User talk:GetLinkPrimitiveParams

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, GetLinkPrimitiveParams, 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! --Ysangkok (talk) 17:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

I'm not sure I follow you on Talk:Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, so I thought I would ask for clarification here. There's no question that the real economy is in very serious trouble indeed, and a major contributing factor is the enormously weakened commercial paper market. John M Baker (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ITN

On 26 November, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 26 November 2008 Mumbai attacks, which you helped update. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦^C 20:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mumbai map

Leopold's is on colaba causeway rd they've placed it somewhere on nathalal pirikh road. I think my dot is a little to the south (it is apartenbtly at the northen end of colaba causeway rd I've placed it in the middle) They've pulled the terminius position from google earth which is wrong as you can see when you zoom in further.Geni 00:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would but Vile Parle is rather a large area and other than the attack hit an underpass I don't know where it happened.Geni 02:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Thank you

Hi there,

Your welcome! Glad I could help! :)

The Helpful One 23:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error on the Mumbai Bomb article

Please correct the following: Sky News has reported that the terrorist "was speaking in Urdu in what was described as a Kashmiri accent" and NOT PAKISTANI. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Mumbai-Jewish-Centre-Under-Siege-In-India-Terror-Attacks-With-Link-To-Kashmir-Emerging/Article/200811415163321?f=rss - NapoleonARS

Done GetLinkPrimitiveParams (talk) 02:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq SOFA

Hi. The removal of your material was completely on accident, I was just dumping some material from the other article and accidentially pasted over it without realizing it. The article is indeed very long, so the need for brevity you point out is understood.

WP:LEAD says any notable controversy should be noted though, and Iraqi concern is important and relevant given the volume and significance of the discussion that it generated in their country. I'd be happy to work out a version with you.

On November 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces Agreement with the United States, establishing that Coalition combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, but allowing for further negotiation if the Iraqi Prime Minister believes Iraq is not stable enough. The pact forbids holding prisoners without criminal charges, and limits searches of homes and buildings.^[1] Coalition forces and contractors will be subject to Iraqi law if they commit major and premeditated crimes while off-duty and off-base.^[2]^[1] Some Iraqis protested the passing of the accord,^[3] and an aide to Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini al-Sistani expressed concern the ratified version of the pact would grant the occupiers immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts.^[4] A referendum will be held in mid-2009, which may terminate the agreement and require Coalition forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010.^[5] Parliament also passed another U.S.-Iraqi bilateral pact called the Strategic Framework Agreement, aimed at ensuring minority Sunni interests and constitutional rights.^[6]

I added a bolded version briefly noting protests and what Iraq's spriritual leader has indicated. They seem especially relevant by the referendum information, given that Iraqi perception and opinion will determine the future of the agreement.--Nosfartu (talk) 16:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The position of each of the respective groups in Iraq has been relatively stable, the Sadrists have been and are staying consistently opposed (now challenging the consitutionality) and Sistani has been noncommital and apprehensive. The political rhetoric is only more likely to pick up as the referendum draws closer, but waiting a few days for reactions seems reasonable.--Nosfartu (talk) 02:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly what you were asking, so this may be off-topic. It appears the Iraqi groups are opposed to the pact because they see it as acquiescing to the occupation, not placing enough effective restrictions on the coalition, and not fully restoring Iraqi sovereignty. Different Iraqi groups state this in different ways and cite different specific problems as examples, but many of them seem to be happy with having a referendum since they don't believe the pact will survive. The "anonymous U.S. officials and specialists who follow the war" may have been making the same point, I am not sure. Some of this may be bunk, that is why it would be better to attribute directly.--Nosfartu (talk) 18:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:EESA128.png

Thanks for uploading File:EESA128.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cold fusion patent

About Talk:Cold_fusion#Reliability_of_patent_authorship_for_purposes_of_to-do_item_1.3F, just pinging you so you remember to nag the patent authors about publishing the email somewhere so we can quote it :) --Enric Naval (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see that we already talked about patents months ago :-) It was archived here, I will re-read later to refresh my mind. (btw, congrats in finally getting a secondary source to mention the patents, now let's see if we can convince people to use New Energy Times as a source....) (btw also, it still needs a source for the 2008 Edison Patent Award? any luck with that?)

See my comment at the mediation. I look at the reverts that were done in Cold fusion and I see that you initally removed the whole rejection thing, but that later you made an edit where you added the specific patents and left in place what you had removed in the first diff. I'm taking that as evidence that you don't oppose the rejection being in the article as soon as it's clear that some CF patents do actually exist. You see, I have substantially expanded the patent rejection thing in the article without remembering that it was in the mediation. I hope that my mistake doesn't influence negatively the discussion in the mediation case, and that I haven't accidentally set off a conflict in the article. I have also proposed an alternative text for inserting the patent, could you take a look at it and say if you agree and propose changes and/or other versions? --Enric Naval (talk) 07:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FA Nomination: 2008 Mumbai attacks

I am nominating 2008 Mumbai attacks for FA-status, as it has improved since GA-status. Since you are one of the foremost contributors like me, I am just notifying you of this. If you have any objections, please contact me on my talk page or on the article's talk page. Thanks! Whaatt^uSpeak_{what iDone} 22:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

You have been accused of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nrcprm2026. Thank you.

June 2009

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Sockpuppetry. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nrcprm2026. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Anderson-Jacobson-Bell-101-modem.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Anderson-Jacobson-Bell-101-modem.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — ξ ^xplicit 04:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:SPAWAR triple tracks in CR-39.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SPAWAR triple tracks in CR-39.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Yikrazuul (talk) 20:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:FRB Docket No. 1334 Public Comments.pdf

Thank you for uploading File:FRB Docket No. 1334 Public Comments.pdf. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

^ ^a ^b Status of Forces Agreement Cite error: The named reference "sofatext" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
^ Rubin, A. (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi Parliament approves security pact" International Herald Tribune
^ "Iraq: Cleric al-Sadr calls for peaceful protests" (Associated Press)
^ Al Jazeera: Iraqi people will judge on U.S. pact
^ BBC News (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi parliament backs US pullout"
^ Karadsheh, J. (November 27, 2008) "Iraq parliament OKs pact on U.S. troops' future" CNN

[sofatext-1] Status of Forces Agreement Cite error: The named reference "sofatext" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

[ihtsofa-2] Rubin, A. (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi Parliament approves security pact" International Herald Tribune

[3] "Iraq: Cleric al-Sadr calls for peaceful protests" (Associated Press)

[4] Al Jazeera: Iraqi people will judge on U.S. pact

[bbcsofa-5] BBC News (November 27, 2008) "Iraqi parliament backs US pullout"

[cnnsofa-6] Karadsheh, J. (November 27, 2008) "Iraq parliament OKs pact on U.S. troops' future" CNN

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]