --Wojsyl 15:23, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
NPOV and writing style
Good, but NPOV means Neutral Point Of View. Do you think that whitewashing Nazis now is neutral indeed ? Which of my edits do you consider POVish then ? --Wojsyl 15:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
- I am not accusing you of bad will, just ask you to consider that where there are more than one, often contradictory, points of view, the neutral one should be taking all of them into account. To some extent at least. --Wojsyl 15:58, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Why did you erase war crimes of Waffen SS Wiking?
And restored that it had no war crimes record ? They killed Jews in Lwow area(source was given) --Molobo 14:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
- I just combined your aditions with the existing intro. Do you see it now? GeneralPatton 14:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)