User talk:Publicola

Note: I will respond to comments where they are asked. Publicola 21:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Iraq war

I agree with your chosen hedder photo.

[[1]] --Comander E.I. Davis2 18:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Iraq streetfight.jpg

Why is the source url you gave http://www.defenselink.mil/home/photoessays/2004-11/p20041108a1.html non working, you only uploaded it on aug 19, it seems strange it would stop working so soon. Bleh999 18:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Please see commons:Image talk:Iraq streetfight.jpg

I left this message also at your commons user talk page: commons:User talk:Publicola

Please clarify the image source. It is an important image for the w:Iraq War article. After long discussion we had decided to use it for the header image. Please see

• Talk:Iraq War/Archive of image header discussions

I have noticed that the military sites seem to be scrubbing their sites of some of the casualty photos. They also seem to have rearranged photo pages, URLs, etc..--Timeshifter 08:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I copied it verbatim months ago, I saved the HTML. I see now that the press photographer was credited after the S. Sgt. Publicola 20:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I will have to look for that concerning images from military sites that I upload to the commons.--Timeshifter 20:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You are right that there are no longer any bodies. I guess that would have had to have happened between February and August. Publicola 21:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Banu Nadir/mpov

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Banu Nadir/mpov, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Oore (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

A note re: Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review

Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xeno^talk 14:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• Further to the above, we would appreciate if you could briefly take the time to place yourself below one of the suggested statements here. If none of these statements represents your current position, please compose your own or simply sign "Not applicable" under "Other quick clarifications". Likewise sign as N/A if you do not want to participate further in this debate. If you choose not to respond then you will likely not be counted with respect to further consensus-determining efforts. –xeno^talk 14:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)