User talk:ICBUW

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Icbuw logo.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:ICBUW logo.jpg. The copy called Image:ICBUW logo.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 14:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, ICBUW, 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 and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Pbt54 01:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Icbuw logo.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Icbuw logo.jpg, 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. --Skier Dude (talk) 05:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

Hi. Thanks for the info you provide at Talk:Depleted uranium. I suggest you put something on your user page: User:ICBUW - if for no other reason that it will then no longer be a red link. I suggest putting some links there for ICBUW, etc.. I really appreciate this link you provided recently at Talk:Depleted uranium:

International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons - Weapons and Platforms.

I was recently looking for that info, and could not find anything quickly from Google. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, give me a shout if there's anything else you need. It's an interesting issue - even if the reality is somewhat different to that advanced by the Internet! Incidentally, we still haven't had any updates on the WHO in Fallujah. Most recent thing we heard was the local branch of the environment ministry has still not undertaken any assessments - crazy really but that's Iraq for you. My colleague's heading out again next month and is planning to try and write a situation report on the DU issue - seems like very little clearance and management has been done, but then they have a range of competing priorities...

Your account

Hi,
Is your account shared by different people (presumably at the ICBUW), or are you a single person? If the former, you're likely to get blocked, because shared accounts are not allowed. If the latter, I would urge you to change your accountname; there is more information about en.wikipedia rules (and examples of usernames) here. bobrayner (talk) 11:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I had no idea. I'm the only one who updates the page using the account, will check the info re user names and alter if necessary.

No worries. If somebody had taken you to WP:UAA you might well have got blocked until name changed, and that's not much fun for a newbie who didn't know the rule existed.

Also, a couple of suggestions for discussions on article talk pages (and user talk pages, like this one):

It's a good idea to sign all your comments on these pages. Do this with four tildes, ~~~~. If you still forget sometimes, you can ask a bot to help - put {{YesAutosign}} on your userpage (or on this page), and SineBot will follow you round adding signatures wherever you forgot.
You can indent your replies with colons. Asterisks (*) make bullet points. They work in combination too. Indenting helps people keep track of who is replying to what - on some pages it doesn't make much difference, but I'm guessing that you'll be editing on a few more controversial pages where a few editors (including me) might start bickering, so clear presentation is more important.

Have fun... bobrayner (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WHO/Iraqi MoH study into birth defects

Thanks for the heads up, and the links. Unfortunately, I may not have much time to do anything for a few weeks or months. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Thanks for disclosing your conflict of interest as required by the terms of use, but I notice that in this edit you linked to your own website. I don't see any benefit to Wikipedia for you to do that since that site isn't really usable as a source itself. I do see many links to reliable sources from ICBUW's website; just propose neutral use of those instead. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 04:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VQuakr the link to our report page was for background purposes only. I know there are a few folk that follow the DU issue on the talk page and for whom it may have been of interest. The link to IRIN's coverage is probably a usable source for the findings of the study should anyone wish to add them to the page. That said the report contains US strike data and an analysis of the targets that DU was used against, which is presumably neutral, even if the analysis sections don't meet NPOV. The raw targeting data is here http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/229.xls but is probably of limited use for the purposes of the article. ICBUW (talk) 17:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Web small.jpg

The file File:Web small.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willy1018 (talk) 05:27, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]