Jump to content

User talk:Don Brunett

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Don Brunett, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —Ed!(talk) 18:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Task Force 1-41, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1st Armoured Division. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

[edit]

How do I upload a personal photo to use on the article I created?

Please help me with...

Don Brunett (talk) 23:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)Donald Brunett[reply]

Uploading photos is somewhat tricky for reasons of copyright. If you personally took the photo, own the copyright, and are willing to release it under a free license that allows everybody to re-use and modify it for any purpose, including commercial purposes, you can upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. The same goes if someone else holds the copyright and has released the image under such a license, but then we'd need some evidence of the licensing, such as a link to a website where it was previously published and where licensing information can be found. If the image was taken by an employee of the US federal government as part of their official duties it's in the public domain and can be uploaded to the Commons, too. If the image is not released under a free license, it cannot be uploaded to the Commons, and whether it can be used on Wikipedia at all (to be uploaded via the local File Upload Wizard) would depend on whether it conforms with the non-free content criteria: We may be able to claim fair use, but we'll need a specific rationale for every single article where it's to be displayed. In particular, it must be of low resolution, no freely licensed equivalent may be obtainable, and it must be directly relevant to the article's content so that removing it would hinder our readers' understanding. Those are rather tough standards to meet. Huon (talk) 00:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Task Force 1-41

[edit]

I have once again turned the Task Force 1-41 article into a redirect. I have left a detailed explanation of various concerns on the talk page and would ask you not to reinstate the article without addressing those concerns. I'll also ask for input at WT:WikiProject Military history. Huon (talk) 19:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Task Force 1-41 for deletion

[edit]
Pic by Don Brunett included in the Task Force 1-41 article

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Task Force 1-41 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Task Force 1-41 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Huon (talk) 22:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Don, It's looking like it's a certainty that this articles for deletion discussion will end with an agreement that the article be retained. I appreciate that Wikipedia's bureaucratic processes can be frustrating to deal with. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:13, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks Nick. You guys did a lot for me. Much appreciated!Don Brunett (talk) 10:26, 30 December 2014 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]
      • No problem at all - it's good to have editors with an interest in the 1991 Gulf War - and first hand knowledge of this conflict - around, and thanks for your work on this and other related articles Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • No problem I don't think people realize how brutal it was out there. The Republican Guard units were much more determined than the conscript units out there. Very few of them surrendered. They also managed to take out some of our Bradleys and yes the T-72/Lion of Babylon tank can take out a Abrams. I saw it with my own eyes.Don Brunett (talk) 11:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]
Hi, thanks for your contributions of photos and writing. I hope you don't find the AFD process too frustrating. I won't add to guesses about how that will conclude specifically, as it seems to be about the organization of articles about various military units and so on which is beyond me to follow, but I believe that your contributions can and will be kept in some form. I added a copy of one of your pics, above; I like the pics especially! It is hard to get started in Wikipedia. It seems unreasonable how many policies and rules and practices there are, how much contradictions there are, and how much seemingly negative intervention can happen. Please do try to Assume Good Faith on the part of other editors, who come from different perspectives and have different failings. Hang in there. Cheers, --doncram 18:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Valorous Unit Awards, Desert Shield/Storm

[edit]

You wrote at the deletion debate page: '..*Buckshot I also wanted to clarify that the VUA's for the other units were not listed specifically as being awarded to a particular Task Force. They were listed mostly on brigade level from what I read. It really does not matter as 7th Corps destroyed the world's 4th largest army in a week. Most were deserving of the award, imo. I am critical of some of these air artillery units receiving the award as Iraq had little air support.' Now, having rechecked Dinackus and done twenty seconds' googling, this from CMH would appear to disagree with your recollection: none of the VUAs listed there was awarded to a task force. All were awarded to permanent MTOE organisations such as HHCs of battalions. 1st Bn, 41st Infantry appears at the top - the award was made to HHC, 1st Bn, 41st Infantry. Now if I may be boring and repeat myself, the linked list supports Dinackus when he says that '..in the VII Corps, virtually every manoeuvre battalion in the 1st and 3rd Armoured Divisions, 1st Infantry Division (Mech) and 2 ACR received the VUA.' So it wasn't mostly brigade HHCs. Buckshot06 (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Have you bothered to open up and read the citations? They pretty much single out everybody on a brigade level for the exception of Task Force 1-41. Most of the VUA citations were well earned for the exception of the air artillery units, imo.Don Brunett (talk) 10:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]
      • Because the topic of the article is Task Force 1-41 Infantry. It's not about anything else (!!). It also thoroughly clarifies what we're talking about - makes it much more distinguishable from a U.S. Navy task force (you'll see I moved your Joint Task Force entry from the USMCEB section, which it is assuredly not, to the combined-arms list. Next time read the top text at Joint Task Force before trying to add material there, please. Material about Task Force Iron should go at a page on that topic. Should you wish to add material on 3rd Brigade, 2nd Armored Division, the place for that is 2nd Armored Division (United States). Buckshot06 (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I mistakingly put it in the wrong Task Force category because of how confusing the format is. I am familiar with the difference between the two. Thanks for correcting it.Don Brunett (talk) 11:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Norfolk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M-109. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Kuwait International Airport has been accepted

[edit]
Battle of Kuwait International Airport, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Kuwait International Airport, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M-60. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Joint Task Force
added a link pointing to 1st Armored Division
Military elite
added a link pointing to Presidential Unit Citation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chinese Thor Airborne emblem.jpg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chinese Thor Airborne emblem.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (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) 02:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:TF1-41pows.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:TF1-41pows.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should have messaged him. He would have been more than happy to verify that I can use the pic. I will have him email you.Don Brunett (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2015 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

File permission problem with File:TF1-41Battle of Norfolk.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:TF1-41Battle of Norfolk.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Actually, you have been sent multiple emails approving use of this photo.Don Brunett (talk) 11:36, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

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 Wikipedia 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) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 3rd Field Artillery Regiment (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M-109. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

If it's already linked (broadly construed) in the text of the articles, it doesn't need to be in the See also section. I figure that's at least half of your list.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Destroyed Iraqi recon vehicle Burgan Oil field, 1991.jpg

[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Destroyed Iraqi recon vehicle Burgan Oil field, 1991.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 18:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Destoyed Iraqi APC, February 1991.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Destoyed Iraqi APC, February 1991.jpg, which you've attributed to David Sforza. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:53, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Norfolk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1st Cavalry Division. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Gulf War. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Phase Line Bullet

[edit]

Saddam was not a general, but he was the Iraqi commander in chief anyway. None of my "awards", as you say, are directly related to the 1991 Gulf War. I am free to write about the 1991 GW without have been there in the same way that I can write about WWII or the Napoleonic Wars; being a first-hand witness doesn't make you better than a reliable source here in Wikipedia. And please, if you have something more to say, go to the article's talk page, not to my personal talk page. This is just a minor issue for me, Thank you.--Darius (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gulf War references

[edit]

Hi! I came across some edits you made to the Gulf War page recently. It's good that you supplied inline references, but they don't seem to include the full citations to the works you consulted: "Bourque", "Nordeen&Isby", etc. Could you go back and fill those in when you get the chance? —Emufarmers(T/C) 12:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Rumaila

[edit]

I have removed some of the content you added to Battle of Rumaila, as it appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://milmag.com/2011/02/battle-at-rumaila/. — Diannaa (talk) 00:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Task Force 1-41 Infantry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Presidential Unit Citation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Battlefield outside Kuwait International Airport.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Battlefield outside Kuwait International Airport.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Don Brunett, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Commando has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 02:45, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 8th Field Artillery Regiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Airborne. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:03, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion pending for File:Destroyed Iraqi reconnaissance vehicle Burgan Oil Field, Feb1991.jpg

[edit]

Hello, Don Brunett. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:Destroyed Iraqi reconnaissance vehicle Burgan Oil Field, Feb1991.jpg — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

  • If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.
  • If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You were sent the email with everything that was needed to retain the pictures. Please read your emails. You guys are doing a poor job.Don Brunett (talk) 14:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley (May 4)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:
I was going to accept but then noticed the sources formatting, so please remove such citations such as "ABC News Correspondent Mike Boettcher" and put the URL instead. Examine WP:Referencing for beginners carefully especially Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Same_reference_used_more_than_once.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
SwisterTwister talk 04:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Hawthorne

[edit]

I would kindly remind and ask you to follow the WP:MOS, including MILMOS, unless you wish to request changes. Changes to the MOS should not be debated on talkpages of users or articles, as they involve many, many, people. Thus they need to be discussed at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you keep on making unwarranted personal attacks, for example [1]. Do this twice more and you will receive a block. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 04:37, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You need to block the people that lessen the value of the articles. Also, I have one more article that needs approved. After that I am gone for good.Don Brunett (talk) 10:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]
Yes, I'd noticed that you were working on the Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley. I've mainspaced it after cleaning up the citations. Is there any other assistance I can give you? Buckshot06 (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No. Thank you. I appreciate it.Don Brunett (talk) 23:29, 5 May 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

3 Para Div; Battle of KIA

[edit]

One needs reliable academic or secondary sources to confirm commanders' views. On KIA, can you link to the discussion threads, and other relevant upload pages etc, then I can see what I can do. Buckshot06 (talk) 00:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Golani Brigade into Commando. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done doing anything else for Wikipedia.Don Brunett (talk) 22:54, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley (May 29)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by In veritas was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley instead.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
In veritas (talk) 18:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Um, that is my article submitted for me by buckshot.Don Brunett (talk) 18:16, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

65th Brigade

[edit]

(diff) The link added to the External links section is already mentioned in the References section. Also you removed the navigation box {{NEZAJA}} in your edit. --Z 13:29, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.Don Brunett (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

About your edits on the articles of Winter- and Continuation war.

[edit]

Hello Don! I have checked your contributions and I can see that you are a quality editor, but there is a one thing I want to say to you. You highlight too much the results of Winter war and Continuation war, it is useless to make your own research by inventing things like "limited victory", "limited tactical victory" etc. I'm going to be honest and say that don't do that. I'm a Finnish history teacher and the professors here have accepted that Finland lost the Continuation war. No doubt in that. The Winter war is though littlebit tricky. USSR won on paper but Finland won in defense. So I think we can keep the discussion on the Winter war article, but leave the Continuation war, because it is clear what happened during that period. With kindest regards HunajaOtso (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I had ancestors who fought on both sides.Don Brunett (talk) 16:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

File permission problem with File:TF1-41Battle of Norfolk.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:TF1-41Battle of Norfolk.jpg, which you've attributed to An OTRS notice was applied over 60 days ago, but no message at OTRS has been processed since this tag was applied.. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 23:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your addition to 101st Airborne Division has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. This is your final warning. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Diannaa (talk) 00:37, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

That was one error. A week ago. I mean really? Look at all that I have contributed to Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

See, but it's not just one error. You've been running into copyright issues for a while now. I don't mean to denigrate your contributions, which appear significant. But copyright violations place Wikipedia itself in jeopardy. Now, as to your block, it's an indefinite block but not an infinite block. All you have to do is convince us you understand Wikipedia's policies on copyright and fair-use, by paraphrasing them. Note that Wikipedia's policies are generally stricter than what the law typically allows, and are notoriously tricky. But you are welcome to ask questions if you don't understand an area. Anyway, once you've convinced us you understand that, I see no reason why you shouldn't be unblocked right away. Yamla (talk) 01:25, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Don Brunett (talk) 01:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Forget it. I have accomplished what I wanted to do. I am officially retired.

Decline reason:

Enjoy your retirement. PhilKnight (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Don Brunett (talk) 01:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

You people could have handled this differently. You could have been more respectful. Another point I wanted to make is you are very unorganized losing emails and such. Good luck.

Decline reason:

The unblock request template is not for general complaints. OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Don Brunett (talk) 01:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

I'm not sure what emails you're referring to, but please realize that all of the admins here are individual volunteers. An email message to one administrator goes to that admin only, and the rest have no way of seeing (or losing) it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You guys need some form of centralized communication because trust me you are dropping the ball. You have no organization at all. You constantly deleted photos I sent emails of verification from their owners and you still deleted them. Sometimes they were sent four times. Each email being the same. Finally after several attempts they were accepted. You also say you have stricter rules. That is BS. Over half your articles are a mess or just plain incorrect. For two years I have worked on them providing sound references in the process. Schools wont even allow their students to use Wiki for their projects for these very reasons so you guys have a lot of work to do before you garner any respect. Good luck. You will need it from what I have seen.Don Brunett (talk) 09:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Don Brunett[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Don Brunett. 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 Wikipedia 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)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Don Brunett. 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 Wikipedia 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)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley

[edit]

Hello, Don Brunett. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Battle of Barawala Kalay Valley".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Don_Brunett&oldid=1163105238"