User talk:Emerine

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Emerine! Thank you for your contributions. I am Rosiestep and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Rosiestep (talk) 01:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Stevens (diplomat)

Hi Emerine: Are you following the news? It may help you learn the facts. I am not sure why in the Christopher Stevens (diplomat) article you are fighting so hard to deny the growing news reports and government sources that Stevens and the other Americans killed and wounded on the recent September 11 attack in Libya was due to a military strike by trained assailants and was not the result of a riot. On the first day, somehow news reports were fed the story that rioters were protesting a movie, 24 hours later reports were coming in that this was a well-organized terrorist attack. Now as the third day after the attacks the news reports are coalescing around the conclusion that this was an attack that used a mob as cover to perpetrate its aims. As good example, see http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57511645/u.s-launching-apparent-terrorist-hunt-in-libya/:

CBS News:

"September 12, 2012 5:02 PM

U.S. launching apparent terrorist hunt in Libya

Updated 2:45 a.m. ET Sept. 13

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The Obama administration, roiled by the first killing of a U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, has begun what appears to be a terrorist hunt in Libya, as evidence mounts that the deaths of four diplomatic workers there were perpetrated by well-armed thugs and not an out-of-control crowd.

CBS News correspondent David Martin reports the FBI has opened an investigation into the deaths, and agents will be sent to sift through the wreckage for evidence. They will be accompanied by a second team sent just for their protection.

As part of the hunt for the attackers, officials say the U.S. will increase its surveillance over Libya, including the use of unmanned drones. In addition, the U.S. Navy is positioning two destroyers armed with cruise missiles off the coast of Libya.

One destroyer, the USS Laboon, moved to a position off the coast Wednesday, and the USS McFaul is en route and should be stationed off the coast within days. Officials said the ships, which carry Tomahawk cruise missiles, do not have a specific mission. But they give commanders flexibility to respond to any mission ordered by the president.

The investigation will focus on whether the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a planned terrorist strike to mark the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and not a spontaneous mob enraged over an anti-Islam YouTube video.

After the attack, an elite anti-terrorist unit of about 40 Marines was flown in to beef up security at the American embassy in the capital of Tripoli. Air Force transport planes flew the bodies of the dead Americans out, along with at least three who were injured and the rest of the approximately 25 diplomats assigned to the consulate. At the same time, the U.S. State Department urged all non-essential personnel to leave on commercial flights.

Wanis al-Sharef, a Libyan Interior Ministry official in Benghazi, said there had been threats that Islamic militants might try to take revenge for the death of al Qaeda's No. 2 commander Abu Yahya al-Libi, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan in June, and he said the U.S. consulate should have been better protected.

Confirming al-Libi's death for the first time in a video posted online Monday, al Qaeda chief Ayman Al-Zawahri called on Muslims in al-Libi's native Libya to take revenge for his death.

U.S. officials believe the militants were using the demonstration against the video as a cover to get into the consulate and then take as much revenge as they could on Americans, Martin reports.

While the White House has been hesitant to call the attack planned, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers was not so ambiguous.

"Absolutely it's a terrorist attack," Rogers told CBS News Capitol Hill producer Jill Jackson. "This was not done by the Libyan government. It was done by an external group we believe has at least extremist ties, maybe al Qaeda ties, and the style and the signature of the attack clearly would be something that we have seen before and would be in line with something al Qaeda would do."..."

Stay tuned as this unfolds in the media, it's gonna be a big story! IZAK (talk) 08:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's important for us not to rush ahead of the facts. As and when any of those things are confirmed by multiple reliable sources, I'd be happy for you to add them to the article, as per WP:V and WP:RS. If those things are true, we can wait for confirmation, then add them to the article in due course. However, if they are not true, it would have been a bad idea to have been reporting them as fact: people read Wikipedia's account of things, and some of them, wrongly, treat Wikipedia as a reliable source. Wikipedia should not become a part of the howl-round of the media rumor mill. -- Emerine (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited AGAI 67, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Administrative (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating AGAI 67, Emerine!

Wikipedia editor Ana Bykova just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for making a wiki page, it looks great. Best wishes, Anastasia Bykova (talk) 02:57, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Ana Bykova's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Speedy deletion nomination of Shemr

Hello Emerine,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Shemr for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks,

Chihin.chong (talk) 19:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Auto-brewery syndrome, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intoxication (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:50, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abominable fancy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Damned (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of LATI (airline)

The article LATI (airline) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article cites no sources and thus fails WP:V. A Google search failed to yield any RS sources. Please add reliable and verifiable sources that support this article's content or it may be deleted.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:57, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of LATI (airline) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LATI (airline) 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/LATI (airline) 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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 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) 16:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]