User talk:Dojarca/Archive3

Re: Requests for arbitration/Digwuren

The Committee does not rule on matters of content, which includes the suitability of particular sources. Kirill 00:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent vandalism

This edit ([1]) looks like pretty blatant vandalism - does someone else have access to your login? Stan 00:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not vandalism. It was the original meaning. The recursive acronym is simply later re-interpretation. See also:[2]--Dojarca 00:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to be an entirely different project. Please refrain from reinserting this material, lest it affects your reputation as regards trustworthy edits. of course if you actually have sources for this insertion please feel free to enlighten us. Chris Cunningham 00:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok--Dojarca 00:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Expendable launch systems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi. I've reverted your move and edits to this page, as the idea of moving this template in such a way as to make it encompass reusable launch systems had already been proposed, and discussion on the template's talk page resulted in opposition to this proposal. Either way, Energia II was never built, and thus does not qualify for addition either way. If you want to discuss this, please refer to the template's talk page. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and created a new template, Template:Reusable launch systems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), for articles of this nature, to save further disputes over their inclusion in Template:Expendable launch systems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Hope this helps. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:LodzRumJP.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LodzRumJP.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Osbk11.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Osbk11.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scorched earth moves

Please refrain from moving an article, then creating an artificial history at the redirect; this requires administrator intervention to move it back. This is considered disruptive and it is not the first time you have done this. Thanks. east.718 at 04:21, 11/9/2007

Why dont you mention these [3], [4] which also made move revertion impossible? Is the right to make such moves reserved to the one party only?--Dojarca 08:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The example you pointed out was just a typo, and wouldn't prevent a move over a redirect anyway. Two wrongs don't make a right either. east.718 at 21:22, 11/10/2007

It prevented the move. It is fact. We may guess was it a typo or was made intentionally - we dont know, but it effectively prevented the move.--Dojarca 20:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ER22.png

Thanks for uploading Image:ER22.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]