Jump to content

User talk:MLauba/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Why did you delete the page on Frank Cullotta???

Why did you delete the page on Frank Cullotta??? You mentioned copyright problems. Why didn't you clean it up??? Why did you have to completely delete it??? Now there isn't a page on him at Wikipedia. It's well-known who he is - he was a hitman for the Chicago mafia who later flipped and went into Witness Protection, then after a number of years he left Witness Protection and got hired on as a consultant when they made the movie "Casino" - in fact, he actually got an acting part in the movie - as a hitman - they hired him so they would know how a hit actually goes down. This is well known and documented in many places, but you just simply deleted the entire entry. This doesn't really help Wikipedia because a better resource. I note that you seem to be one of those people who make thousands of edits - mostly deletions - to information other people post - and you seem to do so on subjects that you are not familiar with. Do you even now what Frank Cullotta is??? I doubt it. Nice going. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.5.255 (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I will respond to all civil messages. MLauba (Talk) 21:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Skyguide

Hi! At what time do you plan to photograph the Skyguide head office at Geneva Airport? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I have to be honest, it totally slipped my mind (and the weather has been pretty lousy recently). If I get some sunshine next week, I'll try to make a short excursion. MLauba (Talk) 22:01, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Alrighty - If you do get a photo, please let me know :) WhisperToMe (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Why Deleted? -- 12:27, 15 December 2010 MLauba (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Product-Market Growth Matrix"

Hi,

I noticed the following page was deleted and I found it quite useful. Was it a copyright violation? Just wondering what happened!

12:27, 15 December 2010 MLauba (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Product-Market Growth Matrix" ‎ (G8: Talk page of a deleted page)

Thanks for your quick reply,

Hopealso — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopealso (talk • contribs) 22:17, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


The talk page wasn't but the original article that was where the redirect now lies was definitely a copyright violation, and dating back to the article's creation. We typically don't keep talk pages of deleted pages, which explains why the talk page disappeared as well. MLauba (Talk) 23:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

By the way

It's always very cheering when you pop in to poke at CP. Thanks, and good to see you! :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Reactivation of IDPPPA (S. 3728)

Hi!

Would you consider reactivating the IDPPPA wiki page? It really is a more important bill than the wiki page made it out to be. 1. It is a hot topic of discussion/debate and articles are written posted about it everyday. The IDPPPA is a huge issue in the fashion industry and the field of intellectual property law and it is important to have a neutral open source of information about it. 2. It made substantial changes from previous drafts of the bill. 3. It made it further in the process than any previous bill. 4. It had support from long time opponents (unlike the previous versions). 5. The next bill introduced is likely to be substantially similar to the language of the IDPPPA so it is important to have a point of reference.

The previous text of this article was pretty bare and did not reflect its true relevance. I can update the page substnatially to reflect its importance and relevancy and add needed citations.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oddlymanic (talk • contribs) 17:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi, please remember to sign your contributions with four tilde marks:~~~~.
I cannot evaluate your request because you will have to provide me with the exact article name that was deleted OR the name of an editor who had edited it, as I cannot find anything under IDPPPA or any other similar titles. MLauba (Talk) 17:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


Thank you so much! I tried to submit a request for recreation but it keeps getting deleted. Oddlymanic (talk) 17:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Revan

Thanks for dealing with Revan. I am generally not one to ask for administrative action against others for incivility, but I can't say it won't be a pleasure to edit without fear of being stalked and insulted for a bit. Cheers.LedRush (talk) 07:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Every editor has the right to contribute free of the kind of harassment you experienced. Glad I could be of assistance. MLauba (Talk) 11:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


re your proposals to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rodhullandemu/Workshop

I would advise you that you are mixing gender neutral and gender specific terminology in the principles section. As principles, and noting there are female admins, the gender neutral terms are correct and you may wish to change any references to him/his to them/their. Cheers,LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, the curse of EN-3... Thanks for pointing it out. MLauba (Talk) 13:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Some excellent proposed principles which can be applied generally. My only qualm is that it doesn't explicitly say anything about the judgement expected/required of an administrator; in practice, an user's fitness as an admin is called into question - even challenged - when he/she exercises poor judgement repeatedly or egregiously. Ncmvocalist (talk) 02:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
A good point but I'm at loss to find a way to describe it accurately. Will have to mull it over (or hope someone more able comes up with a suitable wording). MLauba (Talk) 11:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Fans_and_critics_alike

This new user is engaging in personal attacks in edit summarries and on talk pages. Specifically, here[1], here [2] and here[3]. In these, he says I have an obivious agenda, accuses me of sock puppetry, says that because of edits like mine Wikipedia is a joke, and accuses me of trying to rig Wikipedia for my personal benefit. I am not sure if this editor is related to this IP[4] (who picked up where Revan left off on Led Zeppelin article) or Revan himself[5], but it does seem like I'm being targeted a bit. Anyway, I am not actually requesting administrative actions, but warnings from an admin (assuming that you believe warnings are appropriate) may carry more weight than from me, seeing as I'm obviously involved in the dispute.LedRush (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but I'll be offline for a while. I believe the warnings left there are sufficient on their own, if he resumes the behaviour, a quick post at ANI should be enough to sort the matter for good. MLauba (Talk) 18:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Man, you are one tough mutha. Thanks for looking into this for me.LedRush (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't even aware that there could be a fan feud between Led Zep' and Queen fans. Learn something new every day. MLauba(Talk) 22:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
That's the truly odd thing. First, I like both bands. Second, I am doing the same thing to both articles. It's merely that on the Led Zeppelin article, one editor is strongly fighting for only the lower number to be included, while on the Queen article a couple of editors are fighting strongly for only the higher number. This has actually been resolved long ago (without me involved) on the list of best selling music artists page. Oh well. Thanks again.LedRush (talk) 22:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Just askin' feedback

Hi. This is my current rough: User talk:Moonriddengirl/sandbox. Do you think this is likely to generate anything productive at all? Is it clear?--Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately the message is complex. Everything you write is good, but I worry it will lose too many people. I think the thing would be best served by collapsing from background down, and below that, phrase a simple question, like "How should we treat creative Top # lists compiled by third parties on Wikipedia?" MLauba (Talk) 21:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback. Losing people worries me, too. :) Like this? --Moonriddengirl (talk)21:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Works for me. In return, I'd like some thoughts on my input on the Bollywood talk page :) MLauba (Talk) 21:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Boy, I'm speedy, aren't I? Please blame my heavy workload over the weekend. :) I thought your input on the Bollywood talk page was brilliant. You offered a good compromise. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Might you have time?

I'm hoping to find somebody to help out with reviewing a potential close paraphrasing issue. It's sport related, which is second only to computers in making me run shrieking in horror. Since you've been around more lately, I thought perhaps you might have time. Details are atUser_talk:Moonriddengirl#Talk:Netball.2FGA1. If you don't, please let me know, and I'll ask somebody else. :)--Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll happily work on computer issues but on sports, I'm in the same boat as you. I'd probably let the single example on your talk page slide, but frankly, I'm not up for a complete review of the article. I'm also currently re-evaluating my participation to Wikipedia, and while I procrastinate, unlikely to keep the current level of activity up. MLauba (Talk) 00:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I just ran one source picked at random through Dcoetzee's new tool: this. MLauba (Talk) 00:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Tool server seems to be down. :( I'll see if I can find somebody who isn't sports averse. :D (BTW, words like "currently re-evaluating my participation to Wikipedia" are unnverving. Don't leave us! We need you!) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Revan ltrl part 2

Revan is back on the Talk: Led Zeppelin page and seeming trying to inflame situations. I have removed some personal attacks and non-relevant comments he made, and I have also deleted a comment by me which was probably not helpful to the sitution. However, he has started deleting other of my comments, and I assume it I revert him, he'll just be sucking me in with trollish delete. Could you see his edits and perhaps give him a warning (assuming you believe such a warning is meritted)? It seems that if he is supposed to stay away from me, posting taunts on the Led Zeppelin talk page isn't a good way to accomplish that goal.LedRush (talk) 00:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

In this particular case, I would actually simply ignore it. Yes, it's not particularly helpful, but it may also prove the last of it. That being said, I'm going to abstain from reviewing or acting on user conduct issues for the time being, and I believe you will easily understand why.
I remember you have expressed concerns that my manner of doing so is heavy-handed. I have always thought it a necessary tool to ensure that the point of view you defend can be heard, a certainly crude but efficient way to separate the chaff of particularly aggressive communication coming from certain quarters from the wheat of the appropriate and legitimate view you and some others try to bring to the table.
It is an inherently flawed method, because it fell short in one aspect, to allow you to edit free from the mistrust generated by those others' conduct. Given the history, your position has always been an uphill battle to represent adequately, and in retrospect, I have failed to support its expression more. I regret not the stick I had to show, but the absence of the carrot that I could have offered, and in this, you have my belated apology. MLauba (Talk) 01:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
My goodness. Thank you for that incredibly gracious response. I often act like a magnifying mirror in conversations, reflecting either kindness or incivility back at the people with whom I communicate. It is not such a bad thing to be reminded to be more civil. I will take your advice regarding Revan and appreciate your thoughtful responses to my issues.LedRush (talk) 02:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Come back

No pressure intended by this, but... Yes! Come back to us! I will give you cookies! :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Cookies!

Moonriddengirl has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.


To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You are appreciated here. By some of us, greatly. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


Oh god, you're ruining my diet! MLauba (Talk) 11:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The end justifies the means Welcome back! SoWhy 18:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I'll second that. It's great to see that the WikiBreak hasn't been so indefinite after all! SuperMarioMan 19:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
As with blocks, indefinite isn't the same as infinite :) That being said, as I know this page is watched by more than just sympathizers, I am no longer watching the article that led to my wikibreak, and my return will not lead to any further actions on that specific topic for the time being. That well has been too poisoned for me. MLauba (Talk) 21:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm not surprised, given all the past disruption (and, unfortunately, that which continues to this day). Of course, I respect your decision. Best Wishes, SuperMarioMan 02:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing films

Hi, could you please help me with the List of highest-grossing films page? Seeing your edits on List of highest-grossing Bollywood films, the same kind of edits should be made on List of highest-grossing films since both boxofficeindia and boxofficemojo operate similarly. On boxofficemojo's about page it is stated, "the calendar gross data is generally considered more comprehensive after 2001, while pre-2001 estimates are considered approximate" and "when daily data is not available, estimates are used and are based on weekend and weekly data and historical box office trends." I'm having trouble with the copyright template. I would highly appreciate it if you helped me with this. Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 17:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Same answer as Moonriddengirl gave you, I'm afraid. If you believe there are copyright issues on a particular article, bring it to our attention by tagging it and listing it on WP:CP. Thanks, MLauba (Talk) 06:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Here's how you do that. Paste the following code over the part of the article that constitutes a problem: {{subst:copyvio|url=your text here}}. Where your text goes, you can and should not only put the url but a brief explanation or a pointer to the talk page section where you explain your concerns. At the end of the material that is problematic, paste </div>. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Dorridge Wood

I have placed some revised text on the Dorridge Wood temporary page as suggested, please could you review this. I trust that it is now significantly edited from the originally referenced source to be acceptable? If it is perhaps you could insert the text into the original article so that I do not have to re-write the infobox, references, etc? Pahazzard (talk) 19:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Could you please help me correct a mistake I made?

I was trying to write an essay, I thought I was doing it right, but obviously I wasn't, because instead of saving as a Project Page, it saved as an Article Page. I was wondering if you could change that for me? The page is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_that_disrupts_dispute_resolution

Thanks so much for your help. Mmyers1976 (talk) 04:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Just a note that I have moved the essay into project space (it's at Wikipedia:Behavior that disrupts dispute resolution now) and tagged the redirect, Behavior that disrupts dispute resolution, for G6. If it's still alive when you read this, it would be appreciated if you could delete it. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleteion of Nailsea Methodist Church entry around November 2010

Hi,

You have deleted my entry on Nailsea Methodist Church for suspected copyright infingement because pages were copied from www.rlbr04669.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/history.htm without permission:

15:16, 30 November 2010 MLauba (talk | contribs) deleted "Nailsea Methodist Church" ‎ (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days: copy /pasted from http://www.rlbr04669.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/history.htm without evidence of permission)

The Nailsea Methodist Church website is written by me, I wrote the history page on rlbr04669 and I also write the wikipedia entry - Indeed there is even a link on the www.rlbr04669.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk website to the wikipedia entry.

I can confirm that I Richard Lancaster of 64 North Street Nailsea Bristol BS48 4BS wrote both the wikipedia entry and created the http://www.rlbr04669.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/history.htm webpage and that I have permission for the words and images on both. (the rl in www.rlbr04669 refers to my initials Richard Lancaster)

Please can you tell me if it is possible to re-instate the wikipedia entry or do I have to re-create the entry from scratch?

Thanks Lancaster Richard (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Richard Lancaster

Hi,
As we do not verify user identities upon account creation, we need to rely upon external verification when contributors wish to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia. The process is described on this page, and we will not be able to restore the article or permit its re-creation until one of the two methods of verifying that you are indeed the copyright holder has been satisfied.
Beyond the authorship question, though, allow me to also point out that in order to have an article on Wikipedia, any topic must have been the subject of multiple independent coverage in third party reliable sources. The Church's webpage or the one of its theatrical company do not meet that requirement. Even once the authorship question is solved, the entry may still get challenged for inclusion if no significant outside and independent coverage exists on the Church.
I'm currently not very active but if you have further questions, do not hesitate to get back to me - I will usually respond within 48 hours. MLauba (Talk) 22:32, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

MK Rajakumar page

Please unprotect the page - the original pages are not a breach of copyright - all articles are available for public use and the subject is my father. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KirenR (talk • contribs) 23:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The original pages hold a copyright notice or a license not compatible with Wikipedia - if you are the author of the material, please follow the process at WP:DCM to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia. If you are NOT the author of the source material, your family relationship to the subject doesn't give you standing on copyright issues, please follow WP:PERMISSION instead.
Last but not least, please do review WP:COI and mind it when editing. MLauba (Talk) 00:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
We may need to keep an eye out for this kind of thing. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Brief assistance

Thank you for all that you do regarding Wikipedia copyrights.

There are two pending matters that affect the arbitration. First there is the table at Netball and the Olympic Movement which is now admitted to be a hugh block quote of a table in an Olympic report. Do you think that its status as a quote is clear? Should the 14 footnotes be retained?

Second, there is the table now in Rules of netball with the position descriptions that paraphrase other websites.[6] Could you render an opinion on whether they are too close? Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 15:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the first one, my gut reaction that it is first of all superfluous padding of the article - the content could very well be summarized... and actually make a point relevant to the article. Is it sufficiently clear that the table is quoted from a third party document? Yes. Is it unduly long? Not sure, but I don't see a point having it in the article in the first place, and non-free content should not be used when another way of describing what it says can be used.
And again, I don't see the point of having it in the first place.
Regarding the table, I'm sticking to the same opinion as last time: it's close, but it's also a description of a technical matter that would become unnecessarily convoluted if paraphrased more. So close, but not unusably close.
That being said, I would strongly advise you to unwatchlist anything related to Netball right now regardless of the arbcom's outcome, for your own good as well as the good of the project. No matter how the whole close paraphrasing originated and even with best intentions, the WMF post was in the best case terribly clumsy and inappropriate, and everything that happened since then worse. If I were you, I would also redact my general comments as they pertain to the filing party - it's quite evident that the appeal you wrote up about similar interests will not be received well at this stage. The best you can do is recognize that you didn't measure the effect of your actions, issue an apology for the distress you may have caused, and wait for ArbCom to rule. At least that's what I'd do if I were in your position. MLauba (Talk) 15:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding article, 'Jehangir Kothari Parade'

Hi there. I was wondering what copy-right issues you encountered on a previously written article on this topic that it was deleted? I wanted to write an article regarding Jehangir Kothari Parade so I thought it best to ask what I should be aware of before proceeding to write & publish. Would appreciate your prompt response.

Thankyou S.faris (talk) 08:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)s.faris

Replied on your talk page. MLauba (Talk) 09:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

verification of the content of teacher plus magazine

Hi, I have edited the Teacher Plus Magazine page which was earlier created by Divya in 2009. I would like you to verify the page. I have added third party links for verification and written the content in a neutral way. Please check the page as soon as possible and update the comments on it.

Regards Paulomi.deekonda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulomi.deekonda (talk • contribs) 14:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Chat room

You missed one revision for Chat room, [7]. --Tothwolf (talk) 17:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. MLauba (Talk) 09:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Clerk question

Can you weigh in? Need a couple of copyright admins. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi. :) We've got a couple of more clerks proposed to help NortyNort, who is still doing some amazing heavy lifting. See Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems/Clerks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi. :) We have a clerk consideration here. If you have any observations to add, they would be appreciated. (Is this getting redundant? :D) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi MRG. I'll have to decline this time around - I'm not familiar enough with their work to comment with any measure of fairness, and too tied up in RL to investigate. Sorry MLauba (Talk) 16:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Skyguide HQ

Hey MLauba! Have you had a chance to photograph the Skyguide building yet? Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 01:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello. As a German-speaking WikiGnome, I'd like to solicit your help in testing a new tool. For a few years now, the Red Link Recovery Project has been using the Red Link Recovery Live tool to track down and fix unnecessarily red links in articles. Recently, the tool has been expanded to work on non-English Wikipedias. A small set of suggested fixes for red-links on the German-language Wikipedia have been prepared and I'm hoping to interest some German-language speakers (such as yourself) to work through them.

If you are interested, please visit http://toolserver.org/~tb/RLRL/quick.php?lang=de. Each time you refresh the page you'll be presented with three new suggested fixes. I'll be happy to answer any questions on the tools talk page. - TB (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Need help from a higher authority.

Hello there, how are you?

We had a small interaction long time ago when I had sought your permission to create an article that had been previously deleted.

Today, I come to you with an entirely different issue. I am trying to edit this highly controversial topic [Bangladesh Liberation War] but it is protected by an individual named Ragib. He will not respond to any of my objections raised in the talk page except for one-liners & he keeps reverting my changes to the article on the basis of POV issues. I highly suspect him to be a biased individual who is prejudiced against any changing of the false narrative with factual information that the Wikipedia article relating to this topic depicts.

Please help as I am 500% confident about the work I am citing regarding the changes I am making & I am trained in the subject of History & Political Science but user Ragib is defying all logic and reason and I believe he his abusing his authority with regards to this article. I want to lodge some kind of complaint or do something about it but I am relatively new and do not know such procedures.

Thankyou S.faris (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)s.farisS.faris (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


Just to clarify, faris, I do intend to reply to your points. I've been very very sick for the last few days, so I need some more time to explain my arguments. It is you who are trying to include POV and biased content into the article. But anyway, I'll reply further in the article talk page in a few days when I recover. Thanks for understanding. --Ragib (talk) 05:52, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
And just to let you know, there is no logic in your protection of a fake source such as 'acig.org' - the article cited for content from that website cites no sources - when in fact I am trying to improve the article via a respectable book published by a university press. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which of the two carries more academic weight and credibility.S.faris (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)farisS.faris (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Re-starting Talk:Abanoub a page you previously deleted

Hi MLauba!

A page with this title has previously been deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.

  • 13:32, 30 August 2010 MLauba (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Abanoub" ‎ (G8: Talk page of a deleted page)

Article is up and running again, so I've re-started the talk page. I re-started a number of these, and the admins I've contacted have said it was OK, but re-starting the article itself without going through WP:DRV might be a problem. Could you possibly have a look at both article and talk page? Thank you! --Shirt58 (talk) 10:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi. MLauba is not often able to contribute these days, so I thought to offer you a response in the meantime. There should be nothing controversial about creating a new talk page for any article, regardless of the reason for which the article was deleted. Sometimes there may be value to restoring the old talk page, but in this case there is not, really. The only note on the talk page referred to NPOV problems that disappeared along with the old text. The prior history of the article cannot be restored, as it was deleted for copyright problems, but a new article on the subject without that text (as this one) is perfectly appropriate. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


Thanks for your help, Maggie. MLauba (Talk) 11:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

ANI thread

...where someone has mentioned you in an underlying attack page (subject of thread). Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 00:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. It's archived now and I can't be bothered to dig, so educated guess by the section's title, it's about how Black Kite, John, me and... ? are so bad because we blocked unruly SPAs who just can't seem to understand that no matter their POV, their attitude is not to be tolerated. Am I right? :) MLauba (Talk) 11:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Requested RD1 redactions

Category:Requested RD1 redactions, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 17:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wizard101 Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wizard101 Logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Problem solved. Added the image back to the relevant article. Jenks24 (talk) 05:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy 2012 !!!
Dear MLauba,

May the Year to Come Bring You Great Happiness.

Very Best Wishes,

SuperMarioMan 02:35, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear MLauba,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.206.39 (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wizard101 Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wizard101 Logo.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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello MLauba. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Jacky Jasper for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jacky Jasper 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/Jacky Jasper 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 template from the top of the article. Mdann52 (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Wizard101 Logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Wizard101 Logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

regarding deletion of some pages

why did you deleted? 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Torpedo_Advanced_Light&action=edit&redlink=1 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Varunastra_torpedo&action=edit&redlink=1 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thakshak_torpedo&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.21.139 (talk) 22:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

These articles were flagged for copyright violations by a contributor who had copied content without permission on multiple occasions. Wikipedia cannot keep content copyrighted to others without explicit permission. At the time, no independent third-party reliable sources could be found that would allow a rewrite of these articles so that they met our guidelines, so they were deleted. MLauba (Talk) 01:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Swiss Household Panel

Guten Tag MLauba,

Ich bin eine Mitarbeiterin des Schweizer Haushalt Panels (www.swisspanel.ch). Unsere Seite wurde wegen Copyright Problemen gelöscht. Wie sollen wir vorgehen, sollen wir den Text neu schreiben mit neuen Worten, damit es in Ihrem System nicht als Copy-Paste interpretiert wird?

Freundliche Grüsse, Flurina Schmid


2001:620:610:500:9029:477D:D007:B298 (talk) 10:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Guten Tag Frau Schmid,
Am besten wäre es, wenn die Seite von jemandem geschrieben wird, der mit andere Publikationen Eurer Organisation nichts direkt zu tun hatte und Swiss Panel in seinen eigenen Worten beschreibt.
Bitte beachtet, dass es auch notwendig ist, den Artikel durch Referenzen von Drittparteien zu unterstützen (die müssen nicht zwingend auf Englisch sein). Pressekommentare, aber natürlich auch Wissenschaftliche Publikationen sind hier am besten.
Zuletzt muss ich auch auf WP:COI hinweisen, unsere Weisung betreffs Interessenskonflikte. Wikipedia ist oft zeimlich kritisch, wenn Teilnehmer Artikel über ihre eignenen Organisationen, Publikationen oder Arbeitsgeber schreiben. Diese Seite gibt einige hilfreiche Tipps, die die Zusammenarbeit mit anderen Teilnehmer verbessern.
MfG, MLauba (Talk) 15:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MLauba/Archive_11&oldid=1142474456"