User talk:Rossbarranco

License tagging for Image:The Beatles Anthology 1 - 500 X 500.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Beatles Anthology 1 - 500 X 500.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

About time someone said "Welcome" - and here are some useful links for you.

Hello, Rossbarranco! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DuncanHill 23:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

File:19780305 017.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:19780305 017.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY_sock ^(TALK) 00:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Shuttle Enterprise On 747 - 1978.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shuttle Enterprise On 747 - 1978.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. Acather96 (talk) 20:07, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Peter Strzok. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. - Mr X 🖋 01:08, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:21, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at John Solomon (political commentator)‎, you may be blocked from editing. You made major unsourced changes and despite the warning above added personal commentary. Doug Weller talk 17:23, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I was purposely trying to get a response to address this slander posted on Wikipedia, and didn't know how to do so. My content dispute is with Wikipedia, not another editor. Wikipedia ALLOWED this slander to be published. Quoting hearsay and accusation as fact should not be allowed. Where is the PROOF that the editor's allegations are TRUE, and John's allegations are FALSE? WIKIPEDIA should be responsible for its content. Documents have been posted which support the John's allegations and are being considered for legal action against the Bidens. How about blocking slander and false allegations by the other editor?? Rossbarranco (talk) 18:47, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) You unfortunately have an issue with the claim that Solomon is a conspiracy theorist. The two citations are from third-party sources. It is not up to us here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. The written word is not slanderous, the term is libel. UNTIL such time as Solomon takes the sources to court and wins his case, the description in the lede should stand as written. Regards, Aloha27 talk 22:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]