User talk:Schierbecker/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Schierbecker. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

→

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Schierbecker, 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! FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008

In a recent edit to the page Golf, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the appropriate variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. Thank you. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Golf club (equipment), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. - Fastily (talk) 06:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.Eaglebreath (talk) 19:56, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The Golf article

I wanted to contact you on a personal level to urge you to consider strengthening the credibility of the Golf article by citing your sources. I was reading it over again today, and the section your edited on the golf swing stands out in my mind. As I'm sure we both know, when it comes to playing golf, there's more than one way to skin a cat, (see Lee Trevino, Ben Hogan or Bobby Jones) to appreciate the variety of golf swings that work effectively) however; the golf swing section as it reads now sounds like there is only one true way to hit a golf ball. What you've added to the article has merit, but please inform the unfamiliar reader that a variety of golf swings have proved effective, be careful not to turn Wikipedia into an instructional guide, and cite your source material. Happy editing, Eaglebreath (talk) 06:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Golf. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. CardinalDan (talk) 17:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to the page Golf constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Versus22_talk 17:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Golf, you will be blocked from editing. A More Perfect Onion (talk) 17:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Ultra Lob wedge

A tag has been placed on Ultra Lob wedge requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. -Zeus-^u_c 02:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to United Airlines Flight 93. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to blocking of editing privileges. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Stop shifting boxes to the right Veggy (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Golf

I see you have requested Golf to be reassessed from its B-class rating. I think it still is at B-class in my opinion, but the only way to get it assessed any higher is to nominate it for a good-article, at WP:GAC. I honestly don't think it is ready for that though. And while I am here I have been meaning to let you know that deleting stuff off talk pages is not the way to go, even if it is old and redundant :). Keep up the good work! Grovermj 01:09, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. When on a peer review page, strike stuff out rather than removing it :). That may be what you would like to do next actually, submit the article for another peer review. Grovermj 01:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Various

Hi. I have merged Ultra lob wedge into Lob wedge as there is no requirement for a separate article, and it is one type of lob wedge. I have also reverted your move of Hybrid (golf) since this is a more appropriate term as they are also referred to hybrid woods, but most often simply as hybrids. Regards. _wjemather ^bigissue 17:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, I noticed you created the page with a speedy deletion {{db-nocontext}} tag, and a speedy contested tag {{hangon}}. I don't know if this was intentional, but it would be better to use either a {{inuse}} or {{underconstruction}} tag to notify other editors that the article is newly created and being worked on. _wjemather ^bigissue 23:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Reliable sources

I noticed you made an edit to the M1 Abrams article. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=M1_Abrams&diff=prev&oldid=281081316 Please remember to cite reliable sources for future reference. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. -Signaleer (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hook

Re this edit, which you did twice. Blanking articles is something which only newbies do. If you think an article should be deleted, you use an appropriate {{db…}} tag. But in the case of golf hook, a redirect was more appropriate. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Pics

I'd love to add more pics to the golf pages, and am working on it. I don't have too many hybrids, and only a few real muscle backs, but I'll try to get some pics done this week. Let me know if there's any other clubs you're interested in. ReignMan (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

In response to your question, Yes, I have a chipper. ReignMan (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome!!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Eurocopter (talk) 15:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF (talk) 20:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

MCS

Graphic rendering as far as I can tell. Hohum (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle

A tag has been placed on M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Declined Speedy Deletion: Flop shot

Hello User name one, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined your speedy deletion tag on Flop shot because No such criterion: the reason given is not a valid CSD criterion. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any queries, please let me know. Ale_Jrb ^talk 21:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Use of File:2009 Indonesia C-130H Hercules crash.jpg

The image is a fair-use image when used on 2009 Indonesia C-130H Hercules crash, as specified by the rationale given on the file page. Mnmazur (talk) 20:44, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Muscle back iron

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Muscle-back iron a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. _wjemather ^bigissue 18:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Golf reference sources

Hello... thanks for your work in trying to add references to several articles. Unfortunately, the site you added - "golfalot.com" - is not really what we would normally qualify under the reliable sources guideline as a definitive source. However, the effort is certainly appreciated. Thanks again! --Ckatz^chat _spy 17:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:M1A2 Abramstuskrear.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:M1A2 Abramstuskrear.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Nbcrv.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nbcrv.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Bicycle brake systems

Why are you removing captions from the images? -AndrewDressel (talk) 00:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

to save space. perhaps i should ask for consensus first. -Username 1 (talk) 18:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

That might work, but I doubt it. I, for one, would rather have the different brakes in the pictures properly identified than have a little less white space. Also, be aware that the article is in British English and so calliper should be spelled with two els. -AndrewDressel (talk) 19:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Golf equipment articles

Are you working to a plan, because it is very hard see what your end goal is and follow what you doing. It would appear that you keep changing your mind, and many of the equipment articles are now very messy.

I'm not entirely sure of the titles for some articles either, e.g. Types of irons to me this would be 1, 2, ..., PW, SW, etc. not different designs of irons, which is what the article is.

Perhaps it would have been better to start a discussion before all the mass editing, article creation, splitting, merging and redirecting.

I also note that you consider Stroke mechanics (golf) to be some of your finest work, despite it having no lead section and zero references. Please remember that verifiablity is essential, and as such reliable sources much be cited. Regards. _wjemather ^bigissue 22:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi again. Open-wikis such as wikihow.com are not reliable sources as they can be edited by pretty much anyone. I also don't like about.com as a source, as the knowledge of the author is often questionable. Personally, I think it would be better to find the information elsewhere from more mainstream sources. _wjemather ^bigissue 14:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

When I am looking for citations, I often do a google book search. Alot of the stuff is limited preview but the limited preview is often just what I need to see and cite. These are often much more reliable and you can actually find a wealth of information.Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop using about.com – there are much better sources available out there. Thanks. _wjemather ^bigissue 09:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Wedge Merge

Please discuss before making major merges like you did with golf wedges. I STRONGLY disagree with this action and am reverting some of it. Please engage on discussion on the talk page of the article and if you think a merge is necessary, please feel free to use templates to let people know so that they can discuss, get involved and reach a consensus. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I am going to revert some of your changes. I cannot find any discussion related to this action so I started one at wiki project golf. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the wedges don't need a separate article. At least until numbered irons have one which i may do soon.

Username 1 (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. Wedges are pretty significantly different. Each has an individual history and very specified design characteristics. I think there needs to be 1 article on all of the irons, and individual articles on all of the wedges. Again, I started a thread about this at wikiproject golf to see if any other members of the golf community would like to put there 2 cents in. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

nom nom nom

I just wanted to apologize for being bitey in my above comments. I can be a little rough some times just because I have been here for a while and the things I see as common sense may not be so obvious to others. I hope I did not scare you away. I would love to work together with you on golf articles (especially on your ability to add citations). I like the content you added but you really need to work on the citations. Thanks again for your hard work, it is appreciated. For your hard work here is a barnstar!

		The Resilient Barnstar
		I, Chrislk02, award you this barnstar for your work with the golf articles and your willingness to work towards a final solution when all parties are not in agreement. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

For your RfA

I see you're updating the admin count on your RfA. You might be interested in this template: {{NUMBEROFADMINS}}. Aditya ^α _ß 18:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Please dont go through with Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/User name one right now. You have a pretty low edit summary usage (59%) and little experience with wikipedia space activities. I will gladly coach you and help you reach this point but from where you stand now it is VERY unlikley that it will pass. Just my 2 cents though. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, i see you have been building it for a while, I am a little less concerned. I recommend being here at least a year and having a much higher edit count (or several good articles or even featured articles. You have than 3,000 edits of which only a handful are in the wikipedia space. You have never made a report at administrators intervention against vandalism, Never contributed in an articles for deletion discussion or particpated at any of the noticeboards. These are all things that most people look for in an admin candidate. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Good Articles

Articles must be reviewed by a neutral party before they can be assigned GA status. You can nominate an article if you wish at WP:GAN. _wjemather ^bigissue 18:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Types of irons

An article that you have been involved in editing, Types of irons, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Types of irons. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

Despite the ammount of work you have clearly done trying to organise and improve various golf equipment articles, I do not believe that there is sufficient content here to warrant breaking up the Iron (golf) article. As mentioned previously, it would probably be best for you to start discussions at WP:GOLF before making such drastic changes to the flow of articles, especially since you seem to be going backwards and forwards quite a lot yourself. Regards. _wjemather ^bigissue 10:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Wjemather. I think the work you are trying to do is great, but lets all work together before we do some of this stuff. Collaboration is important, especially on projects like this which is why wikiprojects (such as WP:GOLF) form, to coordinate and work together on these things. Feel free to also drop a message at either mine (or wjemathers page (hope you don't mind that i volunteered you)) if you have any questions or want a second opinion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 19:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:M1130 Command Vehicle.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:M1130 Command Vehicle.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

File source problem with File:M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 19:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Iav-variants1.gif

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Iav-variants1.gif. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Terrillja _talk 19:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:M1130 Command Vehicle.jpg

File Copyright problem

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Terrillja[[User Talk:Terrillja|_talk

File source problem with File:Howitser23.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Howitser23.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Terrillja _talk 19:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:M1130 Command Vehicle.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:M1130 Command Vehicle.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. Terrillja _talk 19:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:M1135 NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle.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. Terrillja _talk 19:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle.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. Terrillja _talk 19:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:FCS XM1209 C2V.jpg

Yes, I think File:FCS XM1209 C2V.jpg is the wrong image, I think the site it was on had the wrong one and I just copied the mistake. Hohum (talk) 18:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Bushmaster mk44.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Bushmaster mk44.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 02:38, 9 July 2009

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Cute

I enjoyed seeing your attempt to change your username to ~~~~ but as you can see it is not allowed. I suspect it's been disabled at the software level, because it would cause all sorts of problems. Note, for example, that nobody would be able to link to your userpage or talkpage, not even yourself. (Try making a link to [[User:~~~~]] if you're skeptical; not even <nowiki> will help.) Note, though, that usernames such as ~~0~~ are in fact allowed. You could technically give yourself a name like ~~~~, which has a zero width space in the middle, but my guess is that even though it's technically possible it would be disallowed because the everyday user will not have a zero width space on their keyboard, and it would cause no end of chaos for people who don't see the space and assume that your name is ~~~~.

Also, another note: I believe that WP:CHU uses a bot and that your new request to change your name to Username may not be recognized by the software even though the human editors can see it. I've seen them decline requests for being improperly formatted even though it's clear what the user wants to do, suggesting that the software can't parse the request. So you might want to make a new request from scratch. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 19:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Merges

Please don't suggest merging articles without starting a discussion. Without explaining why a merge would be a good idea, how could anyone reasonably be expected to support such a change? As mentioned before, the Golf WikiProject would be a good place to discuss things before taking drastic actions. _wjemather ^bigissue 22:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:FN SCARS.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:FN SCARS.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-en@wikimedia.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-en@wikimedia.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. Polly (Parrot) 18:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

CVR(T&W)

I see that you've been renaming CVR(T) and CVR(W) articles. My understanding is that the (Tracked) or (Wheeled) at the end is capitalised as part of the designation of the vehicle, and isn't a wikipedia suffix. Hohum (talk) 08:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Chuiwan

I can find no discussion to justify your effective deletion of this article, so have reverted to the last good version. If there is such a discussion, please advise where it can be found. If it does not exist, please be more circumspect when converting articles to redirects in future. Regards. _wjemather ^bigissue 18:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion etiquette

It is bad practice to change your comments after someone has already replied, as it can lead their comments to appear out of context. However, my comments at Talk:Chuiwan stand. _wjemather ^bigissue 18:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

i changed my response just as you replied. username 1 (talk) 18:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Bipod (weapon)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bipod (weapon), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Bipod. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Ground mount

I have nominated Ground mount, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ground mount. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ironholds (talk) 17:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

August 2009

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

I'm confused. i was creating a page on my subpage.username 1 (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Interlanguage links

Hi! Thanks for your recent cleanup and re-organization of tripod (photography) and related articles. In cleaning up that article, you removed all of the interlanguage links, which I have since restored. On Wikipedia it is usual, in fact very much encouraged, to include links to equivalent articles in other languages in this fashion. So I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the their purpose and rightful place. Thanks again for the cleanup! Moxfyre (ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 02:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

M2 Mortar move

Hi! An IP contested the M2 Mortar move you listed at WP:RM, so I've started a move discussion on the talk page. I also informed the Weaponry task force of WikiProject Military history about the discussion. By the way, could you remove the transclusions of user:user name one/Capitolization from the various talk pages it's included on? Firstly, it's no longer relevant since there's now a place to discuss the issue on the M2 Mortar talk page, and secondly, it's very confusing for editors to transclude such a long discussion onto various talk pages instead of just pasting a link there. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 13:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

instead of removing all the links from the pages i just blanked the page and moved it to the correct spelling. username 1 (talk) 21:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Umm, I'd prefer you didn't. I linked to the page from the discussion at Talk:M2 Mortar, and if it's blanked the old discussion is no more visible to the people reading the move request. Also, why keep transclusions of a blank page on talk pages? Jafeluv (talk) 21:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Good Luck

User name one, Srin ivas has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I have observed that you are editing on BCT Ground Combat Vehicle. Well, good luck with it! --Srin ivas 14:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators, Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Bushmaster mk44.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Bushmaster mk44.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stifle (talk) 19:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

User user name one/Equipment of the United States Air Force

Hit there, just letting you know I moved this page to User:User name one/Equipment of the United States Air Force, as that appears to be where you want it. Best :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vehicles of the United States Air Force

The article Vehicles of the United States Air Force has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

New article duplicates two other articles (List of United States Air Force aircraft and List of active United States military aircraft and is not really needed

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MilborneOne (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know I have asked for comments from two projects Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Military_aviation_task_force#Vehicles_of_the_United_States_Air_Force and at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft#USAF_Vehicles. Comments welcome. MilborneOne (talk) 18:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident‎ image change

The old image showed a B-52 bomber actually launching from Minot Air Force Base, which is why I used it in the article. The new picture you replaced it with merely shows a B-52. Are you sure that the new image is more appropriate for the article? Cla68 (talk) 23:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

i'll change it back username 1 (talk)

Military Barnstar

I would like to present you the Military Barnstar in recognition of your dedication in building a compehensive list of USAF equipment. Well done!--Ndunruh (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

V-22 image

Is there any particular reason why you've uploaded File:Marine V-22 Osprey.jpg and replaced all instances of File:Aircraft.osprey.678pix.jpg? The former is merely a copy of the latter, but smaller in resolution, granier/noisier in appearance, without a description, with a less-specific license, and of course, not at Commons. bahamut0013^words _deeds 05:03, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Equipment of the United States Armed Forces

The article Equipment of the United States Armed Forces has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This list is redundant to at least 10 other lists on Wikipedia (namely List of individual weapons of the U.S. armed forces, List of crew-served weapons of the U.S. armed forces, List of land vehicles of the U.S. armed forces, and List of military aircraft of the United States, but more in the navbox Template:US military navbox). This particular list will serve no use that the older lists don't have, and will never be as complete or comprehensive as the child lists.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Waiting for result of merger proposal at Talk:List of active United States military aircraft. Please read carefully and voice your opinion there.username 1 (talk) 14:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that essay is irrelevant because the main issue isn't something that can be improved upon... the list will never be sufficiently complete, and merely double the maintenance load. Duplication isn't something that giving more time will be able to resolve, but I shall humor you (don't take offense to that turn of phrase, it's not meant to be condescending) and offer you more time in the interests of assuming good faith and being cooperative. If I still feel the same concerns in a week or so after the merge discussion ends, I will offer up an AfD discussion. bahamut0013^words _deeds 16:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Vehicles of the United States Air Force

I see you have restored Vehicles of the United States Air Force from a redirect it still copies the same information at List of active United States military aircraft so your change should be reverted. I have two suggestions that either you add the aircraft images List of active United States military aircraft then they would be the same so you can remove the aircraft list at Vehicles of the United States Air Force or you make the lists different. Can I suggest you make the aircraft list similar to what you have done but remove the version and quantity. It may be easier just to add the images to the other list but I hope you appreciate I am just trying to stop duplicated information (also note it make page maintenance harder as most editors would only edit/update one article so they end up with different details). MilborneOne (talk) 09:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Type	Role	Image
Fixed-wing
A-10A Thunderbolt II	Attack Aircraft
A-10C Thunderbolt II	Attack Aircraft
Lockheed AC-130H	Attack Aircraft	File:AC-130 Aircraft.jpg
Lockheed AC-130U	Attack Aircraft	File:AC-130 Aircraft.jpg

Seems like it should be the reverse, remove the quantity and possibly the version and possibly add pictures to List of active United States military aircraft. That i would be happy with. I am however meeting you halfway by merging Vehicles of the United States Army (I can't even find up-to-date quantity numbers) to Equipment of the United States Army (which i need to rewrite anyway). username 1 (talk) 19:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Aircraft	Type	Versions	Notes	Aircraft	Type	Versions
Fixed-wing				Rotary-wing
B-1 Lancer	Bombers	B-1B	2 Test Aircraft	UH-1N Twin Huey	Utility Helicopter	UH-1N
B-2 Spirit	Bomber	B-2A	1 Test Aircraft	HH-60 Pave Hawk	Search and Rescue Helicopter	HH-60G
B-52 Stratofortress	Bombers	B-52H	20 in reserve	TH-1 Iroquois	Training Helicopter	TH-1H

File:Tank lineage.gif

Given the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 9 - the 1st two uploads aren't usable as licensed and the last image uploaded would be considered a derivative work. Which ones are you asking to be restored - and are you ready to update the license and/or defend the reasons that they were deleted originally? You can respond here or on my talk page. Skier Dude (talk) 03:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

cancel that. i was thinking for some reason that there was something on Gary's combat Vehicle reference guide that said the image was pd-gov but there wasn't.username 1 (talk) 20:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Move

I have moved User name one:/Equipment of the United States Navy to User:User name one/Equipment of the United States Navy. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn! Thats the third time i've done that! username 1 (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)

The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

M113 APC

Thanks for keeping an eye on the M113 article--there's been a lot of... spirited debate about its nicknames. I noticed that the article linked to a PDF by a guy who has been banned from wikipedia (and other sites) many times for vandalism on this and other subjects. Google Mike Sparks or "combatreform"--it's like time cube, but with flying tanks. The pdf seems to have been written before he went totally insane, and it doesn't seem to be self-published like the rest of his stuff, so I guess we should keep it. Thought you should know the background, if you don't already. Therealhazel (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks for help with the table. Ass you can see, I foul them up even when they are easy. WVBluefield (talk) 21:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Your spelling isn't so great either ;) (ass --> as). username 1 (talk) 15:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

PPE

Hi, I've recently expanded List of personal protective equipment by body area. I'd like to move this article to Usage of personal protective equipment. Thoughts? username 1 (talk) 20:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

That list was split off from Personal protective equipment because it was too 'listy'. With your reorganization you might want to put some of your new material into the section PPE by hazard at Personal protective equipment. RJFJR (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Wetlands Mapping

"Usable content was merged" is a reason for redirect, not for speedy deletion. If it was merged, we must keep the edit history. And where was it merged to? DGG ( talk ) 01:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Merged to Wetlands.username 1 (talk)

History of golf

Hi, on may 10, 2009 you changed the word least to most in the sentence The winner was whoever hit the ball the least number of times into a target several hundreds of meters away. Why did you do that? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 14:20, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

That was a really long time ago. I assumed that the author meant most instead of least given the context. Do you have a source that says otherwise? username 1 (talk) 21:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I saw someone changed it back. BTW, you are asking me for a source. What was your source for your edit? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

None. Just common sense. username 1 (talk) 15:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons sense could not have led you to this edit. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 14:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Bear with me. I figured out what happened. There are two totally different ways of interpreting this sentence: the way I perceived it was that the game was basically a driving contest and the players would get a couple dozen golf balls and try to get more balls than their opponent into a target. the way you interpreted it ( and the way it was meant to be interpreted) was that the game was more like golf in which the players tried to get the ball to the target in the least number of strokes.username 1 (talk) 15:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

your edit to Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars

I have reverted your edit. [1] All shortcuts are redirects, that is their purpose. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Jonathon A H's talk page.
Message added 17:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)

The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Broken reference

In this edit from 4 December 2009 you added a reference <ref name=hdmy09/> to Police transportation. Could you please go back and fill in the details, or tell me where you found this reference? Thank you, Debresser (talk) 18:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

An article you have worked on is up for deletion

Characters and wildlife in Avatar is now sent to AFD. This message is being sent to everyone who worked on it, who isn't already there. Dream Focus 19:57, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Future Combat Sytems.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Future Combat Sytems.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.

You claim it's PD-GOV, Prove it :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

[2] (at top). Not really proof though. username 1 (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, The archive site proves it was on a US Gov site , and should be enough for Wikipedia purposes :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Why am I in an edit war?

What about him? He's been reverting my edits just as fiercely. Serendi ^pod ous 22:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The South Butt

Hello! Your submission of The South Butt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Allen3 ^talk 01:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

File:M1 Abrams2007.JPG

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:M1 Abrams2007.JPG has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[3][4]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Wikipedia need to be compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike or another free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. Note, if you did create this file, you may want to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the image to be accessed by all Wikimedia Foundation projects (which include the various localized versions of Wikipedia)

If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Hohum 17:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I looked into the licensing of the file on the picasa page, and on the bottom right under "Photo reuse" you can see the author chose BY-NC-SA. Unfortunately this seems to be incompatible with use on wikipedia. It may be possible to get the author to change the licensing if you ask him. Hohum 17:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Template

Infoboxes traditionally go at the top. Templates go wherever they will least disrupt the format of the article, which is quite commonly along the right side and further down the page. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 21:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

In a recent edit to the page The Who, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

English speaking country My Ass! username 1 (talk)

Please see WP:ENGVAR. The Who is a British band- thus British English is used. Conversely, articles like Foo Fighters don't use spellings like "Colour" or "Foetus". --King Öomie 18:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The South Butt

On February 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The South Butt, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Austintexasplanecrash.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Austintexasplanecrash.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. B (talk) 16:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Enhancing KC-X

Hi User name one, instead of removing the information I researched and added to KC-X page, can you move it to how you think it should appear?

Removing material that is validly referenced should not be allowed. I'm not as well versed in Wiki as you are, but I'm sure you can help me find that. Moving it appropriately I am sure is.

Also, I don't see where references are not allowed in the See Also section.

Thanks, SOM Sliceofmiami (talk) 22:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Austintexasplanecrash.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Austintexasplanecrash.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. Rockfang (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Austintexasplanecrash.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Austintexasplanecrash.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

T-10 parachute

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of T-10 parachute, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/t-10.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

Plagiarism criteria

Although U.S. government works do not usually have copyright protection, copying from sites directly is not permitted, and also violates theWP:Plagiarism guidelines. Please do not make additional pages that copy from other sites on the internet. If you create more articles like this, you may be blocked from editing. Shadowjams (talk) 01:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

After tagging about 10 more articles you've copy-pasted directly from the same source (and a few that I found from non-government sites) I am going to do the following. I will add the This article incorporates work from https://peosoldier.army.mil/newpeo/Equipment/, which is in thepublic domain as it is a work of the United States Military. note on the appropriate articles and remove the speedy tags. However please either source government works like this, or at least reword them. As for those that don't appear to have come from government sources, I will leave the speedy tags on those. Shadowjams (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The relevant guideline for these recent additions is here at WP:PLAGIARISM#Public domain sources. Shadowjams (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of FCS/BCT unmanned aerial vehicles

I have nominated FCS/BCT unmanned aerial vehicles, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FCS/BCT unmanned aerial vehicles. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Shadowjams (talk) 02:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it. I've closed out the AfD. Shadowjams (talk) 02:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on thecoordinator academy course and in theresponsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot(talk) 23:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Your autoreviewer request

Hi Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autoreviewer right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature should have little to no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autoreviewer right, see Wikipedia:Autoreviewer. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 12:16, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

Hello! Your submission of GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! New Hampshirite (talk) 01:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Wornick Company

A tag has been placed on The Wornick Company requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specificnotability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top ofthe page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedydeletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 06:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Non Free Files in your User Space

Hey there Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you thatNon-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:Marcus Aurelius Antoninus/The Wornick Company. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for March 2010 Chile earthquake

On 18 March, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2010 Pichilemu earthquake, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Wornick Company Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploadingFile:The Wornick Company 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.
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) 23:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Wornick Company Logo.jpg

⚠

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
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) 02:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Butt vs. Face.png

Image has been restored. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

It's probably better to keep the OTRS information in case someone else has an issue with the image. At the very least, there's no reason to remove the CC license. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Your RFA

Hi there, just a note to suggest that you might want to change "December 2009" to "December 2008" as the time you started editing on wikipedia; some editors will oppose if they think you've only had 3 months experience, when you've actually had 15! Cheers--Mkativerata (talk) 19:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'd strongly urge you to withdraw. Your RFA is unlikely to pass and I for one would not like to see a good editor (which you are) demoralised. Pedro : Chat 20:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Already did, I'm sure it would have turned out a little better had I not been so eager to transclude it. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 20:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I've done the close for you. Yes, it could have gone better. Sorry to oppose. You might do well to review some other recent failed RFA's for help. Again, please don't be too demoralised over it. Your hard work is valued. Happy editing. Pedro : Chat

Proposed deletion of Concealable Stab Protective Body Armor

The article Concealable Stab Protective Body Armor has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

{This page does not indicate the significance of the subject.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletionallows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.} Dusti^SPEAK!! 03:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Sacred band

Hi, Marcus. Thanks for all your help so far. Must we have a caption? Image is self-explanatory. And if we do, can it just say "Book Cover: The Sacred Band" or should it say "Image courtesy of Paradise Publishing?" And if we require a caption, how and where do I insert it, oe must I upload the whole image again? Harmonia1 —Preceding unsigned comment added byHarmonia1 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to sign aboveHarmonia1 22:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsignedcomment added by Harmonia1 (talk • contribs)

All images should have some sort of caption. I'm going to re-upload the image to crop the whitespace. For future reference sign with[[tilde|Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 22:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)]]. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 22:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The Sacred Band of Stepsons

Have added some links to The Sacred Band of Stepsons; added a new lead. Am working on redefining the content due to notices placed on the page.

Any advice or comments? Harmonia1 02:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. Currently having difficulties seeing images (see below) so you'll have to add a caption where it says Add caption here.Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Help me

{{helpme}} I'm using the same computer I always use but can't see any images on Wikipedia. For example, the image in the template above looks like appears in red as Emblem-question-yello.svg

At approx. 17:00GMT a fault in aircon caused servers at the European data centre to overheat and shut themselves down; we switched traffic to Florida, but the new IP addresses caused further problems - which were quickly fixed, but it takes time for the IP changes to propagate; we anticipate problems for the next hour or so.

See this log.

Chzz ► 20:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

I can't verify the claim that it can "export electricity". Could you please provide a cite for this claim? Gatoclass(talk) 07:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

It was cited with the citation at the end of the paragraph. I've gone ahead and moved that sentence to its own section. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 20:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Appreciation and expression of gratitudes

Hey there! Thankx for helping me to improve the article 'Tham Fook Cheong'. THANK YOU XD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.14.194 (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

On April 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how,quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot(talk) 22:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Re email sent from OrangeMike to Harmonia1

Below is the email, verbatim, sent by Orangemike to Harmonia1 tonight (4/8/10). Orangemike's email demonstrates such a lack of Wikipedian NPOV that one must conclude that this project should be given to a Wikipedian less personally involved with the history of Tempus, Thieves' World and the Sacred Band, TSR, and Dragon Magazine.

Here is Orangemike's email in full, for the record, which clearly shows conflict of interest, stating that Orangemike was in a fiduciary relationship with Dragon Mag related to writing at least one review of the characters in this series and still harbors a clearly-expressed and historic hostility toward one of the series' protagonists:

"I go way back with "Thieve's World"; even sold a gleefully favorable review of one volume to DRAGON Magazine back in the day. On the other hand: my review of the book, specifically my clearly-expressed opinion of Tempus, led Janet to call for a boycott of DRAGON and all TSR products (a call which fell on deaf ears; I wasn't the only one to despise the sister-raping bastard).

The problem with the article is that Wikipedia is supposed to be for the general reader, and must adhere to solid rules about sourcing, notability, verifiability, etc. Fancruft that is only of interest to the fanbase of a series (indeed almost exclusively comprehensible to them) has no place there; if the topic is not documentably notable in the rest of the world, it is not for Wikipedia. (No reason somebody couldn't create a SanctuaryWiki.)"

Harmonia1 responds:

Notability: The presence in Wikipedia of articles on Thieves World and other series like it shows that a neutral editorship has found them adequately notable; this series differs most in that it has a solid historical underpinning and grapples with a topic of perennial interest to general readers: sexuality in the military. This historical connectivity is either not understood or ignored by Orangemike, who is from this fan and gaming community he describes.

Sourcing: This Wikipedia article, The Sacred Band of Stepsons, correctly cites classical sources. It must. All the books have a strong classical underpinning. This is especially true of the latest volume, which incorporates historical characters from the Sacred Band of Thebes and the philosophy and behaviors of those characters, the earliest known homosexual war-band in Ancient Greece, and so requires the identification of classical sources, speaking as it does directly to an academic controversy centering on the missing forty-six skeletons from what was believed by some scholars to be a mass grave where all 300 were said to be buried, and to the perennial political and social controversy of homosexuals and bisexuals in militaries. Harmonia1 (talk) 04:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Nonlethal vs. Non-lethal

Marcus, it is probably more important than will be immediately apparent to decide if you want to title this article with the compound (nonlethal) or hyphenated (non-lethal) version of the term, or call it "Nonlethality," which includes weapons, capabilities, policy and strategy. As I said, the name game continues but the most established terms are nonlethal, nono-lethal and nonlethality. Some questions on this site were about what weapons might be coming down the pike. "Nonlethality: a Global Strategy," breaks down weapons and capabilities into technology areas and operational areas; the Nonlethal Taxonomy (at JNLWD; I think I can get a version of that) gets very specific. It may be useful to provide a suite of potentials rather than simply current items in the arsenal.Harmonia1 (talk) 00:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I see the hyphenated form as being the most common on Google searches:Non-lethal:7,250,000, Nonlethal:1,570,000, Less-lethal: 6,710,000, Lesslethal: 416,000. However, non-lethal on wiktionary redirects to nonlethal. Wictionary also doesn't have an entry for less lethal but sublethal does.Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Non-lethal vs. Nonlethal

Call it "Non-lethal" or "Nonlethal." I prefer "Nonlethal" since it is more literate and means the same as "Non-lethal." If a less lethal or LTL capability, such as an improved rubber bullet or sting-ball grenade, us purchased or to be purchased for military use, then include it. The military police folks will be glad to help if you have a question about police use of crowd-control munitions and capabilities. I left you some discussion on my talk page for this topic. "Nonlethal" will turn out to be the proper usage as time goes on; people have differing levels of education. The Council on Foreign Relations chose "Nonlethal" and if there is an NPOV defense policy activity of high intellectual quality, they are it. That said, one must use information categorized with "Non-lethal" as well, and probably things and activities being developed under other rubrics, as people try to file the serial numbers off the NL activities and claim primacy. For your purposes, I would just say at the top that the "Nonlethal Weapons" or "Nonlethal Capabilities" article you are doing may include at times various items and activities categorized by many different names during formative stages, including "Non-Lethal," "Nonlethal," and others, and that your criteria are whether the research and developemtn effort comes to fruition under direction of the Department of Defense or Defense Department and Armed Services Aquisition activities were involved in their fielding with U.S. armed services. (I am aware of so many variants: "less than lethal, less lethal" (police), nonthreatening force (Darpa); soft kill(National Labs); "scalable force" (Army), etc. Rand has just put out a study trying to rename it yet again; went to their launch conference but can't remember what they wanted to call it: have heard so many silly names. Characterizing the r&d, technology, acquistion and weaponization efforts in terms of their intended end-user or use will keep your article focused and prevent concept drift, one would think.

For citations and overviews, you might start with the DoD Directive I provided, plus the CFR reports I provided, plus "An Assessment of Non-lethal Weapons Science and Technology," National Research Council of the National Academies, National Academies Press, 2003 -- even if it is paid for by the Navy and a bit naval in its outlook. That citation ought to convince even an Orangemike. Certainly Joint Non-lethal Weapons Directorate at Quantico will have some unclassified mission statement.

Did I tell you that "exporting electricity" means only providing excess power to use to power or recharge other devices?

more on my talk page Harmonia1 (talk) 01:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Inventing the AIDS Virus

Before I delete this page could you please let me know what page you are wanting to move here, and where I can find a discussion that would support that move? Peter 20:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

User:BruceSwanson/Inventing the Aids Virus. Editor has taken steps to fix some concerns. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 20:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've now done the move, but maybe you could check if any more cleanup needs to be done (adding links to new article from others etc.) Peter 21:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Also nominating for DYK. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 21:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Automucophagy

Hello! Your submission of Automucophagy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dravecky (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

File:RQ-170 Sentinel impression 3-view.png

Done. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Inventing the AIDS Virus

On 21 April, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Inventing the AIDS Virus, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for this one Victuallers (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Pars4x4-01.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pars4x4-01.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.

Best way to go here is to keep an image of each variant (4x4, 6x6, 8x8) as fair use. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 13:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

There are images of the vehicle on Commons, they are just of pretty bad quality (bad perspective). Unfortunately I doubt that fair use would apply here. --DavidDCM (talk) 14:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

This is Mensa180

Rather than delete my valid page about Dale Adink, why not add something to show that the content is unfinished and others could aid in finishing it? The person and his creation are quite real, google them if you want.

If you really think this person is notable start an article in your userspace. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Why should your opinion of notable trump mine? The man has started a few sims, Warbirds and AcesHigh are the two most notable. Perhaps I'm a history and aviation geek but AcesHigh has thousands of members and is the premier simulation of it's genre. Because something is a niche does not mean it is insignificant.

The criteria for notability for Creative professionals as listed on Wikipedia:Notability (people):

The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.

The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.

The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

We aren't as selective Britannica but we do have standards. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 22:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Mensa tags

I see you have just added a couple of tags to the Mensa International article, but you have not given any specific reasons for these tags. Please could you give them here or on the article talk page so people know what to fix. Stephen B Streater (talk) 08:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. Stephen B Streater (talk) 21:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Great to see move to Non-lethal

Marcus, happy to see LL more to NL. Great work. Should the categories now be adjusted to reflect the military aspect? Asked you about this also on my talk page Harmonia1 (talk) 23:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

BCT Ground Combat Vehicle Program

Clean-up the paragraph that I've noted that clarification is needed and I'll pass it as GA. You've done a lot of hard work and I'd not like to see it go unrecognized.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your patience. an edit by Noraft I think clarified the sentence but he/she didn't remove the clarify tag. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 20:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Pars8x8-01.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pars8x8-01.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 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 created in your upload log. 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. DavidDCM (talk) 12:18, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

2010 Times Square car bomb attempt

Marcus did you mean to revert yourself here?--220.101.28.25 (talk) 13:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Certainly not! Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 13:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

April Fool's Day DYK nom

The article will need to be expanded from its current state before it is in a fit state to appear as an April Fool's Day DYK.Mjroots (talk) 07:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

OOPS

Think I should take it down? EgoNonBarrus (talk) 18:49, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry bout that. —Preceding unsigned comment added byEgoNonBarrus (talk • contribs) 18:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot(talk) 19:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

You should try reading The Bible. BellaKazza (talk) 17:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

This is BellaKazza

That was not vandalizing, That info on the Human page was incorrect and the needed to be corrected.BellaKazza (talk) 16:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Why do you keep editing my words out? You try to silence me? Why? God's word is law he is the lord over the nation why do you try to keep his word from being heard.BellaKazza (talk) 17:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Marcus you try to silence me because the truth is too strong for you to handle.BellaKazza (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

God is more immportant then this person you speak of, God has the truth in the Bible. The Bible is the Standard.BellaKazza(talk) 17:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again, MAA

Thanks for all your help on the Sacred Band of Stepsons page -- again. Harmonia1 (talk) 22:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Is it ok to work on non-lethal page

Marcus, is it appropriate to work on Non-lethal page or wait until they decide whether to split it onto a non-lethal and a less-lethal page? NL page needs to be reorganized and rewritten if that is the title, since the focus then is broader and more encompassing. Several of us want to work on it, but don't want to do any edits that might be considered destructive if the pages are going to be split: less-lethal people might want to keep some language as it is. Advice? —Preceding unsignedcomment added by Harmonia1 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm certain if there was any discussion about splitting the article into non-lethal and less-lethal there would be rejection by the Wikipedia community. As Peterkingiron pointed out on the categories for discussion page, splitting them up (especially without reliable sources that make that distinction) would be POV. Instead, focus on changing all instances of less-lethal to non-lethal on wikipedia. I removed two of the tags from the Sacred band article you can remove the other if you think you have fixed it.Marcus Aurelius(talk) 18:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Copy that. Will do. Also delted the in-universe page. Firmly believe I have addressed the issue adequately. Guidance is very helpful on N-ls and, of course, everything else. Thanks again. Harmonia1 (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Marcus. I have started and ended three previous wikipedia entries. One was called Semasa. One was called dhall10067. And the third was called douglaseivindhall. I plan on keeping the fourth one. Thanks for reminding me about putting references. I do not care what people do with my three previous closed out accounts. I scrambled the passwords. Take care, Doug Hall —Precedingunsigned comment added by Douglaseivindhallgerber (talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

here or on my talk page?

Am I supposed to be responding here? Or on my page? I think that since langue compoudns over time, wiktionary is correct in choosing the compound form, but we need to accept all things labeled "non-lethal" and wll have to take items and capabilities on a case-by-case basis, with filters for what the end use is and how the money has flowed: developed for military or police use needs to be the first sorting mechanism. We were involved with the folks who put together the first NL kits; there we had no option but to use police-derived capabilities. Start with the non-lethal; add the nonlethal, which is usually the intellectual or better-educated, higher-end user. Tules of engagement will help. More on my page. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 18:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harmonia1 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC) -->

MAA, want to include GCV?

Matcus, it would seem to me appropriate if you wanted to put your Ground Combat Vehicle in the 'delivery' category on NLW page, since there is a requirement for NL for that vehicle, even though the specific systms have not yet been chosen. You could say that this vehicle will carry NLs, and is in development. Just a thought.Harmonia1 (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Help

{{Helpme}} I'm not sure what other articles this affects but Mill City Museum exists as an redirect yet if I put it in the search bar (If and only if I copy and paste it!!!) I get 0 results. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 20:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Listed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Vector. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Works fine for me - ie takes me direct to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_City_Museum

Possibly a problem relating to the new skin or something? Try logging out and see if it works. Also try resetting your PC. Apart from that, tech should answer. Chzz ► 20:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Works for me on vector. —fetch ·comms 20:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Still not working. It always takes me here. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Did you reboot? Chzz ► 20:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Just did. Same thing. I'm going to run across the street to try the Universities computers.Marcus Aurelius (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Bizzarre. Here anything I copy and paste redirects to Null. This computer uses Internet Explorer. Is there a way to find what version?Marcus Aurelius (talk) 21:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I am using internet explorer 8. It should be similar for you. To find out what version of explorer it is using go to the internet explorer help menu (next to the tools menu) and click "About Explorer". In Internet explorer 7 and 8 this menu is hidden by default 6 or lower it is enabled). To turn this menu on right click anywhere near the top of the screen, directly below the go arrow works best, and select "Menu Bar". The Help Menu will then appear, along with all the other menu buttons. The problem you are having sounds like a wikipedia settings problem. To fix your problem I would go to your wikipedia preferences and reset the settings to default. If that doesn't work do to yourMypage/skin.js and click edit and blank the page and save. That will clear all of your wikipedia settings. Hope that helps --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

And BTW to find the version of any Windows proggy, try 'Help', 'About'. Chzz ► 22:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

To confirm if it is something in your own settings, just log out and see if it works that way. Chzz ► 22:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Tried that already. See village pump. Thanks so much everybody.Marcus Aurelius (talk) 22:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I see that it has been logged as bugzilla:23517. There have been quite a few problems with the interface changes. I hope they get fixed soon. Best, Chzz ► 12:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Phantom_ray_rollout.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Phantom_ray_rollout.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 04:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for your warm welcome and yes Saab is a Lebanese family and its spelled and pronounced differently in Arabic (صعب) The ع letter does not have an equivalent in English so people spell our name with double a vowel so we end with SAAB as our last name.--Saab 1989 (talk) 20:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Boeing Phantom Ray

On May 27, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boeing Phantom Ray, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bae PIM upgrade.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploadingFile:Bae PIM upgrade.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.
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) 05:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Whigfield II

Hello Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Whigfield II, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Context can easily be found using a simple Wikipedia search. Thank you. So Why 17:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, originally I thought Whigfield III was a person. Then I tried to prod the creator into adding the context. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 18:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Usually, if it looks like a tracklist, it's someone trying to add an album, mostly because they noticed a redlink in the artist's article. So it's a good idea to google/search the title or the content that exists, to see whether you can add the context yourself. :-) RegardsSo Why 18:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. I am really sorry for the mess I have created with the Whigfield stuff, I was only trying to clean up the red links, by putting tracklists for those singles/albums/compilations. I will be looking at the main Whigfield page over the next few months trying to clean it up so it is easier to follow - it is big mess at the moment (I did not cause that!) :-) - Many thanks, StephenStevieboy82 (talk) 21:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Your attention needed at WP:CHU

Hello. A bureaucrat or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up as soon as possible. Thank you. ···日本穣^? · 投稿· Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 15:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

John Forehand

There is the Huffington Post, Fox News, The Telegraph articles and The Young Turks video all being used as sources. Do you want the article to be sourced line by line. Christopher Connor (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Red and Black Cafe (Portland, Oregon)

Christ man, I can't even finish an article without some person trying to claim some irrelevancy. Sorry this isn't a story regarding New York City - of which I am sure there would be no argument whatsoever there. However for Portland, Oregon, this is HUGE news, especially 16:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC) among the pro-police society and the anti-police/Vegan/Anarchist societies in Portland, Oregon who are threatened by the latest round of shootings by the Portland PD. Let me get the article put together for god's sake. The event in and of itself has gotten national coverage in CNN and FOX News and is very representative of the resentment felt by a large segment of Portlanders towards our corrupt and gun happy police department. Despite my feeling on the matter personally, I am citing all sides of the event not for the promotion of the business but rather to reflect the attitudes of Portland business owners towards the local law enforcement agency.BGinOC(talk)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Answer

I did not create that page, if you would read the creation log. —Preceding unsignedcomment added by Whitetiger01 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

However, you may be WP:sockpuppeting. Marcus Qwertius (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

How

How can it be fixed, if you don't mind telling me? JunMaster (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Needs at least 1 reference from a reliable source (no blogs). Marcus Qwertius (talk) 19:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Portland Jr. Pirates

The article has outside varifiable sources, Like I stated on the AfD page jr hockey articles are notable, particularly the Jr. A and major Jr. pages with leagues and teams that produce top players: see Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey Bhockey10 (talk) 21:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see where your project says what is considered notable or not. Most wikiprojects do. Marcus Qwertius (talk) 21:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Template:Uw-pagepatroler1, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you.

Specifically, I'm asking that this page be deleted under speedy deletion criterion T2. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps just a rewording? What exactly is the policy on this if, for example, someone went on a page patrol rampage? Marcus Qwertius (talk) 21:29, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

First of all, the ability to patrol pages is part of the standard package given to autoconfirmed users and cannot be revoked without blocking an account altogether. Conversely, new accounts do not have this privilege to begin with.

I believe abuse of the patrol tool (that is, several obviously intentional bad calls in a short period, or one call made in violation ofWP:COI) would fall under general vandalism. Other than that, I can't think of any situation where a user warning would be warranted.-- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Questioning The Rationale for Deletion

Hi Marcus,

I posted an article about a company that I work for. And we were promptly deleted within minutes of the posting. I would like to get some advice on this, because I feel that this action is knee-jerk and unfair. Here's why.

There are plenty of wikipedia articles that give overviews of different businesses. Sure, they tend to be established businesses and we're a young start up. It's hard for me to avoid getting the feeling that the implication here is that these companies deserve to be written about, and ours doesn't because we're too small. That doesn't seem like a solid rationale to me and not in keeping with Wikipedia. I completely understand why you have to exert quality control for wikipedia entries, but I don't believe that a company writing about itself necessarily amounts to obtrusive advertising.

What if someone hears about us and wants to know more about us? Isn't that the point of Wikipedia ?

I understand the need to have a variety of sources, but don't you think I should be a valid informational source as I know alot about the company that I work for ? I used no "peacock language" in the article, and there was no sales-pitch terminology. Yet, the article (titled BeyondLive) was deleted by the user "Evil Saltine." According to Wikipedia, the articles should be allowed to evolve and become more substantiated by different sources. Ours basically got ripped away from us before we had a chance to do any of that.

I'd like to reinstate the article under whatever guidance you can give.

Thank You,

Dan Cauthorn

You may ask for a emailed copy by pasting {{Restore}} to the deleted page. I do not have access to archive. Marcus Qwertius (talk) 22:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My Article

Why the heck would u delete that article there waz nothing wrong with it dont mess with my work again fool az i may try to create the page again but now it wont be easy thanks to u !! Udontneed2kno (talk) 22:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)udontneed2knoUdontneed2kno (talk) 22:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Please withdraw speedy deletion

The article is referenced with interational headlines from the New York Times and Fox News. There is no possible way a reasonable good faith editor could conclude the topic is not notable. Please withdraw the speedy delete tag, it reflects poorly on your judgement and intentions. Bachcell (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It still fails WP:Not news. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 16:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Your lack of good faith is showing: For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This is a terrorism arrest with worldwide coverage, not the meeting of a butterfly club in the library on thursday afternoon. Please remove the speedy deletion. Do you think the 9/11 attacks or Fort Hood Shooting could be speedy deleted under NOT NEWS??? Gaza Flotilla? Get real. Please do not argue the notability of a plot that is going to be in the news for a week at least as these people appear in court. What is your actual motive for deleting the article? Are you enforcing a POV regarding terrorist incidents, as every terrorist incident article is similarly requested for similarly spurious grounds? Speedy delete is for truly non-notable topics like somebody's birthday party or birth notice, not terrorism arrests which are always notable if they hit the international headlines.Bachcell (talk) 16:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

No, people died in those events. Actually Nadal Malik Hasan went to AfD once. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and it reflects your lack of good faith that you would also claim Fort Hood was not notable. Now show some good faith and remove your speedy delete. If the 9/11 hijackers were arrested and nobody died, it's non-notable enough that you would delete that article too? You are showing a lack of NPOV by deleting a controversial topic. The fact that a topic is even controversial makes it notable. NPOV is neutral, balanced point of view, not NO point of view, and your're POV is showing. You cannot speedly delete to enforce your opinion of what should be in WP. Bachcell (talk) 17:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say I took it to AfD. I just voted (keep) in it. I will not remove the speedy. That is for an admin to decide.Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

This is not for an admin to decide if it is obvious this is an abusive request. You have more than enough information to remove it yourself. So remove the speedy delete now before some similarly deletionist admin decides to act on it. Bachcell (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

IP on Talk:Barack Obama

Perhaps it would be better if you explained to him why he is wrong rather than inflaming him.--William S. Saturn(talk) 20:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Blocked, why hasn't he figured it out by now? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he's right.--William S. Saturn (talk) 20:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Marcus, thanks for the heads up on the picture of Jennifer Rohn. I've added a CC licence. Cloning jedi (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK problem: Stone of the Pregnant Woman

Hello! Your submission of Stone of the Pregnant Woman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Stemonitis (talk) 12:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:24.4.101.72

What are you referencing? I haven't touched the article you indicate. 24.4.101.72 (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Staying in flight for five years doesn't begin to address the notability and unreferenced problems with the article Vulture (UAV). Try finding some sources to back up the claims. 24.4.101.72 (talk) 18:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't bite newcomers

You really hurt me when I found that my article is now under the speedy deletion que. Could you help me? Thanks. Latintooth (talk) 19:11, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Thelegendofgreatness

A final warning before any other was a bit over-the-top for creating and recreating a clearly nonsense article twice. I removed the warning I also left as it was an edit conflict - but it was at level 1, which I think was quite sufficient. I42 (talk) 19:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Replaced. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thx! As it turns out, you appear to be right that they were here only to disrupt. I42 (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Title Edit

Hi Marcus, I recently added an article entitled Indra J Adler. This is a biography of a living person. It appears that the title of this article has been changed to 'Indra Adler'. I'm afraid that this needs to be changed back as the individual's name is infact Indra J. Adler. I have attempted to do this, however I do not think my account has been autoconfirmed yet. Would it be possible for you to do this for me? Many Thanks Jiajkbuzz (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

uh... help a noob out?

Ok, I am going nuts here. I don't see a single place anywhere on your user anything that is basically a "message" link/button. I guess you can remove this if it doesn't belong here but I don't see how I'm supposed to contact you.

I'm a new user. I recently created the cottonwood borer article and you marked it for deletion. I received a message telling me I could remove the prod, but am completely lost as to how to do that. In fact, I think it has been removed already? Anyway, please don't delete the article. It is an important insect and yada yada. Can you show me how to remove this 'prod' tag or help me out or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Razarax (talk •contribs) 17:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Stone of the Pregnant Woman

On 12 June, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stone of the Pregnant Woman, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 06:03, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

M113 APC article

My original edit to the M113 APC article read:

One notable ARVN unit equipped with the M113 APC, the 3d Armored Cavalry Squadron, earned the Presidential Unit Citation (United_States).

You noted that it did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and you undid it. Does this conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy?

One notable ARVN unit equipped with the M113 APC, the 3d Armored Cavalry Squadron, earned thePresidential Unit Citation (United States). ^[1] ^[2]

Thank you in advance TnCom (talk) 21:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

^ "Photo: U.S. advisor confers with ARVN 3rd Cav commander in front of a South Vietnamese M113". Retrieved 2010-06-11.
^ "3d Armored Cavalry Squadron (ARVN) for extraordinary heroism" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-06-11.

Done Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!!! TnCom (talk) 22:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Worldwide Student Identity Card (WSIC)

Dear Marcus,

Worldwide Student Identity Card (WSIC) is a new card that is been issue free of charge to under-privileged student worldwide, our first branch will open in Miami and Brazil in the next 30 days. The organization has pending membership of WYSE Travel Confederation and other travel organization, our website studentid.us in been build as we speak. Why would you feel the need to mark it for deletion? International Students Travel Association, Inc. is a register corporation. Please explain your move??? Thanks I will wait to hear from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by65.2.72.137 (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I reclassified the speedy deletion as CSD A7 since this card is still not notable. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 03:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Um

Was this intended for the IP? Sorry I was confused. It's okay, I've had much ruder. Thanks Tommy2010 [message] 15:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

For IP. I left that message before you responded but I'm not retracting it. Am leaving an explanation on IP's talk.Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry for the confusion Tommy2010 [message] 15:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Grandma Cook's Yellow Angel Food Cake

I do understand the impulse that prompted you to tag this article for deletion; I completely agree that it should not remain, because recipes are specifically covered under WP:NOTGUIDE. Unfortunately I could not agree that the topic met any criterion for speedy deletion. I have therefore removed the speedy tag and its associated hangon tag and replaced it with a PROD tag; should the PROD tag be removed, I have watchlisted the article and will take it to AfD. My apologies for substituting my judgment for yours; if you have any questions or problems, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Grandma Cook's Yellow Angel Food Cake

An article that you have been involved in editing,Grandma Cook's Yellow Angel Food Cake, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grandma Cook's Yellow Angel Food Cake. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Redirect of Gary Brooks Faulkner

Why did you redirect it? There is no info in Osama bin Laden covering Gary Brooks Faulkner. —Precedingunsigned comment added by Samorat (talk •contribs) 16:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Names of Ho Chi Minh City

ah whoops - does Names of Ho Chi Minh City have to be created via a merge? Sorry, it's the first time I've created an article that I've worked on in my own user space. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 17:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. An admin will fix this soon. In the meantime all edits should be made to the userspace version. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Bluebell Falls

Hi, you've now twice added the {{close paraphrase}} tag to this article, without taking this to the article Talk page as you are supposed to do. Can you identify a specific sentence or section that you believe is in breach of copyright in this article (at the Article Talk page, which is where you should have discussed this)? As far as I can tell, nothing in this article has copied specific phrases. --HighKing (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Ta. Was there any others that you feel might fall foul of paraphrasing? --HighKing (talk) 19:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Naa. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks & Questions

Hi, Marcus.

Thank you for your assistance moving my page C.A.Walker Research Solutions. I have questions:

1) I read this stuff about Closing Instructions and frankly, it's confusing. Do I need to add this to my discussions page? "This article has been renamed per the above move request"

2) When I was building the page in my sandbox, I tried to upload the company logo CAWLogo.jpg‎ and it was deleted by a bot. Now that the page is moved can I re-upload it, or ask the bot to put it back, or what? I'm pretty confused how to handle adding a logo with permission by the company owner.

3) Now that the page is moved I can delete it from my sandbox right?

Thank you! RebekahRpaul9578 (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome. Am proceeding to do numbers 2 and 3. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, don't worry about #1. That's for administrators to use and has been taken care of. Mind copy editing your article for a neutral point of view?Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It might take a week or two for the image to get undeleted because of the backlog. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Marcus, I spent considerable time editing the article to submit what I thought was a 'neutral point of view.' Nearly every sentence is cited with articles that we did not publish. I'm really not sure what is being asked of me to do in order to make 'neutral'?Rpaul9578 (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Habba syndrome

Someone posted on requested medical articles [5] a while back. I added this page based on an Uptodate article. This is usually sufficient for notability but I agree it is borderline.--Doc James (talk ·contribs · email) 18:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Copper alloys in aquaculture article

Hi Markus: I am a relatively new editor and was transferring this article from my user subpage to the article space. I inadvertently posted it to a talk page...and then cut and pasted it to article space - instead of the move button. This apparently created some problems which tagged the article. I will ask an admin to review the situation so that the entire article history moves to the newly posted article. Is that OK. Sorry again. Enviromet (talk) 18:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

No prob.Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

cassandra clare article

hey there! i was in the process of extensively editing the page when you made your contributions. If you'd like, double check to make sure I didn't miss anything new you added! Infoaddict1 (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Dallas Elementary School

Are you sure that Dallas Elementary School is part of the Paulding County School District? Neither article mentions the other. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I went to their site which had a link to their district. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, cool, thanks. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 19:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:XLERATOR 800 x 800.jpg

I will update the image with its source. It is from www.exceldryer.com. The company wants its images to be open to use in public places like Wikipedia. If the company wanted to email Wikipedia to approve this particular use of the image, whom would they email? Thanks for your comments on the image, I'd like it to stay up. —Preceding unsigned comment added byHelvetica13 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

LGV / TGV articles

LGV is the better/official french name for 'TGV track'. I was in the process of moving the TGV track construction article to a new article LGV construction (rail) when the bot and you got involved. Can we please do it my way?

Why didn't you use the Move tab? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Call me old fashioned, but I had no idea there was a Move tab. I love the idea. But of course now the Move tab doesn't work (I just tried) because the LGV construction (rail) article exists :-( KevinCuddeback (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Requesting an admin. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

What sort of help will the admin be? (or what sort of help was requested)

I requested the move at requested moves as uncontroversial [6] but Anthony Appleyard took it to discussion. You can comment on the requested move on the talk page. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 23:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Is the move tab new? Certainly, hiding it under a "down arrow" in my UI has kept it out of view.

Sorry about not signing. KevinCuddeback (talk) 18:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Its been here at least since December 2008 or when I joined the project. Maybe it was only used by admins until recently? The Move tab was more accessible before we switched to vector skin. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Help

Mr Qwertyus, may I ask if you would be so kind to help me my talk page? Thank you.Commanderneyo77 (talk) 14:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

help again

Mr. Qwertyus, sorry to disturb you but could you help me With a picture on my infobox, Just so you know it would Be the F-22 Raptor. -Commanderneyo77 (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Done Before you even asked! Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Im sorry again, looks like my brother deleted the F-22. I dont know how to get it back up. The F-16 would be better anyway. I am very very sorry about this. Im changing my password so he cant get through. Commanderneyo77 (talk) 23:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

P.A.W.S.

May I ask why you flagged an under construction article CSD C1 while I was actively editing it?Koman90 (talk), Network+ 20:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

{{Uw-draftfirst}}. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, it seems I also denied your WP:CSD request of this article. Sure, it would be nice if everyone drafted their articles before posting them to mainspace but it is not required. They clearly tagged it as under construction, you are obligated to assume their good faith in doing so. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

UAA report/made up deadline

I'm not sure where you think you got the authority to issue an ultimatum to User:Jansport87 about their username. Usually if a name is not so blatantly outside of policy as to warrant an immediate block we move the report to the holding pen where it can sit for up to a week, substantially longer than the 36 hour deadline you decreed. In this case I don't even think the name is blockable at all and have advised Jansport87 to ignore both your deadline and your request that they change their name. If the name isn't causing an actual problemthen nothing is solved by blocking the user, and the potential of losing a good contributor over a non-issue like this far outweighs the risks of letting them edit with this username as they have been doing without trouble for several months now. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

wth

why did u do that —Preceding unsigned comment added byDeathVivaSpideyHarryPercy10 (talk •contribs) 16:24, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit conflict. tends to happen with editing tools. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

MICHELLE JENNER

Greetings from Spain! Forgiveness is that I have locked the computer and I could not finish the article. A greeting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campeones 2008 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Would you like a copy of your deleted article? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

copyright question

Hello I have a question about the article on Mose Kalev. we have a copy of a article where he was interviewed in a colorado paper and it has images he did for ralph lauren of his ranch, can we post these or would we need the permission of his agent to do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carrojb (talk •contribs) 17:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. You will have to go through the process outlined here [7]. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

hi

hey could u plz get rid of 22 armdale? —Preceding unsigned comment added byDeathVivaSpideyHarryPercy10 (talk •contribs) 19:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Can't. I have to let the discussion run its course. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Concerning article "Thierry Lang"

Hi, because Thierry Lang is a living composer, Wikipedia is going bazonkers. I just want to say I translated the article of the French Wikipedia. That's my source. I heard him multiple times on the national classical radio station, thought I'd look him up, wasn't on Wikipedia in English, so translated it. I have no idea how to solve the sourcing problem, because my changes are instantly reversed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GodowskyIsDead (talk • contribs) 19:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

File:CAWLogo.jpg

Hi. One week ago, you used {{ImageUndeleteRequest}} template to request that File:CAWLogo.jpg be undeleted. I have restored this image and reset its countdown. Please note that unless it is added to an article and the template removed, it will be re-deleted in one week.--B (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Quintesocial

Mr. Qwertyus, Is there any reason in particular that you have marked my page for speedy deletion? Would love to hear your feedback.

Thanks,

Laffittehl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laffittehl(talk • contribs) 16:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

See if I interpreted this correctly:this social networking site is only available Portland, and Denver? -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The articles been deleted now but you can ask for a copy from an administrator. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Qwertyus,

You are correct that Quintesocial is currently only available in the Portland and Denver markets, however Quintesocial's expansion will soon encompass Charlotte, NC and other territories as well. This is an emerging social networking site that I feel warrants a Wikipedia page for the sheer fact that it has already helped thousands in both those regions and will soon help many more on a more national scale in the months to come. Looking forward to your feedback on this.

Thanks

Laffittehl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laffittehl(talk • contribs) 17:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ask one of these admins to request that theyuserfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. You can continue to work on it until your networking site meets our notability guidelines. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Bounty Hunter film

Hi,

I updated the box office revenue for bounty hunter by following box office mojo

I entered the correct data. Please let me know your comments if i had done anything wrong.

Your feedback is most welcome

Thanks

Sriram —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolguychn (talk • contribs) 17:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I still need a citation. There is a "cite" tab in the editing menu, click it, hit the "templates" button and scroll to the "cite web" button and fill in the blanks. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

User Page Protection

Hey there, I just wanted to let you know that I protected your userpage for 1 week to help deal with this string of vandalism you seem to be experiencing , if you would like me to extend it to indef, or unprotect it, feel free to ask :). Best, Mifter (talk) 17:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Moncena Dunn

I have added the name of the Congressional Committee. Is the article OK now? Schmausschmaus (talk) 00:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Janet Jackson Submission is no hoax

Hi Marcus,

Just wondering why you think that my story about purchasing the towel that covered up Janet Jackson in the Superbowl is a hoax/untrue? I was hired as a production assistant in Dec. of 2003, and worked for a month on location at Reliant Stadium...

The day of the event I was stationed on the first floor of the stadium watching the game, and I was radioed by my production coordinator. There was a request for us to take the "P" card (purchasing credit card) and buy a official Superbowl towel for the show. We had no idea why (since we had purchased 400 towels already that week) but we did it anyway and handed it over to the staff. The next time we saw the towel it was on stage covering her up. It was obvious that it was purchased for that reason because she was handed that towel specifically, even though there were many normal towels under the stage (which we were using to dry off the stage because it was raining outside. I saw this from the 50 yard line, and not sure if the towel-handing part of the show was aired nationally.

Here are a couple pics of me from the gig: http://twitpic.com/1z4di8 http://twitpic.com/1z4d9x

I have altered the entry because I didn't want to have that be the reason that my page was taken down, but it happened. I can provide more evidence and references if needed for any other source. I did not start this page, but seeing how it concerns me I have made edits to try and make it as accurate as possible. I'm not sure what the multiple "problems" are with this article, but you seem to be an expert on wiki so if there is anyway you could help me fix this article, it would be much appreciated.

-The Cheese (Carl Kocis) —Preceding unsigned comment added byThecheesefeed (talk • contribs) 00:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Ease friend

Hi, friend.I've just noted you that you've been putting deletion tag just after an article is created.You should slow down.Chech the wikipedia policy here.You should give some time to article's author so that he can improve it.RegardsMax Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 16:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Your referring to The New York Foundation and Manifesto (book) no doubt? I will slow down on tagging good faith articles from now on. Thanks. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 16:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah,I just wanted to tell you that if you think that the article is good faith then you should send it to afd instead of putting deletion tag. Regards Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 16:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inkfruit

Can you please explain why you struck Claritas's !vote in this discussion? --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Mistake. Whap! -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok fair enough. If you were trying to strike your nomination I can close it as "nomination withdrawn". As it stands right now, I've relisted it for another 7 days. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

No just thought he/she ivoted twice but realized first one was just a comment. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Lima by Fathima Shajahan

Hello Marcus Qwertyus. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Lima by Fathima Shajahan to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ultra lob wedge

As requested, this article it now listed at AfD. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultra lob wedge. Regards, _wjemather ^bigissue 09:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

what else do you recommend?

on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Burroughs I got a delete recommendation from you. I'll be glad to fix as needed. What do you recommend?---- —Preceding unsigned comment added byPostmodernscribe (talk • contribs) 19:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Not much you can do. 1 picture book isn't going to meet our notability requirements. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Social party imberakuri

What to do with this French article?please Check it out.Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 19:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

ThanksMax Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 19:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

American Vigilante

Mark, Gary Brooks Faulkner deserves a page. Obviously, I hadn't had the chance to create the page he deserves, as there was only a single sentence posted. The page will be glorious. I even used a citation from the Associated Press to back up my whopping sentence. What is the deal, man? —Preceding unsigned comment added by STEGASAURUS REX(talk • contribs) 19:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

A debate I initiated concluded that the article was not neccessary. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Marc, Funny that there is now a page for Mr. Faulkner. Even funnier is that the debate that you initiated had more votes to keep the page than to delete it. You are a power hungry wiki-freak and are abusing your imagined powers. Shame. —Precedingunsigned comment added by STEGASAURUS REX (talk •contribs) 00:23, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: SeaDream II

Hello Marcus Qwertyus. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on SeaDream IIto a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. ArcAngel (talk) ) 20:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletetion Laurence Traiger

I have added reliable sources, and removed the tag.Mwinog2777 (talk) 17:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Stone of the Pregnant Woman

Hello Marcus. I appreciate how you have been taking care of the article, but I feel that it is better served if we only cite from the scholarly articles. Sometimes less is more. I can make the French and German material available to you, if you like. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 08:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

is there anyway people can discuss whether it is right to have an article on Mr. Sakalauskas or is it just that you put up red flags and they get deleted quickly whathever ? —Preceding unsigned comment added byNefesf9 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

If you expand the article it will not be deleted. In the mean time stop removing the red tags. -- Marcus Qwertyus(talk) 16:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC) i add refrecnes, and he is a very important man, this terrible affront to pride of liothuanaia. —Precedingunsigned comment added by Nefesf9 (talk •contribs) 16:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

He's trying to get references now. Peridon (talk) 16:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I wrote two articles, and now I cant edit one of them and only the other, and people have tried to delete both of them. Its not fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nefesf9 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure an admin with access to the page will implement the changes you put on the talk page. -- Marcus Qwertyus(talk) 17:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

HOW dare you !

why are you trying to make all my articles get deleted ? Peter and Polly the Penguin has lots of refernces and you say in your summary that it isnt real ? shame on you ! read better ! Nefesf9 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC).

That was a comment to user:wuhwazdat. Am not implying it was a hoax. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

not real person product or company or band either ? I mean why can you just try and delete everything I write. you must hate me.Nefesf9 (talk) —Precedingundated comment added 18:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC).

Altered Speedy Deletion rationale: The half blood shinx

Hello Marcus Qwertyus, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (The half blood shinx) under a different criteria, because the one you provided was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any queries, please let me know. Thanks again!Kingpin¹³ (talk) 00:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

another page gone..

my page on Epilepsy York region was deleted, i made my case to "orangemike" and he said that wikipedia was not the place to "publicise an organization", but that is not my intent. i am simply presenting a NPO that has been around since 1988 and who are an important part of the community. there are many other NPO's up on wikipedia and i do not understand how this is different. Purpleepilepsy (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)June 29

Yrjö Leino

Whoops. :) Everard Proudfoot (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation

I noticed that you commented on the sockpuppet investigation on [8]. I was just curious if there is a way to speed the process up a bit, or what the process is at all. Don't know if you can help, but I thought I'd see. (sorry, I always forget to sign these things.)Sodapaps (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

These things can be quite lengthy. There are 8 cases in front of yours but they can closed out of order. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Mindaugas Piecaitis

Hi Marcus. I moved Mindaugas Piecaitis to my user page so I can work on it. Melba1 (talk) 17:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure :) But first, would you look it over & improve it if you have time? (Having a little trouble with the reflist.) Melba1(talk) 18:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Noted (your last communication re Did You KNow). Melba1 (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

SimpleVote?

What's that? I cannot seem to get anything working after importing/refreshing. (I am watching this page, so please reply here.) — Timneu22 · talk 17:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

With vector you'll need to vote on the log page next to the edit button. -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Well that's fancy stuff!! Cool, thanks. — Timneu22 · talk 17:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Your autopatrolled suggestion

Thank you for your suggestions, which I'm sure were well meant. However I'm always reluctant to apply for things, so I think I will give it a miss. Fuller reply at my talk page. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 18:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Maru doll

Hello Marcus Qwertyus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Maru doll, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to dolls. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Jimbo Wales, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Badger Drink (talk) 21:08, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Good catch

Wow, that was fast...thanks. Cheers,C628 (talk) 15:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I keep a close eye on pages. Even at 3 in the morning.

Anyhow, one of the victims in the 2010 ABB plant shootings (an article we worked on) turned out to be my friend's dad. He was trying to rescue one of his fellow employees and got shot up pretty bad but survived. Also the perpetrators son used to go to our school. Small world, eh? They never did find a motive. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 04:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow...I'd certainly say so. You seem to have a knack for being near these things; I'd hope it doesn't go any further. C628(talk) 02:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle

Thanks for the info :)--Iankap99 (talk) 03:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010)

Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial

Project news

Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members

Editorial

LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate sectionhere.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for the message, Marcus. Take it easy. :) -Fnlayson (talk) 23:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing! Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 00:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

1992–93 A.C. Milan season

Could you stop hunting that article down, now. Thanks. I've added sources, and there's nothing wrong with the tone or anything. There's no reason to pick on me because of a thing that doesn't even exist. I write my articles as I do in my native Swedish Wikipedia, and there nobody complains about it, so could you stop stalking me, please.Roslagen (talk) 17:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

There are problems. Namely "enjoyed a second consecutive successful season" and other peacock words. I am not stalking you. I am a new page patroller and that is my job. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 17:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism from 70.132.203.143

I have read your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism on 70.132.203.143. It seems that there is now a range block on this. However, if there hadn't been then I would not have known what range to block. For future reference it helps in such cases to indicate other IPs that are involved, so that a suitable range can be calculated. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Duly noted. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 18:54, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Range block obviously not working. List forthcoming. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 19:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I have placed a new range block which covers 70.132.203.143, 70.132.202.16, and 70.132.206.79. If you know of any more let me know on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I have received your more complete list. Unfortunately the range is so wide that a single block across them all would catch over 200 million IP addresses, which would be unacceptable. I will look into the possibility of a number of smaller range blocks, but it may not be possible.JamesBWatson (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

That's a lot of collateral. If the problem persists I'll just have my userpage protected indefinatly. Not sure about jimbo though.Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 19:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

The IPs at present split into three smaller ranges plus 4 individual IPs which are on their own. it would be possible to block them in separate subranges, which would catch six thousand and odd IPs. This would still be too many to accept in the long term, but it might be acceptable for short-term blocks. Unfortunately we would almost certainly find there were new IPs coming up in the gaps between those ranges, so we would have more to block. It may be worth trying to contact an admin who has more experience of this kind of problem than I have, but I'm afraid I think it is likely to be a question of continually blocking piecemeal for short times as new IPs crop up, and hope the vandal gets bored and gives up or (less likely) gets a life. Keep telling me of new instances, though, and for the moment I will do what I can.JamesBWatson (talk) 19:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I think on the whole that the best thing to do is just to keep blocking them as they come, and not feed the troll. If you like I will semi-protect your talk page, but I don't recommend that as it would prevent access by other new and unregistered users. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC

Actually go ahead and indef my userpage and temporarily semi-protect my talk page. I've got my email listed on my userspace and will leave an explanatory note at the top of this page. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 15:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Fenton Williams

Dear Marcus: Thanks for the message. If I make the article about Fenton Williams a "stub" will it have a better chance to not being deleted. What else can I do to make this article more legitimate? Bryan Bieber (talk) 14:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Account creator

This is my confirmation edit. Looking take on new responsibilities. Marcus Qwertyus^{(signs his posts)} 06:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the toolhere. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarise yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and the mailing list. If you do not have an irc client you can use the webchat on my site here. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Also, this is for access to the account creation tool; this does not include the account creator right, which can be granted if needed once you have some experience. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for your work in user name patrol and for your interest in participating in the account creation process. delirious &lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 09:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI: Sydney r. martin not an attack page

Just any FYI... The article wasn't an attack page as written by the original author. An IP came along and turned it into an attack page. The article was still deleted for being non-notable. I left a follow-up comment for the User:Favoritenumberis7. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Noted. Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 03:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Dybuster/Dybuster en test

Er...where is the consensus to move this spamfest to mainspace? – ukexpat (talk) 01:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Moot point, now G11'd. – ukexpat (talk) 02:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

WT:MILHIST

I suggest you contact either Caden or Ranger Steve directly. Edit summaries are not the best place to explain one's actions.Nev1 (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

SBNR "Spiritual But Not Religious"

Thanks for holding my hand with SBNR.... Steep learning curve here for a newbie. Thechiefgood (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. Marcus Qwertyus ^{(signs his posts)} 19:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Just so you know

I don't want you to think I hate you or that I would perpetually oppose you at RFA or anything like that, but communication is an important part of an admin's job and it seems like you need a little work in that department. An error in judgement of my own causedmy first RFA to go down in flames, but I learned from my mistakes and made it through onmy second try and was even supported by the user who had brought up the damning evidence in the first place. I'm sure you could do the same given some time. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

for the nomination. Squam256 (talk) 18:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Apologies

I'd just created Piquet Carneiro train crash and felt a bit peeved when the expand and orphan tags were so quickly put on; never mind. I have calmed down now and added an infobox to the article now; feel free to re-add the tags, I promise not to remove them again !GrahamHardy (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Never noticed they were gone! I usually add an expand tag if the article is not long enough to be split into sections nut it's okay now.Marcus Qwertyus 21:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

That 70's Show

Marcus, can you please look at the reblanking of the cast summaries in this article? You reverted the change once. You can see my discussion with the user who insists it's better this way in the Cast Biographies section. I disagree with the user but said I would let you deal with it. I'm not sure if your silence on this issue means you've changed your mind or just haven't noticed. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Requests for adminship

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Marcus Qwertyus

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) Final: (2/26/6). Closed per SNOW by 67.136.117.132 at 18:06 20 July 2010.

I was going to withdraw but you beat me to it. P.S. I'm pretty sure IP's arn't allowed to close RFAs. Marcus Qwertyus 18:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Nomination

Marcus Qwertyus (talk · contribs) – ^{(Formerly known as Marcus Aurelius Antoninus and User name one)} I principally work on tedious tasks such as New pages patrol and vandal-fighting but have also created lots of articles (74 to be exact but I've created dozens of others over redirects). I help new users by moving userspace drafts, answering the occasional question and providing encouragement.Marcus Qwertyus 20:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Mostly deleting articles with speedy tags and expired prods. I hang around requested moves a lot and perform moves on userspace drafts and in the future I'd like to assist moving uncontroversial moves (e.g. over redirects and stuff.) I would also monitor AIV and in addition have over 2,700 articles on my watchlist and will issue blocks accordingly. At some point I'd like to help clear out Category:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons. There are ~20,000 images in the backlog there. I would also like to edit twinkle and already have to some extent by asking administrators to implement the changes I make.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: My best contributions have been to the mainspace. I have cleaned up ~~dozens~~, no, hundreds of articles. Here is an example [9]. I am also particularly skilled at article mergers. FCS Manned Ground Vehicles was consolidated from 8 different stuby articles.

I have also worked extensively on the main page. On my trophy shelf there are 6 DYKs (and rightfully there should have been a couple of ITNs but the ITN talk pages atmosphere is not conducive for democracy). I often check the factual accuracy of the main page and report problem and updates to Main Page Errors.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I do not edit war though there is the occasional edit conflict. I made Jansport87 quit (I think I was the straw that broke the camel's back) so I apologized.

Slightly random question from WFC

4. I appreciate how random this will seem, but I ask it in good faith. This was my first thought on seeing your username. Do you have a reasonably strong password?

A: L3tt3r$ & numb3r$ and I change it all the time too. Marcus Qwertyus 21:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Additional optional question from Beeblebrox

5. Since you took a moment put of your time while preparing this RFA to re-address the situation at User talk:Jansport87, it can hardly come as a surprise to you that it is on my mind as well upon seeing this nomination. Would you care to explain your actions in this matter?

A: I would have accepted any explanation during that 36-hour time frame I gave. If the same problem occurred today I would take it to Request for comment instead. Marcus Qwertyus 22:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

General comments

Links for Marcus Qwertyus: Marcus Qwertyus (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Edit summary usage for Marcus Qwertyus can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Discussion

v t e RfA/RfB toolbox
Counters	XTools Edit summary usage
Analysis	Articles created Non-automated edits BLP edits AfD votes AfD closes CSD log PROD log
Cross-wiki	CentralAuth Global contributions User rights

Support

~~First to support.~~Weak support Good balance of contributions for an admin. --WFC (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I still think this candidate will be a good admin. For that reason I am still supporting, and when this candidate comes back to RfA I will almost certainly support again, without the "weak". But Beeblebrox's diffs are hard to ignore. --WFC-- (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Support Good balance of audited content creation and vandal-fighting. Clearly here to build an encyclopedia, have never had any negative interactions with him. Jclemens (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Support - Personally I don't find the opposes convincing. The Jansport incident was a one time thing. Everyone makes mistakes. Even admins sometimes makes mistakes. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 23:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC) Moved to neutral. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 04:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Additionally, this was a month ago and he did apologize, which is a good thing. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 23:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
He apologized when he made this RFA for what it's worth. Additionally, the opposes do more than point out the Jansport87 issue, with which I personally would be disturbed if an admin made the same error. Nevertheless, I agree that if the Jansport87 issue was a one time thing, it would not be worth opposing. Airplaneman ✈ 23:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
In my defense I was on wikibreak when I discovered this. I could have apologized yesterday or the day before though. Marcus Qwertyus 00:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
And while I agree it could've been handled better, I am still supporting since I have seen some excellent work. Hopefully things like this won't happen again. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 00:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I guess I was hoping for some indication of where the 36 hour deadline cam from and why he thought he could impose such a deadline. The report he made at WP:UAA [10] demanded that the user be blocked once this imaginary deadline had passed. We give most users a week for any name that merits discussion as opposed to blocking on sight, but instead of looking for the relevant policy or asking for advice Marcus just made up a policy out of thin air and then demanded that admins enforce it. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Manners are something you're really going to have to work on, Marcus, if you want any chance of success in a future RfA. Less demanding, more asking nicely. The way I see it, if you want me to get off my arse to fulfil your request, the least you can do is say please. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose I find both your actions and your explanation for them in the Jansport thing disingenuous. You didn't seem to care one bit about this until earlier today, when you went over there and asked them to come back right in the middle of putting together this RFA. (look at the timestamps on these edits:[11] [12][13]) That looks to me like just trying to cover your tracks and make an apology for the sake of appearance to help you at RFA. You completely ignored my postings your talk page about this incident[14] and about a bad CSD tagging you made the same day[15]. Admins are expected to be skilled at communicating with other users, and should respond to legitimate criticisms of their actions. Your answer to my question about this did nothing to persuade otherwise. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
My lack of a response to your critisism should not be interpreted as me ignoring them. Recently I have taken to writing "duly noted" or just "noted" on such posts. Marcus Qwertyus 23:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
You didn't respond, and you didn't do anything about it for a month. Looks like ignoring it to me. I might be more willing to buy that reasoning if you had given a more direct and sensible response to my question, but that ship has sailed now. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. No rationale given to Jansport87 as for what makes the username promotional (I honestly have no idea!), and a lack of follow-up on this article's speedy G11 tag, which you self-removed without explanation after the material was sent to OTRS for G12 compliance. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
never heard of Jansport? Marcus Qwertyus 23:31, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Never. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't me that removed the speedy. There's talk about getting Twinkle configured fo db-multiples. Marcus Qwertyus 23:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
My bad. It was the creator (but it was done in good faith). Still, I don't see the relevance of this response when, even with an OTRS ticket, the material submitted was way too promotional to accept as is. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: Beeblebrox's rationale is just too compelling to ignore. I don't think you have the right attitude to become an admin at this time. Salvio ( ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}) 23:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry - I can't support, having seen the diffs for the Jansport87 incident. I also have some general maturity/attitude concerns from reviewing some contributions, and from the responses to questions and criticism here. Begoon^talk 23:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. Opposing an RfA is not something I enjoy doing, but something just doesn't sit right with me. In my own interactions I've found you abrupt and uncommunicative. My most recent interaction was an {{editprotected}} request, where you demanded that code from your userspace be copied over, your request comprising simply of "implement this." You only added the word "please" after an administrator all but refused to make the change until you did so. The only justification you provided for your lack of common courtesy was that you were going to request adminship in a few weeks. If that was my only concern, I would abstain or put my comment in the neutral section, but everywhere I turn, I find yet more niggling concerns- Beeblebrox above does nothing to put my mind at ease. I'm also unimpressed with "and rightfully there should have been a couple of ITN's but the ITN talk page's atmosphere is not conducive for democracy"- the bad grammar and use of apostrophes raises an eyebrow and Wikipedia is not a democracy, but much more concerning is your refusal to accept the consensus when it didn't go your way and the desire to take on a role that often involves sorting out some bitter disputes when you can't accept. All in all, I have deep concerns about your maturity, communications skills, ability to accept consensus and understanding of the workings of Wikipedia. TL;DR? Sorry, I don't trust you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Just a little clarification. The news item was about a string of bombings and shootings in Afghanistan. The reason the ITNs were not put up on the main page was that they were buried under piles of irrelvant news.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Qwertyus (talk • contribs)

The use of apostrophes in the example you cited is actually correct - well, half-correct. Apostrophes are in fact often used to denote a plural acronym - while most major publishing houses recommend against it, outlets as major as the New York Times continue to use them in this fashion. The second case is bona-fide correct, as it is being used to denote a possessive ("the atmosphere belonging to the talk page"). Badger Drink (talk) 08:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Although vandalism fighting is definitely a plus, I don't feel that the user is fit to become an administrator at this time due to the run-in with Jansport87. Tyrol5 [Talk] 23:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunate oppose – Your contributions are great, but the Jansport87 incident killed it all. Sorry. That should have been handled much better, and the diffs make it worse. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 00:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait why are the diffs so damning? Marcus Qwertyus 00:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Since I cited the diffs as part of my rationale too, I feel I can answer that. Firstly you ignored the issue for a month, after it had been pointed out to you what was wrong. Secondly, you leave an audit trail in the history of this page showing that you made the apology as part of the process of preparing this RFA, in which audit trail you really seem to take it less than seriously. That's how I read it, anyway. The apology itself wouldn't overly impress me, were I the recipient, either. Begoon^talk 00:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
The hidden comments you made on this RFA, as well as the talk page comments of Jansport87, just blew it. Sorry. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 01:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
2x(edit conflict)Oppose from neutral per CSD concerns (see my neutral comment), Beeblebrox, and HJ Mitchell. In addition, the Jansport87 incident tipped the balance for me; it should have been handled better. Airplaneman ✈ 23:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose He/she can't be an admin at this time due to the recent Jansport87 incident and CSD concerns. I might support you once the Jansport87 incident is 1 year ago and the CSD concerns has been addressed. Décembër21st2012Freâk ^Talk at 00:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose largely per the Jansport87 incident. Just looking at your comments as well as the stuff on your talk page makes me hesitate about giving you the tools. My oppose can largely be summed up as "Per HJ".--White Shadows ^{It's a wonderful life} 00:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Per HJ Mitchell. :( Diego Grez ^{what's up?} 01:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose [16] in regards to CSDs, what HJ said, and the odd Jansport thing. I appreciate the work in tagging articles, but having to be informed about it by multiple people in a relatively short time frame is hard to ignore; if you aren't sure about a tagging an article, you should ask for a second opinion if you didn't already. (for the record, the CSD thing is the least of my concerns, I'm just pointing it out) RN 01:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Ouch, Jansport. Could have been handled a lot better... and I think we can see this is already in WP:SNOW territory, so let's not prolong the pile-on. Candidate should work hard and come back next year with a clear slate. Jusdafax 01:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Jansport oppose. Suggest withdrawal. Townlake (talk) 02:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per attitude illustrated above by candidate, not yet ready for the mop in my opinion. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 02:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Per oppose reasons. Attitude matters a lot in this area! Bejinhan Talk 02:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - the candidate had no basis for purporting to give a new user a 36 hour deadline to change his username. He assumed an air of authority that he had no right to assume. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:15, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - per Beeble. Suggest withdrawal, so as to avoid a pile-up of opposes, and trying again after a year.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose No, not a great idea. Jmlk 1 7 07:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. WP:NOTNOW. Sorry. elektrik SHOOS 08:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose beeblebrox makes a good point and a valid issue of concern. I do oppose this rfa. Suggest a Not now and snow at this point. Ottawa4ever (talk) 10:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Regretful Oppose. Lots of great work done, but looking back at the nominee's Talk archives I'm just not seeing the degree of helpful engagement with people that I think is needed in an admin. What we need is not just tagging articles for deletion and then telling people they're wrong when they disagree, but a constructive effort to help people understand and to encourage them to become better editors. And there have been some recent poor CSD taggings, and the Jansport87 thing.
Additional comment: I've just noticed on the nominee's User page that he says he's 16 years old. I wouldn't oppose based purely on age, but it does suggest that the concerns voiced here can be addressed by a bit more maturity. Spend a bit more time, get a bit older and a bit wiser, and I can see myself supporting a future RfA. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't see the age on the User page, but I did pick up on the maturity issues in my review/oppose above regardless. Now the age is pointed out I agree with that entirely. Acquire age, wisdom and experience, and keep the dedication, sounds like a recipe for a good future RFA. Begoon^talk 11:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't want to mention his age, though I was aware of it at the time of my oppose, because I didn't want to give the impression that I was opposing on that basis (a very bad rationale imo) and I didn't want to sound patronising, but I agree that with age, so come maturity and wisdom and sometimes rather quickly. As such, I wouldn't rule out a future RfA, but for now, I would suggest withdrawing and forgetting about adminship for the foreseeable future. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Nay clearly i missed something big in approving you for account creation team and there is no way i can support you for admin at this time. Your other edits to UAA looked good so i never got as far back as your reporting Jansport87. Jansport87 is not a flagrant violation of user name policy and your behaviour surrounding that user is not becoming of an admin. Hopefully you have learnt from this experience. And hopefully Jansport87 comes back. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 11:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Beeblebrox et al. The interesting bit here is that, despite the damning diffs above and the very serious concerns about your conduct, you still have several veteran admins offering encouragement. Add me to that list - I think you can get where you need to be, and that you can eventually be a good admin. But you'll want to find a mentor and work very hard on your communication skills. As we see with the Jansport incident, mistakes can have real consequences, and that's something every admin must consider all the time. Good luck, UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:28, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Seems like a good content contributor, but the concerns raised above are a bit alarming to me. Perhaps a bit more experience will help. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Beeblebrox et al. I also have some serious conduct concerns that I just can't shake, normally, I support RfA's because I think RfA is too hard already, but I just can't here. Ronk01 talk, 17:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

~~Neutral~~ for now at least. Although contributions look great overall, I am a bit concerned with multiple converted taggings as recent as July 3 (found here). I am impressed at the amount (2500+) pages he has patrolled, but am not confident he holds a super-firm grasp of CSD policy. Since this is a place he intends to work in, I am uncomfortable supporting at this time. Airplaneman ✈ 22:23, 19 July 2010 (UTC)moved to oppose

Neutral At least until there's a more in depth answer to Question 5. Begoon^talk 22:40, 19 July 2010 (UTC)...moved to oppose

You could have just ignored the Jansport thing, which happened a month ago, and hoped no one mentioned it. But you chose to be honest and state it in the answer to Q3. Admitting one's mistakes is a good trait for an administrator to have. However I don't think you're quite ready yet, because of the other reasons brought up in the oppose section. —Soap— 00:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral I don't know. He has had some good contributions, but that Jansport87 thing ruined it for me. At least he didn't make somebody else bring it up (then I would have certainly opposed). I agree with Beeblebrox's and HJ Mitchell's rationales, but also with the three supports. I'll need more time to think about this before (or if) I move it to support or oppose. Coasterlover1994^{Leave your mark!} 00:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral I think the Jansport87 thing was a mistake, but that and HJ's points are still too recent. Sorry. Doc Quintana (talk) 00:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral per the Jansport incident. Sorry I had to change my !vote, but I am now convinced you aren't quite ready. Sorry. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 04:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral even after having a deeper look at his contributions, this one is a bit hard to decide, does he earn it or not. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 08:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral – and not for the Jansport87 reason (though it was a large mistake I am sure that with a majority of people opposing because of it, you have learned your lesson). I would very much like to support, but for other reasons brought up in the oppose section and your somewhat pleading replies to some opposers, I will stay neutral. ••Pep per•• 14:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

Marcus Qwertyus 19:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

splitting articles

Hi, I see that you split some of the content of Estadio Nacional (Lima) to create 1964 Lima football riot, but you don't seem to have added the various talk page templates required by WP:SPLIT to ensure that the edit history is preserved.

The chunk of text you copied is a rather a mess, with two versions of the same content (one translated worse than the other from the same source perhaps?) and needs a lot of work done on it! PamD (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm about to go offline. If i interpreted the article right then there are quite a few articles I created that I need to attribute.Marcus Qwertyus 19:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Christian testimony

I thought so too, at first. But it's actually spam promotion of someone's book. Cheers. Taroaldo (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm kind of a shoot first ask questions later guy. Marcus Qwertyus 01:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I can respect that. :) Taroaldo (talk) 01:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank You!

Thank you, Marcus, for the warm welcome and the gooey batch of cookies. All are appreciated! --AlanEarl (talk) 17:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Good sir

Hiya Marcus! Just a friendly note that I declined your speedy deletion tagging of First person to own Apple's Ipad. Although the articledoes indeed indicate significance, I did not see it as a very significant significance, so have nominated it for deletion. SeeWikipedia:Articles for deletion/First person to own Apple's Ipad. Best regards mate, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if you intend to fix them later. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. There is a dedicated page for testing Twinkle and other tools atUser talk:Sandbox for user warnings. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You should also link the two accounts as outlined at WP:SOCK#NOTIFY. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for the info, however the test I needed required a blank user talk page. The problem with twinkle has been fixed now.Marcus Qwertyus 19:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Ronk01's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Lelapindore's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ndunruh (talk) 17:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Air Force Portal Administrator

I am looking for an editor or editors to take over administration of the US Air Force Portal. If you think you might be interested please see the Portal Administration section on the talk page to see what is involved and comment there if you’re interested or have any questions.Ndunruh (talk) 17:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

CSD

Hi. Thanks for being quick to tag Allan Dybczak for speedy. It might be a hoax, but as we don't know this, do remember to courtesy blank (WP:CBLANK) the page in case it does just happen to be an attck on a real person. Cheers.--Kudpung(talk) 21:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

You beat me to the courtesy blank. I did a google and it also appears to be a hoax. Marcus Qwertyus 21:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Abdul Malik

If an article has no categories on it at all, could you please use the {{uncat}} template instead of the {{catimprove}} one? The latter is for articles that already have some categories on them but need additional ones (e.g. if an article is filed in Category:Living people but doesn't have a nationality or occupational category on it); the former template is meant for articles that have no categories on them at all. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 04:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I usually try to add categories after tagging them but sometimes I forget. Also catimprove is a tiny bit friendlier than uncat. Marcus Qwertyus 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I have not copied copyrighted material from other sources.

Not sure what you mean by that, I have made no such copies. Children of the dragon (talk) 20:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

You didn't repeatedly copy material from about.com? We can not accept paraphrased material either. Marcus Qwertyus 20:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry!

I thought I did something wrong and was trying to fix it! Ha! Sorry, I'm still trying to get the hang of Wikipedia. I'll let you get on with it. Lalaland007 (talk) 23:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem! Marcus Qwertyus 23:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Oplan 5027

Expand it? You misunderstand my MO here brother. I find these small bits in the news and start a stub in order to lure others to do my research for me. I have nothing else to add to this article, although I am still looking. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 23:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Okay. Jeez. Marcus Qwertyus 23:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Melissa Walton

Thanks for the nominating the article, but it will have a mass of sources in ten minutes. :)RAIN the ONE (Talk) 23:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus 23:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

A Thousand and One Nights (song)

Well, next time check the page in question: [17] Diego Grez ^{what's up?} 00:30, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD

Hi. Marcus. I shouldn't have rePRODed THIS but I didn't realise you had already done one that was removed. It was removed again so I have put it up for AfD. --Kudpung (talk) 06:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

RE:Screenshot

No problem; I'm guessing you figured it out? :) -- bydand•talk 01:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Affirmantive. Marcus Qwertyus 18:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK

Thanks for checking over my FBI Seal DYK. Could you also please have a look at my nomination of Attorney General of Virginia's climate science investigation? It's been languishing since July 29th without any comments so far. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Marcus, Thanks for the welcome. I have been using wp for years (who has not?), so I thought that it was time I made an effort to pay back a little. Also I am bumming around Thailand now, so this would be a good place to start.

A question, do you think it is beneficial to add the latlong of a tourism or site of interest in a Thai provincial or city page? My thinking is that as more people acquire a gps/smart phone, gps spots will become increasingly relied upon for navigation. Also, I dabble in waymarking, so I have acquired more than a few gps spots in Thailand. —Preceding unsignedcomment added by Ian@perth (talk • contribs) 17:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

That would be great. Also you could put up infoboxes as well. Marcus Qwertyus 17:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Duane Earl Pope‎

On 8 August, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Duane Earl Pope‎, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse •Talk • 12:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Erma EMP-35

Hi Marcus, I was just looking at the World War 2 German submachine guns when I looked at the French guns I saw the submachine guns, I was guessing the French soldiers stole the fallen German soldiers guns. The submachine gun Erma EMP-35 was not listed on the german submachine guns list. I was asking permission to see if I could correct that if neccesary. commanderneyo77 (talk) 22:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

What article? Also, you may be better off asking another editor more familiar with the article. Marcus Qwertyus 22:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010)

Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial

Project news

New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced;
Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy

Editorial

Opportunities for new military history articles

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate sectionhere.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

User: Rai Muhammad Saleem Bhatti

Hi Marcus. I noticed a message you left on the talk page of the user above when I came across his edits at Saurabh Singh Shekhawat. I don't know whether these edits are the disruptive edits you refered to, so you might want to look at it. I don't know what the appropriate steps would be. Cheers. PINTofCARLING (talk) 17:39, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Dealt with. Thanks for letting me know. Marcus Qwertyus 20:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Support for Community Ban

Hi. I've suggested a community ban for Danielwork (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), as he/she continues to ignore our concerns, thus flouting consensus.

As you've raised concerns before on the user's talk page, I thought you may wish to be aware of the process, &/or add any thoughts you have to the discussion atWikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Danielwork_-_ignoring_consensus_.26_others.27_talk. Regards,Trafford09 (talk) 07:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010)

Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial

Project news

The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants

Editorial

In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations

To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team, Roger Davies ^talk 19:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Greetings!

Hello Marcus Qwertyus, Melba1 has smiled at you! Smiles promoteWikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Just passing on the WikiLove that I received from Thesevenseas :D Melba1 (talk) 11:30, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I beg your pardon, from User:Thesevenseas. Melba1 (talk) 11:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Appreciated. Thanks! Marcus Qwertyus 12:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 3 April 2010 Baghdad shootings

The article 3 April 2010 Baghdad shootings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lacks notability, basically a news story. Delete per WP:NOTNEWS

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

I am mystified by your nomination. Please explain. Marcus Qwertyus 22:57, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

As I said in the PROD I think it fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT - particularly in the lack of widespread, significant or in depth coverage. I'd suggest merging the article into the list of terrorist incidents in the country (or if that does not exist to create it)--Errant [tmorton166] ^(chat!) 09:40, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI I created such an article: List of terrorist incidents in Iraq in 2010. From first run through I would suggest that 20 June 2010 Baghdad bombings and 3 April 2010 Baghdad shootings could be completely merged (the former I believe is already at that stage) and redirected there. --Errant [tmorton166] ^(chat!) 10:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm no fan of list articles but the proposed merging would do much to consolidate other non-notable incidents. I'm going to try and expand my article after which you may take it to AfD. Marcus Qwertyus 18:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

UK Election Maps

I apologise for my use of that 2001 map, I was new to uploading images and didn't look into it's source well enough. I have now replaced it with a map which was created by a friend of mine who also created maps for most general elections dating back to the 1830's. I hope that this saves any of the maps I have uploaded from deletion as no other maps from before 2001 seem to exist on the internet and I've received a number of e-mails and messages thanking me for uploading them. Any further advice on how to resolve this matter would be appreciated.MWhite 13:16, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I did the four tildes to sign my post, but it's saying unsigned. Just so you don't think I'm being rude or anything.

License tagging for File:ArmedScout-3.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:ArmedScout-3.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set ofimage copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Jansport87

I remember your RfA, and I'm trying to get involved in the relevant CCI, that's how I know this. It seems that this account was a sock after all. Just figured you might want to know that if you didn't already. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I saw. I'll help with the CCI.Marcus Qwertyus 17:23, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Someone else made the connection to more socks: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OSUHEY/Archive. VernoWhitney(talk) 21:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Oy vey! Marcus Qwertyus 21:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Window to Paris

As the creator literally admits this is a (poorly) Google-translated version of the article from the Russian wikipedia, doesn't that technically make it db-foreign? HalfShadow 20:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't know. I asked your question on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion.Marcus Qwertyus 20:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

If you really wanted to get technical, it could even be considered copyvio: he's just taking the original article, running it through a translator and posting it. Copyvio applies to wikis, right? HalfShadow 20:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I think if you attribute it then it's okay but could be wrong.Marcus Qwertyus 20:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

"Released"

"Relased" does not mean the company has relinquished its rights to the image, but that it's allowed the US Navy to use the image. These inages are not public domain. See File:USS America (LHA-6) - 050718-O-0000X-001.jpg for how a similar issue was handled. I'm still trying to find the original discussion page about that image, which explains the issue in better detail. If you've added any other images to Commons that were "released", you should proably see about having them removed. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 23:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

At least one other. Thanks. Marcus Qwertyus 23:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. The P-8 images is a very good one, so it's a pity we can't use it! But since we have other public domain images of the P-8, we can't claim fair-use on this one. :( - BilCat (talk) 23:24, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Fort Hood shooting

Hi Marcus,
One of your recent edits here seems to have 'broken' a ref and left a 'Cite error': "<ref name=KC1 />" see Diff (and look at the bottom of the page). Most of the refs are defined in the references section, not among the text as is more common. I fixed it by 'commenting out' the reference, which apparently gave an error as it was no longer being used. Just FYI.- 220.101 talk^\Contribs 17:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

noted. Marcus Qwertyus 19:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010)

Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial

Project news

The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)

Editorial

In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate sectionhere. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit thenewsroom. BrownBot(talk) 20:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Article

Hello! Your submission of Article at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! The Interior (Talk) 19:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Adaptive Vehicle Make

On 4 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Adaptive Vehicle Make, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how,quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 06:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

List of fighter aircraft

Thanks for your comments about this article. If you're still interested in helping, note that I've moved the draft table toUser:Snottywong/List of fighter aircraft. Feel free to volunteer for a section on the talk page. If you have any thoughts about how to make the table better (particularly before we put a lot of work into it), please don't hesitate to start a discussion. Thanks! SnottyWong ^spout 16:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I added a whole bunch of aircraft to the list today. I think I'm done for the day, so if you were going to add some, you should be able to do so without edit conflicts. Also, I hacked together a quick javascript which made the work go a lot quicker for me. It's not pretty but it works. If you're interested in using it, let me know. SnottyWong ^spout 00:38, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll start adding more in a couple of hours. Maybe then I'll take another look at that js script. Marcus Qwertyus 00:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

It's at User:Snottywong/fighterextract.js. If you import it into your skin file, then anytime you edit an aircraft article (any article which uses the "Infobox Aircraft Type" template), it will try to parse the infobox for the relevant data. Then, it'll replace the article text (in the edit window only) with a pre-formatted table entry which you can copy and paste into the table (after cleaning it up). The infobox doesn't have a country field, so the script just defaults to US. The script also gets rid of all spaces, so sometimes you have to add them back in to the manufacturer name. SnottyWong ^squeal 00:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, also: if the "Status" field of the infobox hasn't been filled out, it'll default to Retired (since I've only been working on retired aircraft). That might be important for you since you're working on newer ones. SnottyWong ^{spill the beans} 01:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I've finished adding through the "3rd generation" fighters. I know you've been starting from the newest ones and working in the opposite direction. Let me know where you're up to and we'll figure out how to meet in the middle without duplicating anything. I think we're pretty close to being done with the rote data entry. SnottyWong ^{spill the beans} 18:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Everything above the J-10 is done. I did a few more out of order so check before you add others (Ctrl + F). There were a few that weren't on the original list, particularly UAVs, so I'm going to go back later and add those. Marcus Qwertyus 19:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Are there UAV's out there that are actually considered fighters? As in, intended for air-to-air combat? I thought they were mostly for surveillance and bombing. Anyway, I think I'll probably have time to add the rest of the 4th generation fighters below the J-10 today. I'll double check that I'm not adding any duplicates. Then I'll sort it alphabetically again, and then I think we'll be ready to move it to the article. SnottyWong ^soliloquize 20:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Since when is Wikipedia a conduit for lies and libel?

To state that only "one person" calls the M113 the Gavin when its obvious that thousands of people do is pure sour grapes--and deliberate LYING. When he edits a book and there are several others as co-authors who call the M113 the Gavin, you are not in any position to continue to LIE and say ONLY ONE PERSON calls the M113 the Gavin. If Mike has "followers" as you admit below---then you need to stop LYING that only one person is doing something. And if you google "m113 gavin" you will find THOUSANDS of web sites and pages that have nothing to do with Mike Sparks or any news organization so that is yet another lie.

Moreover, when the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army General Casey says he wants a GCV-Light of under 20 tons who are you "Marcus Qwertyus" to play god and delete his remarks?

HE IS THE CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE U.S. ARMY, that's REALITY, bud.

This is yet more proof why Wiki is not deserving of any of our donations because jerks think they can monopolize the pages and be accountable to no one and no amount of FACTS.

Marcus Qwertyus and anyone who acts like him as a conduit for lies and a censor of the truth are the ones VANDALIZING Wiki.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by98.88.209.220 (talk) 08:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Can I ask why [18] apparently well-sourced addition was reverted as vandalism? VernoWhitney (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

This IP is another member of Mike Sparks' army. Mike has an obsession with the M113 and has a hatred of wheeled vehicles like the Stryker and heavy vehicles like the 70 ton GCV. If you read the sources it says nothing about a "GCV-light". "GCV-Light" is an invention of Mike as seen in this video. Mike and his followers have been well warned and I will not continue to tolerate him and I hope you won't either. Marcus Qwertyus 18:59, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so that explains the Replacements section - what about the source for some people calling it Gavin? VernoWhitney(talk) 19:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Been discussed on the talk page before. That user will will have to get consensus if he wants to change the wording. Most websites that use the Gavin term are either Mike Sparks combat reformers or news organizations that have been misled into believing that is the correct name.Marcus Qwertyus 19:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. I should've checked the talk page first. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 19:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

April Fools Nom

I have recently reviewed your nomination at Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know and have found that there are still outstanding issues. Please review the new comment underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for helping this years April Fools be funny! --Found5dollar (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

April Fools Nom

Foreign combat

Can you please explain why you object to the phrase foreign combat operations so strongly? Swarm ^X 22:08, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

If you'd just provide a reliable citation we could stop this silly edit war. Marcus Qwertyus 22:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't answer my question. Why do you object to that phrase? It's not a controversial claim. Do you dispute the fact itself, or do you agree that it's true, but are just against it because there's no source? Swarm ^X 23:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

It is a controversial claim. I'm sure there are combat operations being carried out in the form of small scale operations such as raids.Marcus Qwertyus 17:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

By whom? The United States? Swarm ^X 07:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Anyone. Marcus Qwertyus 13:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

If you mean a coalition nation, the last one (Australia) withdrew on July 28, 2009. If you mean the United States, we have sources to support that US combat operations are over. If you mean Iraq in any sense, they don't qualify as a foreign nation, obviously. Which other foreign nation do you suspect is conducting combat operations if not a Coalition member and not the United States? Swarm ^X 20:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't suspect any particular foreign nation is conducting combat operations. I just want a source. Marcus Qwertyus 20:25, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I have provided a source taken from the Multinational Force Iraq article, it along with a source showing US combat operations have ended is enough sourcing for the claim. I might also remind you Marcus, much of the infobox isn't sourced but is self evident (you don't remove them, why is that?). Finally, in what way is sending me warnings productive? I'm an experienced member of a related wiki project and I have been here a long time, check your attitude my friend. G.R. Allison (talk) 11:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Also I must add, I don't see how this is controversial, it's just you that seems to object (perhaps given your interest in the US military) that the US be changed to 'Coalition' or 'Foreign'. You then try and send me warnings in an attempt to shut me up? Poor show.G.R. Allison (talk) 11:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Ref looks valid so I have no reason to revert. Marcus Qwertyus 17:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

Your Military history Newsletter

Project News: Editors for the newsletter, GAN backlog reduction drive
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: EyeSerene sums up our "Five years of military history"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:23, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Why have you edited my user page?

Marcus, why have you taken it upon yourself to edit my user page? Leaving me with an edit summary of just "?" You have removed the word "Thanks" for no reason. Please refrain from doing so, you have no right or reason to do it. G.R. Allison (talk) 12:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

See Ownership and editing of user pages. Userpages cannot be owned. If Cluster duck is your account, you must follow the procedure at Alternative account notification.Marcus Qwertyus 19:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Marcus I am aware I literally do not own my user page ('my user page' meaning the user page associated with my account and not one I legally own) but you know fine well what I meant. You still have not addressed my question. You have edited my user page with no explanation. If I may quote... "by convention others will not usually edit your user page itself, other than (rarely) to address significant concerns or place project-related tags". Also I find it very insulting that you appear to be accusing me of sock puppetry as a response to this rather than answer a direct question. Why did you remove the word "thanks"? G.R. Allison (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, I am in no way connected to the account 'Cluster duck'. G.R. Allison (talk) 20:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Do you have an answer for me Marcus? G.R. Allison (talk) 13:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Marcus it is poor form to fail to reply to an editor in cases such as this but on your own head be it, I'm done. G.R. Allison (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Categorization

I've been recategorizing a bunch of articles. If you have questions please direct them here. Marcus Qwertyus 20:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Why did you remove the Japanese SP rocket launcher system from the category of rocket artillery? Are you trying to set up some sort of hierarchy?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Cat:Rocket artillery contains many towed and crew-served weapon systems. Marcus Qwertyus 22:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Help!

Hi im new to Wikipedia as you probably know, could you fix up the page i created about a mole who 'compomised' australian intelligence. George Sadil Its my second day and its way too confusing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Sadil--Gargabookofayr (talk) 07:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OSUHEY

Hey. Could you please take a look at the SPI case? There's a question waiting for you there. Thanks! — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Jonathon A H's talk page.
Message added 19:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

Your Military History Newsletter

Project News: From the editors, "Military Historian of the Year", New Incubator, Black Project Report
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: bahamut guides us through "Nominating military biographies for deletion"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Recent edit re personal attack

in your recent edit at Talk:Mark I tank you removed/edited another user's comments. While I appreciate the sentiment behind the edit, it is still not the correct thing to do. The correct approach is to ask that the contributor either defend their comments which you consider to be contrary to assuming good faith and no personal attacks or apologise and retract them. It may be that the user spoke in haste and the heat of the moment and should be given the opportunity to respond. I will advise User:Andy Dingley that I have mentioned this to you.GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:24, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I can't wait around for Andy to come to his senses. I can't allow my reputation to be damaged by someone who can't convey a point without using derogatory comments. I appreciate you going to talk to Andy about this though. Marcus Qwertyus 16:30, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Marcus, you seem to be removing User:Andy Dingley contributions to this page without any sort of response, you seem to be displaying a pattern of removing without discussion, as I said before (which you decided to ignore)... this is bad practice. G.R. Allison(talk) 18:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I can can remove whatever I want from my talk page. Marcus Qwertyus 18:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Your talk page? Didn't you say to me, "See Ownership and editing of user pages. Userpages cannot be owned"? It is convention to explain actions on Wikipedia and to at least reply to established editors (such as my question regarding your editing of the user page associated with my account). G.R. Allison (talk) 19:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Personal attacks and off-topic material in particular can be removed from any page. Marcus Qwertyus 19:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Removal seems entirely reasonable, IMHO. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Light_fighter

Hello. You made an error when creating this page, just letting you know I changed your edit to make the template work.--v/r -T P 21:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, never had this problem before with Twinkle. Thanks for letting me know. Marcus Qwertyus 22:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Creation of iPad original

Can you create your draft in your userspace and discuss this on the iPad article. I'd be interested in people's thoughts there. --Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather create iPad (original) but merge iPad 2. I'd rather keep both but not sure how that will work out. I think I'm going to wait a little bit before moving it to the mainspace. Marcus Qwertyus 02:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I think its an all-or-nothing thing. Post release of iPad 2 what you're saying probably makes sense, but it will need discussion. --Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Bzuk (talk) 15:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:uw-mos3 restored

Hello. I appreciate the Bold! direction you were going when you sent {{uw-mos3}} and {{uw-mos4}} to TfD. However, the uw-mos3 nomination was flawed as step #1 "tag the template" was not completed. As per the DRV process, Icontacted the deleting admin and asked him to review his deletion on the grounds that this was a stealth nomination. Heagreed and invited me to restore the template as he was unable to utilize his admin tools at the time.

Speaking as an editor, I have used {{uw-mos1}}, {{uw-mos2}}, and {{uw-mos3}} when working with new editors who were not familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines (for obvious reasons this series of templates was designed with new editors in mind). Speaking as an admin, I can also tell you that I have blocked editors for disruptive editing because they ignored warnings in the uw-mos series. However if you still feel strongly about the usefulness (or lack thereof) of these templates, I would encourage you to seekconsensus first on the talk page and/or working with WikiProject user warnings. Regards, — Kralizec!(talk) 01:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me. I believe that threatening users for violating the Manual of Style does no good. It is contrary to the blocking policy. I see blocking users for "persistently violating other policies or guidelines." but only in the context of severe disruptive editing. Editing is not disruptive if it is at least a little progressive. If this template is to be of any use it should at least be specific. A single-issue notice can suffice for notifying new editors. Marcus Qwertyus 12:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

MRAP move

I declined your speedy-rename request because I found another meaning for the term (that makes it a 3-way dab, so can't be handled with a hat-note in the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC article). Maybe send the disambiguation page to MRAP (disambiguation) (with hatnote on primary pointing there) instead of just nuking it? 09:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Read your mind. Can you move MRAP (armored vehicle) to MRAP now? Marcus Qwertyus 09:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

All set (and hatnote fixed). DMacks (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

WP NOT

WP NOT shouldn't be reworded on the basis of one particular situation without very general agreement. I support your view on the article, but I have reverted your change to the policy. I shall propose a change there, and it must be discussed there, and will probably require a general discussion, which is apt to be very protracted. DGG ( talk ) 15:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Criticism of Religion

I've reverted your tag on the Criticism of Religion page per my concerns I've raised on the article talk. I just wanted to inform you in case you wanted to respond, or make any proposals, etc. Thanks. Jess_talk|_edits21:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Criticism

I don't think it matters Marcus, I just think it's bad form to tinker with a policy just after launching a discussion about it. Even if your edit was totally unrelated, I'd say remove all doubt and just don't touch the policy page. --FormerIP (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, your argument was about an article entitled "Criticism of...", the policy page had an example using "Criticisms of..." and you removed the s, thereby just possibly making it fit your case a little more clearly. It's not really about consensus, it's about when is an appropriate time to make tweaks to a policy page. --FormerIP (talk) 01:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Fahd page name

Hi there!

Concerning the move made to Fahd (vehicle), the previous name of the article was based on the name of the M113 armored personnel carrier article, albeit with brackets. Are you sure that counts as over-precision? I find vehicle to be somewhat vague.--Sherif9282 (talk) 14:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The policy I was talking about was PRECISION. Personally I find that policy badly worded. If it were true Wedge (golf)could be moved to Wedge (sports) which would be inaccurate. I am throwing in a little COMMON SENSE by deciding titles that are also CONCISE. Marcus Qwertyus 23:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Alright then, in that case I guess we'll have to do with the new title. --Sherif9282 (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Reverted. This was about as bad an idea as the similar (and similarly reverted) move of Archer (tank destroyer) to Archer (vehicle).Andy Dingley (talk) 00:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Quick Kill

You added a CSD to Quick Kill, which I thought was because you were converting from a dab to a hatnote. In any event, the result was a redirect to itself. I'm not quite sure what did happen or was supposed to happen, so I reverted Quick Kill to a recent version, can we try again?--SPhilbrick T 19:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Apparently when I added the csd to Quick Kill [19] twinkle got confused and copy-pasted everything from Quick kill to Quick Kill active protection system. Unless maybe you accidently appended part of the revision history from the quick kill disambiguation page.Marcus Qwertyus 21:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm pretty sure I caused the mess, but I'm not sure what is supposed to happen. Is Quick Kill supposed to go away? When I did the original delete, I was left with a redirect to itself, which was clearly wrong, so I tried to resurrect what it looked like before the deletion, and I probably did that wrong. Should I simply delete Quick Kill?--SPhilbrick T 22:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Fine where it is at. MarcusQwertyus

WP:POINT

Your actions at Gunfire were very WP:POINTy. Would you care to explain? — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 23:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a point to prove and I'm not even a deletionist. Marcus Qwertyus 00:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Then why edit the disambiguation page and nominate it for deletion to "show" that crappy articles exist? —The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 15:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

PS One

Regarding your edit to PlayStation (i.e. the splitting of PS One into it's own section) the PS one is a redesigned PlayStation, similar to the redesigns fo the PS2, PSP and PS3 that followed. A simple piece of proof can be found in the PlayStation (console) article. I tried to add the link to the edit summary of the reversion, but Twinkle doesn't tell you how many characters you have so it was too long. So, for convenience, here it is: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/12/06/sony_ps_one_sales_rocket/ Alphathon™ (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

You can disable the edit summary limiter in your preferences (Don't know why it's not defaulted). That source doesn't explicitly say that the PS one is a variant. The burden of proof goes to you. Seeing that PS one sales shattered PS 2 sales, do you oppose the creation of PS one?Marcus Qwertyus 01:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

List of reptilian humanoids

Multiple editors have come to the conclusion that the original reptilian humanoid article was a work of original research that did little except appear to endorse the ideas of David Icke via WP:SYN. If you feel this was in error, then add your opinion to the already voluminous discussion on the talk page. But do not restore the original article without discussion. Serendi ^pod ous 09:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

"Reptilians" is a term used by UFO conspiracists for evil reptilian aliens. The reptilian humanoids article deals with reptilian humanoids in general, not just "reptilians". Serendi ^pod ous 10:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. But just because reptilians are sometimes called reptilian humanoids that doesn't mean that all reptilian humanoids are reptilians. Serendi ^pod ous 10:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you cite that? If not reptilian humanoid should be redirected to reptilian. Marcus Qwertyus 10:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you cite that Quetzalcoatl, the dinosauroid and the Thetis Lake Monster are reptilians? "Reptilian humanoid" just means a reptile that looks like a human. That's all. It's not a specific term. Yes, most talk of reptilian humanoids is going to be about reptilians, but that doesn't mean that we can call every reptilian humanoid a reptilian. Serendi ^pod ous 10:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

All you have done is incorporate novel synthesis to conclude that these creatures fit your neologism. You have not even cited a definition that would make Reptilian humanoids different from reptilians. Marcus Qwertyus 11:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Find me a citation that employs "reptilians" the way you do. Show me that it means anything outside of UFO/NWO conspiracy theories. "Reptilians" is a term used to describe ONLY reptilian humanoids in conspiracy theories. It is NEVER used to describe reptilian humanoid gods or fictional characters, except by conspiracists. The burden of proof is on you here. Serendi ^pod ous 11:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Have you made your RfD comment? Because the section is not there. Serendi ^pod ous 18:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Purge cache. Marcus Qwertyus 19:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It's still not there. I'm not sure you've completed the process. Serendi ^pod ous 20:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of iPad (original)

I requested speedy deletion of iPad (original) under CSD A10 as a recently created article that duplicates an existing topic. It's a disruptive, redundant content fork of iPad, with no substantive changes. It was neither discussed nor explained atWikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_January_2. --Pnm (talk) 20:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ripsaw logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploadingFile:Ripsaw logo.png. 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Fahd APC

You know, there is one configuration of the Fahd, the Fahd 280-30, that can be considered an IFV. Shouldn't that category stay?--Sherif9282 (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

No I didn't realize that. I always like to have a category includes all the vehicles in the family. For instance Stryker would go in the AFV category and not the NBC vehicle, IFV, commander, reconnaissance and ATGM categories. Marcus Qwertyus 17:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Local page created for this weekend's meetup

I just created Wikipedia:Meetup/St. Louis to parallel the page on the WP10 site. Easy to watchlist! Hope to see you there. Cheers.--Chaser (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Details set. Hope to see you there.--Chaser (talk) 06:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

iPad 2

I've started a new section on the iPad talk page so that iPad 2 related content can be discussed. This is linkedhere. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:38, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

How do I change my username

Hey Marcus, I got a question for you. Do you know how to change a username? If so, can you please tell me how to do so?---Andeep3450 (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

You can change your name at WP:CHUS. If the username you want is already taken but doesn't already have any edits, go to WP:CHUU.Marcus Qwertyus 02:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

ipad

HJ is a good person, though he did make an error. Don't push him too hard, please. DGG ( talk ) 23:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I have a suspicion HJ either didn't or still hasn't read the full debate. Oh well. Something good may come of this like a rewording of Chrystal. MarcusQwertyus 23:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Leopard 2a7.png

Thanks for uploading File:Leopard 2a7.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set ofimage copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010

Your military history newsletter – Volume LVIII, December 2010 From the editors • "Military Historian of the Year" • Discussions • The month's new featured and A-class content • Review awards Contest results • A-class medal recipients • bahamut teaches us proper usage of "Jargon and acronyms"
To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot(talk) 21:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

"Is this table correct?"

hi, just wondering what is the meaning of the heading "Is this table correct?" in the Wikipedia:Flagged_protection_and_patrolled_revisionspage. Did you mean to ask it in the talk page? Or did you forget to change the heading after experimentation? It seems it has been there since July 2009. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subh83(talk • contribs) 21:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

I have only included reliable sources. Blogs are allowed if done by professionals on the relevant topic. Thanks.-Eric H Eric H, on the meds (talk) 21:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Please seek consensus on the relevant talk pages. (Talk:Carlo Mattogno, Talk:Holocaust denial. Marcus Qwertyus 21:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I have proposed to include the link on the discussion page.Eric H, on the meds (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Mistake?

[20]. Logan_Talk ^{Contributions} 21:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Whack! Marcus Qwertyus 21:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Criticism of Wikipedia

I am about to go ahead with large-scale changes to address the non-neutrality of the Criticism of Wikipedia article. Are you still interested in helping? -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. Marcus Qwertyus 01:00, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

All of the Criticism of Wikipedia content is being merged into other articles and then the Criticism article will be turned into a redirect. Currently, the largest task is to copy/merge the "Criticism of the community" section into the Wikipedia article. Would you mind taking on that task? Please leave everything in the Criticism article until we're ready to put in the redirect. Thanks! --JTSchreiber (talk) 01:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Would it be easier to move that content to Wikipedia community? The Wikipedia#community is already quite long. Marcus Qwertyus 01:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

It's true that Wikipedia#community is already quite long, but Wikipedia community is currently just a redirect back to Wikipedia#community. It looks like the redirect -vs- article debate was pretty heated in the past. I suggest putting all the community content into the Wikipedia article for now. When we are done with the criticism article, we can start a discussion on Talk:Wikipedia about splitting out the community section by making "Wikipedia community" into an article again. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 03:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I've started a draft in my userspace so when I'm done I can attempt to gain consensus through a Requested move or just ask an admin to move it. I can find no discussion where it was decided to merge.

Ironically it's going to be considered undue weight if we try to move all this to the Wikipedia article. Marcus Qwertyus 04:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ask an administrator to do what? If you want your content to replace the redirect that's currently in Wikipedia community, you can just edit it yourself here. This is preferable to a move, since it preserves the edit history of the old "Wikipedia community" article. --JT

Or just history merged. Marcus Qwertyus 07:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

It looks like the merge was done unilaterally and then debated afterward. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Would you like to do any other work related the Criticism of Wikipedia article? -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm swamped. I'll see what cleanup I can do to the split articles. Marcus Qwertyus 07:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 04:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Could you go ahead and set up the Wikipedia community article? I'm getting close to turning the Criticism of Wikipedia article into a redirect, and I'd like the community article to exist by the time I do that. Thanks. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 06:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Admin will merge the two histories soon and then we can move it to the mainspace. Marcus Qwertyus 07:45, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 03:52, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:AirforceMQ-11B.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AirforceMQ-11B.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. --Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

QinetiQ

Hi there - I'm really not sure why you've reverted that move. Your move summary says (in respect to my earlier move after closing a move discussion): "you did not have the authority to close that debate". Why is that? --Mkativerata (talk) 00:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

While there may or may not have been consensus to move, you participated in the debate which makes you ineligible to move the page. (WP:RMCI). Also "Trademarks in CamelCase are a judgment call. CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable". QinetiQ has popular usage with the press [21]. Marcus Qwertyus 01:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Please explain - at what point did I participate in the debate other than by closing it? --Mkativerata (talk) 01:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I have made a grave error. I think I accidentally searched for the the nom's username instead of yours.

Still though, isn't the CamelCase rule valid here? if you think not, move it back and I can make another requested move. Marcus Qwertyus 01:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

No worries, but I'd appreciate it if you could revert the moves and edits back to the consensus version with an appropriate edit summary (in light of your earlier ones). CamelCase is "open to jugdment" and the judgment of the discussion was that standard English shouldn't apply here (in particular, one editor pointed to non-CamelCase usage in a number of high quality reliable sources). As the consensus is currently behind Qinetiq, the way to get it moved back to QinetiQ is to open a new RM discussion. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Page User:Marcus Qwertyus/Wikipedia community

See Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen#Queried requests. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Object 187

What are you doing!? Why tagging again? Can't you see it's fixed! Oblivion Lost (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The ratio of references to text is quite low. Marcus Qwertyus 17:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The tank is quite rare! You can't ask for more! Oblivion Lost (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Look what the article looks like now. Busted up. References and all. Oblivion Lost (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kim Jong-chul

Hello Marcus Qwertyus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kim Jong-chul, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Deletion of this page may be controversial or is under discussion. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

{{Infobox weapon}} is b0rked. Could you please fix it, as you're the last person to have been working on it.

Looks like unclosed }}, as it's spitting out the first half of an {{#if: test at the top of page. Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Nett Warrior

Thanks for creating the Nett Warrior page! I work on (parts) of this program. I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have, but will be mostly off the record (proprietary). 166.214.189.31 (talk) 03:52, 19 February 2011 (UTC)DLM

I thought so. If you are up to the challenge, the Future Force Warrior page needs an update and is chok full of incorrect material.

Do you know if the Individual Body Armor program is just an upgrade of the Interceptor body armor system? Trying to decide if its worth making an article about. MarcusQwertyus 04:02, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Edmodo.png

Thanks for uploading File:Edmodo.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set ofimage copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011

Your Military history Newsletter

Project News: From the editors
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: EyeSerene discusses "Writing neutrally for Wikipedia"

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

SPI

Hey. Just to clarify, a sleeper account is an account created by a sockpuppet that isn't used to edit immediately, but is saved for later. It's akin to being a sleeper agent. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Stockpiling puppets. Got it. Marcus Qwertyus 16:01, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Recce aircraft

Hi, You've created an article Reconnaissance aircraft that seems to cover much of the same material as existing articles Aerial reconnaissance and Surveillance aircraft. Would it be better to move any new info to one of those pages and change Reconnaissance aircraft back to a redir ? See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Possible Content fork. DexDor (talk) 16:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Lion of Babylon: No problem, but...

Hi Marcus Qwertyus. Personally I have no problem with changing the name of the article. You should remember, however, that "Lion of Babylon" can also refer to a 2,500-year old basalt monument of ancient Babylon, a symbol of goddessIshtar. No WP article about the sculpture yet, but in that case we will need of a disambiguation page. This is my only objection.--Darius (talk) 18:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. A hat note at the top of the page should negate the disambiguation if the article is ever created. Marcus Qwertyus 18:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Ipad original

What's the point? It simply duplicated content from the existing Ipad article. Nyttend (talk) 04:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Come on.

Seriously? --Mono (talk) 00:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I screwed up. I was thinking it was still there from when you added it earlier. Marcus Qwertyus 00:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

iPad 2 DYK

Hello, your nomination of iPad 2 at DYK was reviewed and comments provided.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Ground combat vehicle

Portal:Ground combat vehicle, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Ground combat vehicle and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content ofPortal:Ground combat vehicle during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk) 23:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for IPad 2

On 14 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article IPad 2, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the iPad 2 is thinner than aniPhone and comes in black and white? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project News: From the editors
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Undated manual archive

Replied

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at The Bushranger's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at MrGRA's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Help!

Milton photo

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Joel Michael's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tsunami vs tsunamis

Just wanted to follow up the note you left here. You were quite right to point out that tsunami in the singular is better, but the question of terminology has always been a vexed one. I would phrase it as the article does, a 'tsunami wave train', but that would raise other objections as well. I do, though, object to the periodically repeating surges or run-ups being referred to as 'waves'. Most people's experiences of waves is of surface waves, and tsunami 'waves' are much more than that (the displaced water column is from the sea floor up to the surface, rather than just at the surface). I'm sure you know all this already, but I'm just trying to unpack it here for my benefit as well. One older term used in the article is 'seismic sea wave', which isn't bad, actually. The deprecated term 'tidal wave' makes more sense than it seems, because the surge of a tsunami (effectively a violent local rise in sea level) is similar to that seen in a tidal bore, or a high tide, or a storm surge (see also meteotsunami). Finally, the use of the plural. Though they all originate from a single source, the wave trains can be referred to separately as they impact different areas, so it is actually not that uncommon to refer to them in the plural as tsunamis - for example, look for use of the phrase "Tsunamis Predicted for Pacific Basin" following the earthquake. As I said earlier, I'm sure you know all this, and please don't think I'm objecting to the change to singular (as I said, you were correct to suggest that). I'm just trying, in a long-winded way, to explain why I used the plural form. Carcharoth (talk) 07:45, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Do wave packets really have to travel as a unit as the article suggests? There isn't a whole lot of unity in tsunamis so even wave packet doesn't solve all our problems. Also wave train redirects to wave packet but the former is more common. It should be moved unless a wave packet is a smaller part of a wave train or ENGVAR applies. Marcus Qwertyus 16:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't have any sensible answer to the question you came up with here, but the animation is really good - thanks for posting that here. I've been looking round some of the NOAA sites, and there are some excellent pages, such as this and this. The latter has a good definition down at the bottom of the page. Carcharoth (talk) 09:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Android

Just out of interest, what exactly is the test you are performing on the Android db page?

Chaosdruid (talk) 04:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh that? It'll tell us what people are clicking on so that a primary topic can be determined. When you type in Android (operating system)#1 on the article traffic monitor you can compare it to clicks on Android (robot)#1. This minimizes search engine bias.Marcus Qwertyus 04:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Unless you have other information, I don't think the traffic statistics page tracks traffic to section targets on a page separately from traffic to the page itself. For some other similar situations, such as Lincoln, redirects were used to capture traffic from the disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 14:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I am offline in five seconds but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_reaction_to_Fukushima_I_nuclear_accidents#Move.2FName_Change:_Accident_.2B_Disaster_.3D_Incident_or_Emergency.3F normally I would not rush to judgement but if you can look into this I would appreciate. Geofferybard (talk) 09:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

About notability

You made an edit with the summary "because it was notable". I'd just like to point out a few things about Notability. One, it dictates what subjects deserve a separate article, not whether information can be included in an existing article. Second, notability requires that material comply with other Wikipedia policies, including WP:CRYSTAL, WP:VERIFY, and WP:WEASEL ("analysts say..."). Thirdly, please note that "significant coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone article." (WP:GNG, final bullet) Such consensus, in our case, has not formed yet but may form in the future, and must be built on arguments relating to this specific case and not on the notability guideline, because both possibilities are acceptable under it. Please understand Wikipedia policies and guidelines before you quote them in situations where they do not apply. Thank you, HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 00:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I was responding to someone else and the policy I was referring to was WP:Undue. Marcus Qwertyus 18:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Quirky screenshot.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Quirky screenshot.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 05:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: F-15

A friend of mine realized that we met that aircraft there, needless to say, I shot mostly the other exposed F-15E aircraft, '204'.--KGyST (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Doodle.com

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Doodle.com requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under thecriteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top ofthe page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note onthe talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contactone of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

Hi Guy - your special barnstar is from Harmonia1 - a sockpuppet that has been blocked indefinitely. Do you really think it means much?Mark^Dask 18:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

While I don't endorse her actions I know her in real life and she is a good person. WVBluefield was also blocked for a short time but his violation was a less serious block-evasion charge. Marcus Qwertyus 18:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ice Cream (mango)

On 1 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ice Cream (mango), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that ice creamgrows in Florida? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Transformer (flying car)

On 1 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Transformer (flying car), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the U.S. military hopes to incorporate Transformers into its combat units? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how,quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi5

Hello... FYI, I've restored the original page positions for now. Given the number of items on the disambig page, it would be best to have a move discussion. Cheers. -Ckatz^chat _spy 17:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Timeline of iPad Models

Hello, I noticed that you were the one who created Template:Timeline of iPad models and was wondering if you could get the new iPad 2s onto the timeline. I have no idea how to do it and it's bugging me that it hasn't been done. Be sure to distinguish between AT&T and Verizon models on the template. Sorry for the interruption. Democraticmacguitarist (talk) 19:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I'm busy for next two hours though. Marcus Qwertyus 02:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

iPad template is updated but this could also possibly be more relevant. I think people will object to the addition of a template that conveys very little information. I've omitted the separate sub-models since they were are released at the same time. If they are discontinued at separate times the timelines can be split off. Marcus Qwertyus 09:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I think this template is great. See if you can get it official. Democraticmacguitarist (talk) 12:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

An S.O.S. In The Dry Desert Of The Netherworld Of Wikipedia Editing

Marcus,
My name is Ryan and I am taking over the work starting by user Jgarboden, on whose talk page you made a comment (see talk page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jgarboden). I have been assigned the task of cleaning up and correcting (according to Wikipedia guidelines) all Wikipedia pages regarding, pertaining to, or dealing with Raleigh DeGeer Amyx. I'm getting the hang of it but if you have a few minutes I have some questions that I really need the answers to. Thanks Raw4815 (talk) 20:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Josh Hannah; Link exchange; Lifestreaming; Zastava M92; Body weight; JDS Atago (DDG-177); M55 howitzer; Jack Herrick; Facebook Query Language; Scribe (log server); Schofield tank; Morris CS9; T30 Heavy Tank; Game Center; Adam Penenberg; Matt Cohler; EE-T1 Osório; Andrei Alexandrescu; HipHop for PHP

Cleanup: Sexton (artillery); Tyler Winklevoss; Wirehog
Merge: Social network advertising; Cameron Winklevoss; Cocoa Touch
Add Sources: Eduardo Saverin; IPhone; Facebook Beacon
Wikify: Seasoned trade line; Nomee; PowerVR
Expand: Panzerhaubitze 2000; PlayStation 3; Cruiser Mk II

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks fromNettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Article Tags

Please do not change tags on articles as you have now done twice with the globalise tag in ipad 2. It is not permitted for editors to delete tags withouit discussing the matter first on the talk page. Had you taken the trouble to look, there is already a discussion on the subject. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I must of misread it because I misinterpreted it to mean remove the tag from the lead. I don't think there is really a pressing need for globalizing. Marcus Qwertyus 17:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Wikipedia prefers that articles are not written form the point of view of one country (WP:POV). A global perspective is preferred to reflect the fact that the article is universally accessible. 86.183.175.94 (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

News and notes: Commons milestone; newbie contributions assessed; German community to decide on €200,000 budget; brief news

In the news: Wikipedia accurate on US politics, plagiarized in court, and compared to Glass Bead Game; brief news

WikiProject report: An audience with the WikiProject Council

Features and admins: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Case comes to a close after 3 weeks - what does the decision tell us?

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page ·Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:18, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

News and notes: Survey of French Wikipedians; first Wikipedian-in-Residence at Smithsonian; brief news

In the news: Low-hanging fruit and sustainability; Qwiki on iPad; sceptic critic; brief news

WikiProject report: WikiProject Somerset

Features and admins: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Request to amend prior case; further voting in AEsh case

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page ·Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Doodle.com for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Doodle.com 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/Doodle.com 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 good 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. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 10:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Tornado deaths

I appreciate that you were acting in good faith, but we have discussed this on the talk page that we should make sure we are sure we are posting the correct death toll. I just posted an update of the various death tolls being reported at the talk page. Thanks for your edits, and let me know if you have any questions. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

We report what is commonly accepted among reliable sources not what you think is "true". Marcus Qwertyus 21:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project News: From the editors
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha!

That's pretty funny, I think, that we both AfD'd the same article at the same exact time. What's that they say about great minds?– Muboshgu (talk) 23:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I just thought it should be deleted twice. :) I've had similar experiences with bots removing my vandalism reports on AIV when our edits crossed paths. Marcus Qwertyus 03:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

News and notes: Picture of the Year voting begins; Internet culture covered in Sweden and consulted in Russia; brief news

In the news: Wikipedia users name "superinjunction celebrities"; brief news

WikiProject report: The Physics of a WikiProject: WikiProject Physics

Features and admins: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Two new cases open – including Tree shaping case

Technology report: Call for RTL developers, varied sign-up pages and news in brief

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page ·Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

News and notes: More research on newbie editors; Baidu plagiarism; bin Laden coverage; brief news

In the news: Billionaire trying to sue Wikipedians; "Critical Point of View" book published; World Bank contest; brief news

WikiProject report: Game Night at WikiProject Board and Table Games

Features and admins: Featured articles bounce back

Arbitration report: AEsh case comes to a close - what does the decision tell us?

Technology report: MediaWiki 1.16.5, 1.17b1; 1.18 branched; UploadWizard the default; Berlin Hackathon; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page ·Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:48, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Good Morning Gloucester?

Marcus, you tagged Good Morning Gloucester for speedy delete because it reads like an advertisement. Could you give some examples? Everything seems to be fairly descriptive. Would just removing adjectives like "long standing" do it? There is nothing commercial or for profit connected to Good Morning Gloucester so I find it hard to find the real advertisement. thanks, MBCF (talk) 16:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It isn't tagged for deletion. It's just an informal notice highlighting article issues. There is a lot of humorized editorializing like "Fishermen are an independent, fun loving lot. Some might say [things that are] a bit strange." or "Up close photos of a mouse, chipmunk, mole, etc. that got too close to the cat, JJ Jinglenuts." instead of "...mouse, chipmunk, mole, etc. killed by the cat, JJ Jinglenuts." SeeWP:W2W for tips. Marcus Qwertyus 16:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation and you're right, it does need to be cleaned up removing the personalized stuff. MBCF (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Changes made to Panzer

You recently made a major change to the Panzer article by wiping out all the content and making it a redirect. This article doesn't cover the same ground as the Tanks in the German Army article (it includes some information on origins of the name, etc) and shouldn't have been wiped out without a consensus. I've restored the article and think that it should be left there and expanded, unless you can get a consensus to removing it. Thanks Tobyc75 (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

News and notes: Geographical distribution of Wikipedia edits; Sue Gardner interviewed; brief news

In the news: Education minister's speech copied from Wikipedia; Jimmy Wales interviewed; brief news

WikiProject report: Back to Life: Reviving WikiProjects

Features and admins: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Motions - hyphens and dashes dispute

Technology report: Berlin Hackathon; April Engineering Report; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page ·Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project News: From the editors
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Tracked military recovery vehicles

Category:Tracked military recovery vehicles, 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.Andy Dingley (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

iPad 2

Marcus, I'm not going to revert your edit again now, but you are still required to discuss this matter on the talk page in the meantime. Alternatively please seek additional dispute resolution over the matter. Asking for a third opinion or at a WikiProject noticeboard would be suitable steps to take if you are unhappy with the discussion on the iPad 2 talk page. --Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:30, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of IPad 2 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IPad 2 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/IPad 2 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

News and notes: GLAM workshop; legal policies; brief news

In the news: Death of the expert?; superinjunctions saga continues; World Heritage status petitioned and debated; brief news

WikiProject report: WikiProject Formula One

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Injunction – preliminary protection levels for BLP articles when removing PC

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Declined speedy

I'm letting you know that I declined your speedy request here. I'd like to see discussion and consensus before executing that move. - Philippe 08:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

AFV production to combat vehicle production

I consider the moves to be questionable utility. The article titles have been stable for a long while and the content too. I suggest you go through Requested moves and get some opinions from the MILHIST project. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I second that. Or are you planning to add unarmoured armed vehicles?--MWAK (talk) 11:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

were there any armed vehicles that weren't armoured apart from unusal setups like the LRDG jeeps and trucks? GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Whether there are or aren't isn't the issue - there might then be some excuse for AFVs as a sub-cat of "combat vehicles" (even thought this is a clear OVERCAT), but what's happened here is to rename the AFV cats to combat vehicles, even though their members clearly belong in the AFV category, however that is represented. That's a ludicrous change. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Now that we're all here... Just because all the British AFV's of WWII were not unmanned (or add any other variable here) doesn't mean we should go rename the article British manned armoured fighting vehicles of World War II. The fact that they are manned platforms (or armoured vehicles in this case) is unnecessary disambiguation. Marcus Qwertyus 15:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I would say that this isn't a matter of disambiguation but of using the normal names. Such vehicles are usually called AFVs — therefore they should be called such in the article title also.--MWAK (talk) 06:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles are customarily merged into the larger topic if it doesn't make sense to have two articles on a topic. Marcus Qwertyus 07:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

At the moment we don't have two articles on the topic that I am aware of. Production of unarmoured vehicles by British industry would encompass the transport vehicles, Tillys and the like - such an all-encompassing article probably ought to be called British military vehicle production of World War II. And then we'd probably be thinking about spinning off sections to stop it becoming oversized so we'd be back where we started. I'm not convinced that a modern definition of combat vehicle (I am aware of your recent work on the article, I wouldn't say at the moment it was an article ready to be linked thought) fits so well with a period when military vehicles were generally armed and armoured or neither. GraemeLeggett (talk) 09:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was the opposite way around. Combat vehicles in WWII were "all or nothing", that is to say either armed and armored or low signature unarmored combat vehicles for armed reconnaissance (a certain U.S. vehicle comes to mind that was literally an armed platform with absolutely no possible coverage). With such a diverse arsenal of combat vehicles, the term AFV could only cover an arbitrary selection of armored vehicles including vehicles that were only lightly armored despite an only marginal difference in tactics with unarmored versions. Today, all combat vehicles have some type of armoring, whether it be a reinforced engine block or ballistic glass and window shutters. The term AFV becomes unneccessary to describe these vehicles and will soon fall out of popular use.Marcus Qwertyus 21:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

News and notes: ArbCom referendum goes live; US National Archives residency; financial planning; brief news

In the news: Collaboration with academia; world heritage; xkcd; eG8 summit; ISP subpoena; brief news

WikiProject report: The Royal Railway

Featured content: Whipping fantasies, American–British naval rivalry, and a medieval mix of purity and eroticism

Arbitration report: Update – injunction from last week has expired

Technology report: Wikimedia down for an hour; What is: Wikipedia Offline?

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Response to Birds and the Bees edit.

Dear Marcus, The addition to the article that I made was legitimate. I think that one of the bots that wikipedia uses to combat vandalism caught it as a false positive. This addition regarding the connection of latin root words and gender specific reproductive organs is accurate. Please reconsider this edit as it is not vandalism. Sincerely, Benjamin Howland (Renegade0894) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renegade0894 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Please explain to me how my "birds and the bees" edit constitutes vandalism.

Dear Marcus, My additional information under the article "Birds and the Bees" has continually been removed by you and I have not been given reason as to why this perfectly legitimate information is being marked as vandalism. Please explain to me what the problem is and I will rephrase my post if necessary. Renegade0894 (talk) 02:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Using two template on File:Windows 8 pre-release at D9 conference.png

Hello, Marcus Qwertyus

I see that you have added both an {{Information}} tag and a {{Non-free use rationale}} tag on File:Windows 8 pre-release at D9 conference.png. Well, that would have not been necessary. Simply put:

For free pictures, use {{Information}}
For non-free pictures that are used in one article, use {{Non-free use rationale}}
For non-free pictures that are used in multiple articles, you can use
- Multiple {{Non-free use rationale}}, one for each article
- A single {{Non-free image data}} and multiple {{Non-free use rationale}}

Fleet Command (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:04, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

2011 Libyan civil war

On 5 June 2011, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2011 Libyan civil war, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--RxS (talk) 20:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Board elections: Time to vote

News and notes: Board resolution on controversial content; WMF Summer of Research; indigenous workshop; brief news

In the news: 60% of doctors use Wikipedia; growing in India; brief news

Recent research: Various metrics of quality and trust; leadership; nerd stereotypes

WikiProject report: Make your own book with Wikiproject Wikipedia-Books

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Two cases pending resolution; temporary desysop; dashes/hyphens update

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:57, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

News and notes: Wikipedians 90% male and largely altruist; 800 public policy students add 8.8 million bytes; brief news

In the news: Revere, Palin and Colbert generate activity; British Wikipedia "cleanser"; brief news

WikiProject report: WikiProject Aircraft

Featured content: Featured lists hit the main page

Arbitration report: More workshop proposals in Tree shaping case; further votes in PD of other case

Technology report: 1.18 extension bundling; mobile testers needed; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Margaret Conditt

Dr. Conditt's birthday is incorrect. Her birthday is August 7, 1953. She has also requested both universities be listed, Univ. of Alabama and Univ, of Colo. I am also in the process of writing more information for the page. I am her daughter and I have been working with her on this. I can put you in contact with her if you would like. Please don't change the information again, especially if it is incorrect! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.79.210 (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

It was another editor who changed the birthdates and universities. Since this user is a serial sockpuppeter and blatant copyright infringer I removed the text additions but left the birth changes unchanged. The text additions I removed are below and you can re-add them assuming you have re-worded or otherwise thoroughly checked for copyright violations.

Life and Career

A native of Mobile, Alabama, Conditt received her doctorate in chemistry from the University of Colorado at Boulder. Subsequently, she worked in various aspects through Proctor and Gamble, before retiring in 2006. In terms of public service, Conditt was elected as aLiberty Township Trustee in 1998 and served in that capacity until 2001.

Conditt practices Catholicism and serves on the Catholic Social Services board in both Butler County andWarren County. She is also a campus minister at the Northern Kentucky University.

Ohio House of Representatives

When Senator Gary Cates, a long serving legislator who once held the 55th District, resigned from the Ohio Senate, RepresentativeBill Coley sought to replace him. He ultimately attained the seat, and went on the resign from the Ohio House of Representatives soon before. As a result, Speaker of the House William G. Batchelder was required to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the 129th Ohio General Assembly. Conditt was among thirteen other Republicans who opted for the seat.

Ultimately, it was announced that Conditt would indeed succeed Coley in the House. Conditt was sworn into office on June 8, 2011. She will have to run for a full term in the fall of 2012.^[1]

Margaret Conditt

Thank you. I do not know who made the original entry. We only made the changes to her birthdate and college information. I will check for copyright infringement, but I will be writing the information along with Dr. Conditt. Ehritzaa (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Bold move has been reversed

Hi Marcus. This is to inform you that I have reversed the move you made, without any consultation, of Electric vehicle warning sounds. First, this is a Good Article, which means it has been formally reviewed and the name checked. Second, if you read the content you will realize that the new warning sounds (yes several) are quite different from a conventional horn. Last, considering this is a GA rated article, I think you should have opened a discussion to rename it rather than doing a bold move. Since I reversed the move, feel free to open a discussion in the corresponding talk to rename the article. Thanks.--Mariordo (talk) 01:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Ohio politicians

Hi Marcus. This is to inform you that the articles that you have been diverting from what is called a sockpuppet are often good edits, despite the worry of plagiarism or infringement. Specifically, the edits made to Karen Gillmor, Margaret Ruhl, and others. Specifically to those two articles, I recommend keeping them as previously updated. As you may or may not know, Gillmor will be leaving shortly from the legislature, so it is important that this specific article is updated. Furthermore, Margaret Ruhl's article was severely outdated, and after inspecting the newer article, it seems to be up-to-date. I am a member of the Ohio General Assembly staff and a legislative expert in Ohio, and recommend leaving those articles as they currently stand. Thanks. 69.99.117.240 (talk) 22:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Marcus, I would also like to help you check for copywrite violations and incorrect information amongst the articles I read. If this is OK, please let me know. I will leave notes in the discussion pages for the articles which I read, regarding what page information is correct or up-to-date. Once again, I am a legislative expert in the state of Ohio with years of research and institutional knowledge about the Ohio General Assembly. Additionally, I will add knowledge pertaining to the legislative journals, and from news clips that are compiled by the legislative service commission pertaining to our legislators. Please make sure you check the discussion pages of ohio legislators before reverting edits. 69.99.117.240 (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

After checking the four articles reverted today, it looks like the previous revisions are all correct and in accordance with wikipedia policy. As a Ohio legislative expert, I recommend keeping them as they were, and have reverted your reversions. 69.99.117.240 (talk) 22:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Although I have little interest in Ohio politicians I have done my best to preserve edits that are purely constructive. If you want to independently verify each of his/her contributions then that is fine with me. I highly recommend that you create an account so that I may discern your edits from other sockpuppets. Marcus Qwertyus 01:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Per your request, I have created an account. Thanks for your hard work and continued interest in the Wikipedia project, notably with the sanctity of Ohio politicians. Hopefully I can curb your intrest in the future in terms of Ohio politics! PaulKreder (talk) 01:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Ayman al-Zawahiri

On 16 June 2011, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Ayman al-Zawahiri, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--RxS (talk) 23:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Talk:Pearl River (China).
Message added 02:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Updated some of the data methology. You will see why. —HXL's Roundtable and Record 02:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Reggie Brown (impersonator)

The article Reggie Brown (impersonator) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a collection of articles about anyone or anything that has ever appeared in a newspaper. If he is not established aside from this one incident he should not have an article. To quote "Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. N^oformation ^Talk 02:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Firefox 7 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Firefox 7 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/Firefox 7 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Rory McIlroy image

Hello! Thanks for arranging for the file's license to be changed. I searched Flickr for a free image of Rory McIlroy, and I found that one after the license was updated. Having noticed your request, I looked up your Wikipedia account (so I could inform you that I'd uploaded it to Commons), but I see that you're already aware. I updated In the news to include a cropped version.
Thanks again! :) —David Levy 00:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I have also messaged a few other uploaders with images licenced CC by-NC. Sent the Flickr uploader a gracious thank you too. Marcus Qwertyus 00:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

News and notes: WMF Board election results; Indian campus ambassadors gear up; Wikimedia UK plans; Malayalam Wikisource CD; brief news

In the news: Wikipedia could become trusted medical resource; neologism controversy; news in brief

WikiProject report: The Elemental WikiProject

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: One case comes to a close; initiator of a new case blocked as sockpuppet

Technology report: Engineering department restructured; "break MediaWiki and be reverted"; news in brief

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

News and notes: ArbCom database theft; WikiLove to roll out on the English Wikipedia; brief news

In the news: Russian president uploads to Wikimedia Commons; brief news

WikiProject report: The Continuous Convention: WikiProject Comics

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Proposed decision for Tree shaping case

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Alexa figure

Firstly rounding a figure and sticking in the figure is you doing your own thing to the figuree and is unlikely to stop anyone changing it. They simply see you doing it and copy.

Secondly and increase in the figure means the ranking went down. I view marking the ranking as going up as confusing.

Thirdly you removed the American ranking. That is probably the most important thing about the Conservapedia ranking as they don't care about the rest of the world. Dmcq (talk) 08:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see the harm if someone really gets a kick out of constantly updating the Alexa. The

indicator shows whether the web traffic has increased in the past three months. It is indicated in the upper left corner of the alexa page.[22]. The ranking by nationality is hardly relevant in an infobox which should only give a brief summary and not delve deep into the statistics. It just isn't done. Marcus Qwertyus 08:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

News and notes: Picture of the Year 2010; data challenge; brief news

In the news: WikiLove roll-out; €25,000 in damages for being removed from Wikipedia; brief news

WikiProject report: The Star-Spangled WikiProject

Featured content: Two newly promoted portals

Arbitration report: Arb resigns while mailing list leaks continue; Motion re: admin

Technology report: June report: Virginia datacenter, parser, user profiles; WikiLove 1.0; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:06, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Corero Network Security for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Corero Network Security 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/Corero Network Security 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Deleted entries

Hi Marcus, I recently deleted some of your contributions from the record because an automated log from Twinkle contributed an entry that needed to be deleted under RD3. As a result you will see some strange entries in your contributions. You, however, have done nothing wrong. Thanks for patrolling new pages. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 01:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Should I disable logging for patrolling? Marcus Qwertyus 01:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

No it's fine. I just wanted you to be aware of why some entries ended up getting deleted. It's not the first time something like this has happened; I make a note to mention if I'm deleting entries by non-vandals because sometimes people get confused or think they did something wrong. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 01:24, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Help

But for which my username did not meet Wikipedia's username policy, can you explain. Sorry, but I did not remember that. So please tell me about that, thanks.--—AssassiN's Creed^(talk) 01:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Your name could be considered a conflict of interest. So far you are okay as long as you don't start editing articles related to Assassin's Creed. I would highly recommend that you change your name. No rush though. Marcus Qwertyus 02:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

But I want unified username change, where do I put request for that? --—AssassiN's Creed^(talk) 02:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

After changing your name at WP:CHUS you need to go here and claim your global account by following the steps. Marcus Qwertyus 03:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

From the editor: Stepping down

Higher education summit: Wikipedia in Higher Education Summit recap

News and notes: Wikipedians' surfing habits explored, Sloan Foundation renews $3M grant

In the news: Britannica and Wikipedia compared; Putin award criticized; possible journalistic sockpuppeting

WikiProject report: Listening to WikiProject Albums

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Tree shaping case comes to a close

Technology report: WMF works on its release strategy; secure server problems

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:05, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Gratingwide.svg

I have had a message that this image has been flagged for speedy deletion. I have no idea why this is. I created it myself in Gnuplot and I use it in an article I am writing about Fraunhofer diffraction. So there are no copyright issues, and it is totally innocous. Have I missed some vital aspect? Can you tell me what I need to do to stop it being deleted? ThanksEpzcaw (talk) 23:16, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The file itself is not getting deleted. Just the redundant file description page you created on Wikipedia when you added the category. Make sure all future categories are applied to the commons version. Marcus Qwertyus 00:09, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I still find uploading images a somewhat mysterious process, and I presumably created this page by accident. I normally use the Upload Wizard, which enables categories to be added to the uploaded image, but then don't appear in the final image, so I am frequently reprimanded for not having set categories when I thought I had done so. Will keep trying. Epzcaw (talk) 08:01, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires
Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:The Hermitage Quarry.jpg

If this is just a page deletion after transfer to commons, why is there not a notice to say as such?

As there seems to not be a deletion notice on it, or at least I cannot see one - though commons has been playing up for the past two days - can you please enlighten me to why I have been informed? I cannot see if I added the category, nor see the page history, or if I added it, whether I added it to the wiki or commons version. Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 12:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

You likely added a category to the Wikipedia version instead of the commons version that created a redundant file description page. This is what was deleted. Marcus Qwertyus 20:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

News and notes: WMF Annual plan; Article Feedback tool; university outreach; brief news

In the news: Fine art; surreptitious sanitation; the politics of kyriarchic marginalization; brief news

WikiProject report: Earn $$$ free pharm4cy WORK FROM HOME replica watches ViAgRa!!!

Featured content: Historic last launch of the Space Shuttle Endeavour; Teddy Roosevelt's threat to behead official; 18th-century London sex manual

Arbitration report: Motion passed to amend 2008 case: topic ban and reminder

Technology report: Code Review backlog almost zero; What is: Subversion?; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Heroes in Hell merger

I think you should reconsider reverting my merger changes. I suggest you read over the AfD for Lawyers in Hell, because the merger "discussion" is merely an brief extension of the discussion on the AfD. Authors supporting to keep the article(s) on separate pages bludgeoned the process and at least some were confirmed to be authors in the series, constituting a POV concern. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 22:05, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

A no-consensus, no matter how off-the-wall that last AfD might have been, is no substitute for consensus. Marcus Qwertyus 22:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, the merger discussion was given a week, and there was exactly one oppose that made the following arguments:

For completeness alone, with different authors in each volume, each volume needs its own page. Many other books, including every other book (but not these three) by CJ Cherry, whether important or not or reviewed or not, have their own pages on Wikipedia, many of these with lesser credentials than these books as part of this landmark series. WP:NOTINHERITED.
Two volumes had Nebula award finalists. One volume had a Hugo award winner. One volume had a cover nominated for a Locus award. WP:NOTINHERITED
Proof of existing reviews in non-trivial sources should be adequate demonstration of notability; content of the reviews is largely immaterial. WP:INDEPTH
...Lawyers in Hell demonstrates that this series and this form continue to be viable, no matter the author's choice of publishers or perhaps because this series was chosen by the editors as a candidate for a modern marketing approach not dependent on old-style publishing methodologies, and is noteworthy because it brings the series out of a twenty-year hiatus using alternative publishing. WP:ITSIMPORTANT

Therefore, the oppose vote was not especially strong. Considering the lack of other editors participating in the merger discussion, and the weak arguments by the opposing editor, the merger did not appear controversial. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 23:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

Wikimedian in Residence interview: Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science: an interview with Daniel Mietchen

News and notes: Oral citations; the state of global development; a gentler Huggle; brief news

In the news: Open access clash with copyright; rising reader satisfaction; the wiki-correlates of geopolitical instability; brief news

Recent research: Talk page interactions; Wikipedia at the Open Knowledge Conference; Summer of Research

WikiProject report: Musing with WikiProject Philosophy

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: New case opened; hyphens and dashes update; motion

Technology report: Protocol-relative URLs; GSoC updates; bad news for SMW fans; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of the United Kingdom of Fiji 1871-1874.svg

Why put up a Commons image for speedy delete as a corrupt or empty image when it's not hosted on the English WP, when it isn't empty and it isn't corrupt? --The Pink Oboe (talk) 02:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

It is a deletable image "as an image, hosted on Commons, but with tags or information on its English Wikipedia description page". All categories need to go on the Commons version. Marcus Qwertyus 02:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

And if those categories aren't available on Commons but are available on en? --The Pink Oboe (talk) 02:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Then just go ahead and create them. You won't need to add National flags since the Commons version is already in the Flags of Fiji category. Marcus Qwertyus 02:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The current Commons categories for that file are Flags of Fiji, SVG flags - Fiji, and Images created by Fred the Oyster. – Athaenara ✉ 06:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Follow-up on page move

Following your page move of Ivan Melnikov to Ivan Melnikov (singer), may I ask you to observe the fifth paragraph of Wikipedia:Moving a page#Usurping a page title ("If you do decide to boldly usurp a title, it is strongly recommended that you modify all pages that link to the old title so they will link to the new title.") There are about 13 articles which need to be modified. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject St. Louis#St. Louis Post-Dispatch and St. Louis Globe-Democrat

As a member of WikiProject St. Louis, can you help out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject St. Louis#St. Louis Post-Dispatch and St. Louis Globe-Democrat? Thanks, Goodvac (talk) 21:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Your reverts on Ohio politicians

As someone who is concerned about the quality and authenticity of Wikipedia, I've noticed some harm being done to a significant amount of articles in which you have worked. I've noticed that there have been a lot of reverted edits regarding members of the Ohio General Assembly for quite some time now. I wanted to make sure that you understand the dynamics of this problem. While I appreciate your concerns of policing Wikipedia, there are significant reverts that have effected the integrity and have nonetheless dated articles. Plus, some reverts have not allowed for resignations and other recent events to be demonstrated. While there are problems addressed by you in regards to Wikipedia's safety in which I appreciate, please don't revert non-infringing information just because of that reason. For example, the articles Ohio House of Representatives, 129th Ohio General Assembly, Robert Mecklenborg, Kris Jordan, Thomas C. Sawyer, and Jarrod Martin are all now dated due to reverts. Please refer these to an administrator who knows about ohio elected officials to see if he can fix them. Thanks, from a concerned Wikipedia enthusiast. SantaCristina (talk) 13:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello Jansport. Marcus Qwertyus 16:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Sarkhan Vol

Hi. I blocked Sarkhan Vol because she/he has repeatedly posted personal attacks, even after repeated warnings. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Air Force Portal

Please feel free to tweak the layout if you think it would make it better. Regarding your idea, I certainly see merit in moving the news section up, however, personally I would still have it below the article and picture spotlight. Perhaps swap it with the 'did you know.' Just my two cents, but go nuts with whatever you think would give it the best presentation.--Ndunruh (talk) 10:40, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

News and notes: Wikimania; why Board of Trustees elections attract few votes; brief news

In the news: Consensus of Wikipedia authors questioned about Shakespeare authorship; 10 biggest edit wars on Wikipedia; brief news

Research interview: The Huggle Experiment: interview with the research team

WikiProject report: Little Project, Big Heart — WikiProject Croatia

Featured content: Featured pictures is back in town

Arbitration report: Proposed decision submitted for one case

Technology report: Developers descend on Haifa; wikitech-l discussions; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Winans moves

At the top of your user page you say:

I'm unusually bold so feel free to revert me with an explanatory note.

I'm afraid you were way too bold in the edits, or moves, you did over the weekend to:

Whatever reasons you may have had for moving the previous versions of these articles to their new locations, you have made it necessary for a huge amount of work to be done to resolve the problems created by the moves, i. e., links all over Wikipedia now pointing to wrong articles. I see that you're doing a huge amount of editing and moving and can't believe you had a chance to give serious consideration to what would need to be done after you moved these two pages.

I tried to take you up on your suggestion and move the two Winans pages, and their talk pages, back to where they came from, but I obviously don't possess your skills and was unable to accomplish this task.

So, Qwertyus, I implore you, please undo what you did July 30 and put these pages back to the way they were!

Thank you, DutchmanInDisguise (talk) 05:31, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

It sounds like your only concerns are the wikilinks. If you will permit me, I will change all the links for the politician and point them to the correct article. Marcus Qwertyus 05:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:NextGenBomber.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NextGenBomber.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. Skier Dude (talk) 03:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Google+ homepage.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Google+ homepage.png. 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. Skier Dude (talk) 03:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

William Richard Arnold

You recently moved William Richard Arnold to William Richard Arnold (rugby union), but did not move any of the linked articles to the page, thus making several broken links. Please could you ensure that after moves that you update these pages. Thanks. FruitMonkey (talk) 08:12, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I found three more pages that needed to get moved the last time someone asked me to clean up my move. Having a disambiguation page accessible by a rotten link is the lesser two evils. Marcus Qwertyus 21:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

What a pathetic response. Take account of your actions, rather than expect other people to pick up the slack to your half-arsed changes. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

requested move: Edwin B. Winans (general) → Edwin B. Winans (U.S. Army general)

Just making you aware of the requested move for Edwin B. Winans (general) → Edwin B. Winans (U.S. Army general) given you moved the article to its current location.Labattblueboy (talk) 17:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Cleaning up

You moved Gary Evans to Gary Evans (golfer). Please, clean up after yourself per WP:USURPTITLE. Tewapack (talk) 14:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't need it. It is accessible by a disambiguation page. If I was moving Person X (guy) to usurp Person X then yeah, that would be a problem. The current solution works just fine. Marcus Qwertyus 14:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

There are over a dozen pages that link to "Gary Evans", leading to the disamb. page, when they should link to "Gary Evans (golfer)|Gary Evans". For example, English Amateur. Look at the "What link here" link from Gary Evans. Tewapack (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

As I said, doesn't need it. There are only three people listed on that page so it should only take a split-second to find the right one. Marcus Qwertyus 15:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Quoting from WP:USURPTITLE, "If you do decide to boldly usurp a title, it is strongly recommended that you modify all pages that link to the old title so they will link to the new title." That's what I'm asking you to do. Go to the pages like English Amateur and List of male golfers and 2004 Open Championship and change all instances of "Gary Evans" to "Gary Evans (golfer)|Gary Evans", so that a user doesn't have to go thru the disamb page to get to the golfer page. Tewapack (talk) 15:21, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Forget it, I cleaned up after you. Tewapack (talk) 17:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Khamis Ghaddafi

Stop posting western biased things on the wiki! There is no confirmation about his death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frajjsen (talk • contribs) 08:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Renaming articles

Please look at the button on your left, (What Links Here), before willy-nilly re-naming articles. You turn links to individuals into links to dis-ambiguation pages. For example,
you re-named
Timothy Sylvester Hogan (1864) to Timothy Sylvester Hogan (politician). No problem so far.
you re-named
Timothy Sylvester Hogan to Timothy Sylvester Hogan (judge), still no problem.
Now a bit of mischief: you turn Timothy Sylvester Hogan into a dis-ambiguation page, making links to the judge into links to a dis-ambiguation page without bothering to fix anything!
If you were a newbie, I'd give you a pass. Please think before editing.
Roseohioresident (talk) 18:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

Wikimania: Seventh annual Wikimedia conference concluded in Haifa, Israel

News and notes: Wikimania a success; board letter controversial; and evidence showing bitten newbies don't stay

In the news: Israeli news focuses on Wikimania; worldwide coverage of contributor decline and gender gap; brief news

WikiProject report: Shooting the breeze with WikiProject Firearms

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Manipulation of BLPs case opened; one case comes to a close

Technology report: Wikimania technology roundup; brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Plastic bullets in 2011

Please stop claiming that plastic bullets have been "authorised" for use on the UK mainland in 2011. They have been authorised for years, but the police were (and still are) reluctant to use them. The Times article you cited makes no claim that there is any new authorisation for their use. You have also cited Time magazine here, which is hardly WP:RS for a subtle issue of a foreign nation's politics.

To quote Time, "Cameron, who has authorized the use of water cannons and plastic bullets to combat the rioters, even though it has emerged that the police do not believe they need those things."

There are two problems with this quote - one of which is Cameron himself making a less than clear statement.

There are no water cannons. You can hardly "authorise" water cannons that don't exist. The UK's only six water cannons are in NI, and there is no way that the PSNI will let those come over to the mainland when it's still the marching season in NI and they might really be needed there in a hurry. Yet it's a good soundbite for Cameron to talk tough.

There are plastic bullets. They were there last year too, and the year before that. They have been authorised for police use in a riot situation for some years, yet have not yet been used (one case in a hostage situation). One might assume that this was due to police reluctance, given their limited tactical value and the backlash against them in NI. It is highly misleading to claim that plastic bullets have now been "authorised" for use when nothing of the sort has changed. Cameron, and some newspapers, are making this statement because they have a vested interest in talking tough. We though are supposed to be accurate and objective. Pulling up claims of new authorisations when the situation is the same as it has long been is far from NPOV.

If you insist on adding something to this article re 2011 riots (which is the worst sort of recentism, unless they are actually used), then at least make it objective. Describe the claims being made (as above) and explain how they don't actually mean what they appear to. Give the whole picture, not a spin doctor's biased propaganda of it. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:18, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability, not truth. Multiple sources are saying that these have been recently authorized and you haven't given any evidence to the contrary. There are also different types of authorization. Politicians say the weapons are legal, a conflict arises and the police agency headquarters permits law enforcement to bring these weapons, a situation occurs that requires use of force and unit command gives permission to fire. All our information has to come from the media because you don't know the full story. The story has been covered by multiple sources and the WP article has been viewed 46,900 times in the last three days. Recentism is undercoverage of past events not overcoverage of recent events. Marcus Qwertyus 04:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability never outweighs truth. This simplistic interpretation is hugely harmful to WP, and this isn't the first time I've seen you falling into the same fallacy. If you ever start thinking that it really does, it's time to give up working on an encyclopedia.

Verifiability is a real need, and its absence often reduces the detail we can say about a topic. But if verifiability is difficult, our answer should be to remain silent, not to start repeating untruths because there is a paltry source to "support" them. This is particularly so for any political topic, where there will always be sources produced to support a politically advantageous position. An untrustworthy newspaper, and even The Times is sometimes guilty of this, will sometimes reprint what it is offered, if that meets with the bias of its editor or owner.

A source can be found for almost any statement or opinion, of either slant. The trick is to know which of these sources are reliable. US mass media are almost never a reliable source for foreign politics, at any real level of detail. The UK Times generally is (even though it's a Murdoch paper), although most UK newspapers wouldn't be either (the Daily Mail is far too frequently cited on WP, as it's very far from neutral and almost never a good source).

As to the plastic bullets issue, there are several highly dubious statements in circulation. There is considerable politcal spin-doctoring by the Tory government to present themselves as having taken charge of the situation. These claims are repeated at press conferences (Cameron's speech outside No 10) and even to Parliament itself (Theresa May's claim that she had withdrawn police leave, rather than the Chief Constable). If you want to see a more reliable statement of fact, following Sir Hugh Orde is likely to be far more accurate than the government.[23]

There are a few simple statements of fact that can be made about these riots, all of which are easily checked and sourced, yet all of which disagree with government statements

Water cannon. We have no water cannon available, so it's unclear what difference "authorizing" them means.
Police strategy and leave. Theresa May claimed to have set these policies. She didn't, they're under the control of the Chief Constables.
Plastic bullets. These have been ready and waiting in police armouries for some years. Nothing has changed here. They haven't been used, because the police have seen them as tactically inappropriate for a small dispersed group of looters rather than to break up a solid phalanx of massed rioters. There has hardly even been a "riot" in these riots, per the normal meaning of the term.

Andy Dingley (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability isn't difficult because there are an abundance of reliable sources out there. There is no reason to remain silent. As I said, there are different types of authorization. If Cameron's claim is incorrect, a media source will report this. So far you haven't been able to provide a single instance of this. WP is not a primary source of information nor does it synthesis primary sources. Marcus Qwertyus 14:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan
Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Rick Perry

Hi Marcus, I made minor edit to very good bio of Perry regarding the Tbone Pickens discussion. The part regarding environmentalists doubting Pickens is subjective at best and not the broad view. So less is more in this case, as the rest of the summary is quite good and factual (without undue editorialization or one-off statements that can be construed as biased). Nice work.... Rick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlfstrat (talk • contribs) 10:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

~~I would suggest bringing that suggestion up at Talk:Rick Perry. In your argument make sure to bring up undue weight. Marcus Qwertyus 10:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)~~

I just looked more closely at the removal and realized it has very little to do with Perry. I've removed it. Marcus Qwertyus 10:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Metricopolus's talk page.
Message added 12:30, 15 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Metricopolus (talk) 12:30, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Women and Wikipedia: New Research, WikiChix

News and notes: Chapter funding and what skeptics and Latter Day Saints have in common

In the news: Wikipedia a "sausage fest", Chicago Wikipedians ("the people you've probably plagiarized"), and other silly season stories

WikiProject report: The Oregonians

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Abortion case opened, two more still in progress

Technology report: Forks, upload slowness and mobile redirection

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:07, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of History of the lawn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article History of the lawn 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/History of the lawn 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Children's Museum backstage pass

The Children's Museum Backstage Pass! - You are invited!

The Children's Museum of Indianapolis is hosting its second Backstage Pass and its first Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, August 20. The museum is opening its doors to Wikipedians interested in learning about the museum's collection, taking them on a tour of the vast collection before spending the afternoon working with curators to improve articles relating to the Caplan Collection of folk toys and Creative Playthings objects. Please sign up on the event page if you can attend, and if you'd like to participate virtually you can sign up on the Edit-a-Thon page. ---LoriLee (talk) 15:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Heroes in Hell

A page you have edited has been involved in the Wikipedia Dispute Resolution Mechanism. If you wish to take part please click here. Some of the editors working on it have been accused of being sock puppets including myself, information on that can be found here. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 14:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Image description page for a Commons-hosted image

Hi, please could you comment on User talk:Fayenatic london#Speedy deletion nomination of File:Sunlight Soap WW 1 Ad.jpg ? - Fayenatic (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

"Edit War" (Non-Leathal Weaps Page)

I attempted to resolve the matters (in the plural) on the talk page; The disputes are the listing of lethal waeps on the page (which hasn't gotten to this point yet) and the neutrality of sources. I objected to the use of Amnesty International as a source for the "Torture" section; I let my objections to the entire section go for the time being, and focused on the source, specifically that the ONLY source given is AI, which Wikipedia itself acknowledged is NOT neutral (please see the effective talk page). When ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► himself said in essence to make the changes, I did so. (I also removed the tag.) If anything it IS ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► who is in the wrong here on two fronts; One, for disseminating dis-information (caltrops and batons are lethal weaps, both legally and realistically) and for including a source that Wikipedia itself acknowledges in highly biased.Wikipedia- Best Source Of Information Since The Weekly World News. (talk) 20:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)A REDDSON

"No Bullshit" Flag

It appears that HAS been done before. ¿How do I remove it?Wikipedia- Best Source Of Information Since The Weekly World News. (talk) 20:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)A REDDSON

Unless you have a need to keep it, I'd like to deleted this and the section on my own talk as now irrelevant (since the iimage is now gone).Wikipedia- Best Source Of Information Since The Weekly World News. (talk) 02:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC) A REDDSON

You are permitted to remove any material from your talk page at any time. Marcus Qwertyus 02:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Notification

Hi. There is a request for mediation at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification#Request_for_mediation:_Non-lethal_weapon_page.3B that mentions you. — Jeff G. ツ 01:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. Now there is a request for mediation at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-08-20/ that mentions you. — Jeff G. ツ 12:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pinterest

A tag has been placed on Pinterest, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Phearson (talk) 05:30, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

By request

It's at User:Marcus_Qwertyus/Priceseller - what there is of it... Was tagged and deleted A7 (web). Peridon (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

News and notes: Girl Geeks edit while they dine, candidates needed for forthcoming steward elections, image referendum opens

In the news: Journalist regrets not checking citation, PR firms issue advice on how to "survive" Wikipedia (but U.S. Congressman caught red-handed)

WikiProject report: Images in Motion – WikiProject Animation

Featured content: JJ Harrison on avian photography

Arbitration report: After eleven moves, name for islands now under arbitration

Technology report: Engineering report, sprint, and more testers needed

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Vortex Ring Gun

As an editor who has addressed this article previously, could you perform the review again now that my input is complete?

Someone else started this article, and since I was the Army Project Leader back in 1998 I have contributed, text, footnotes, references, and supporting video.

I noticed that since writing it there have been nearly 4000 views in two months, yet only one person volunteered a rating. Is the counter for viewers accurate? http://stats.grok.se/en/201107/vortex_ring_gun

Will your responses be on my luceyg talk page or the Vortex ring gun discussion page, or here?

Luceyg (talk) 00:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Although the counter has been known to screw up in the past, it is more likely that a news article on vortex ring guns or a link on the Wikipedia main page triggered the view count. External links should be placed in there own section after the references section or in Template:External media. Inline references also look better if they are placed after punctuation. You should also provide links in the image descriptions to the actual source of the images if available. File:Slaby model.jpg looks like it is a work of Adaptive Research inc. and not a work of the U.S. Government. Marcus Qwertyus 01:12, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I will make the changes.

Re the "Slaby" image - This is Army property published long ago in one of my reports. I wanted to give him recognition he earned, so if it is not breaking a policy I would like to leave the credit.

 Luceyg (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

News and notes: Abuse filter on all Wikimedia sites; Foundation's report for July; editor survey results

In the news: Wikipedia praised for disaster news coverage, scolded for left-wing bias; brief news

Recent research: Article promotion by collaboration; deleted revisions; Wikipedia's use of open access; readers unimpressed by FAs; swine flu anxiety

Opinion essay: How an attempt to answer one question turned into a quagmire

WikiProject report: WikiProject Tennis

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Four existing cases

Technology report: The bugosphere, new mobile site and MediaWiki 1.18 close in on deployment

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Article moves at Dan/Daniel Choi

The normal process involves the "Move" command, next to the Watchlist star in the top bar - it moves both the article and its edit history and its logs, and the talk page and its history and logs. Please DO NOT copy/paste whole articles/redirects anymore. The Move process involves deletion pending move, and so requires an admin. Admin help can be requested on IRC.

So I requested an admin to undo the copy/pastes and perform the proper moves, making "Dan" the main article, and "Daniel" the redirect, since the sources use "Dan" more frequently by far.

Good catch on the name preference, though. --Lexein (talk) 03:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Google sucks nominated for deletion

a tag has been placed on Template:Google sucks suggesting it be speedily deleted. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 05:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I note your comment on my talk page. I regret that I do not agree with it. your template is against policy, and will remain so unless policy changes. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 19:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you nominate it at VfD if you are so confident that it is against policy. I have demonstrated that it isn't against policy and it isn't even interfering with anything because I am the only one using it. "I do not agree with it" doesn't contribute anything to the debate and you failed to leave an edit summary or user talk page response. Marcus Qwertyus 02:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to nominate it at VfD as it has already been deleted. And my comment "I do not agree with it" related to your comment, not to the template itself. There is no ongoing debate, and the question as to who was using the template is not relevant. If you feel that it should be re-created take your case to DRV.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 10:10, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Talk:Non-lethal_weapon#Mediation_case_now_open.
Message added 20:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TransporterMan (TALK) 20:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

IOS

Where is the discussion, exactly? It seems kind of inconsiderate, by the way, to take them straight to the page about the Apple product given Cisco IOS has been around about 20 years longer. You could have at least had a disambiguation page. In any case, I am not a part of any consensus to direct visitors to the Apple page.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:07, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

ok. I found the original discussion at "Talk:IOS_(disambiguation)#Requested_move." It appears the consensus was actually to direct visitors who typed IOS to "IOS (Disambiguation)," which is certainly not where I was taken when I typed that.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)~~:It was actually at Talk:IOS (disambiguation)#Try it as a multi-move.~~ You can try another WP:Requested move but that was a rare unanimous opinion that I don't think you can hope to overturn until Apple iOS is long gone. Marcus Qwertyus 05:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Again, it appears the consensus was actually to direct visitors who typed IOS to "IOS (Disambiguation)," which is certainly not where I was taken when I typed that.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

It was a multimove request with IOS → IOS (disambiguation), and IOS (Apple) → IOS. Marcus Qwertyus 05:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. And our search box doesn't appear to be case sensitive when it comes to the first letter you type into it, so we should redirect anyone who types those letters to the disambiguation page.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

No. The consensus was to point this to a disambiguation page. BDE Go read Talk:IOS (disambiguation)#Try it as a multi-move again. Marcus Qwertyus 05:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

That's what I just did. It's pointing to the disambiguation page, now. You're trying to make it point to the Apple iPhone OS page.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:36, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The consensus was that IOS (Apple) should be moved to IOS not that IOS should redirect to IOS (disambiguation). The arrows don't mean "redirect to". Marcus Qwertyus 05:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I get it now.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you restored the redirect and speedy until you get consensus. Marcus Qwertyus 05:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Will do. But I can't edit the page for 24 hours since I've already made three reverts to it.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:56, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Self-reverts are exempt from the rule. Marcus Qwertyus 05:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Reverting the page move required administrator assistance because IOS had been modified from the original redirect. Everything is now back to where it was. Favonian (talk) 10:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox file format/doc

Hi. Please be careful what you are doing. Unless I am fatally wrong, you just broke a link in Template:Infobox file format/doc. Carefully, now. Fleet Command (talk) 07:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

News and notes: 24,000 votes later and community position on image filter still unclear; first index of editor satisfaction appears positive

In the news: Britannica and Wikipedia like "apples and chairs"; should anyone who's anyone get an article?; and why fighting and barriers to editing may be useful after all

WikiProject report: Riding with WikiProject London Transport

Sister projects: Wiki Loves Monuments 2011

Featured content: The best of the week

Opinion essay: The copyright crisis, and why we should care

Arbitration report: BLP case closed; Cirt-Jayen466 nearly there; AUSC reshuffle

Technology report: Pencils down in Google Summer of Code, August analysed and integrated HTTPS support in action

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Redirect

"Is daniel tosh gay?" - I'm sure you had a reason to create this redirect - could you explain it? AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:47, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

This is the #1 searched for "is" question according to Google instant. Marcus Qwertyus 01:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. But why does that require a redirect? From a WP:BLP policy perspective, it is a somewhat questionable redirect. Ok, Tosh may play on the ambiguity over his sexuality in his act (apparently - I've not seen it, I'm going by Google reports myself), but I'm not sure that we need to create redirects based on transient Google search results. Especially when our article neither answers the question, nor probably needs to. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I suspect this will not fare well at RfD. Deleted. Marcus Qwertyus 02:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok - to be clear, I wasn't necessarily suggesting that it should be deleted, but was rather trying to figure out why you thought it worth having - I just happened to see it among 'recent changes', and it seemed unusual. In itself, it is probably harmless (or even to Tosh's advantage), but it looks a little awkward as a precedent. Actually, I should probably look at policy regarding redirects a bit more closely myself (and policy regarding pointy article moves for that matter - I seem to have got away rather lightly with my last dubious escapade...) AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:J-1 Jayhawk.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:J-1 Jayhawk.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Marcus Qwertyus 13:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you! I just want to contribute to Wikipedia on the weapons part. Also make it a better reliable encyclopedia. Roughbeak (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Yumm! Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus 13:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine
Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:20, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

News and notes: Foundation reports on research, Kenya trip, Mumbai Wikiconference; Canada, Hungary and Estonia; English Wikinews forked

In the news: 9/11 coverage, Wikimedia hypothetically rebranded and Wikipedia golf 2.0

WikiProject report: Politics in the Pacific: WikiProject Australian Politics

Featured content: Wikipedians explain two new featured pictures

Arbitration report: Ohconfucius sanctions removed, Cirt desysopped 6:5 and a call for CU/OS applications

Technology report: What is: agile development? and new mobile site goes live

Opinion essay: The Walrus and the Carpenter

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit Wars; Rules

¿How exactly does one go about ‘charging’ (for lack of a better word) someone for starting an edit war? Thank you. A. J. REDDSON

Usually Wikipedia:AN/EW if there are more than three reverts by any one party in 24 hours. Marcus Qwertyus 06:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. A. J. REDDSON

Police Departments

Just fyi, there was a discussion a few years back within Wikiproject Law Enforcement on how to title police departments. It was decided that because there were multiple agencies with the same name, there needed to be a standard within the project. The two main contenders were:

Baltimore, Maryland Police Department
Baltimore Police Department (Maryland)

The latter won. It was done mainly because editors were writing all kinds of different ways to differentiate different departments of the same name [e.g., Pasadena Police Department (California) and Pasadena Police Department (Texas)]. It was understood that some departments are obviously identifiable in their own right (e.g., NYPD); however, for uniformity, it was decided to include the state name after all department page titles. So, long story short, that's why the state is there. Just fyi. Cheers!--It's me...Sallicio!^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 23:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The consensus was later rejected as entirely premature. [24]. Also "City Police Department" was moved to "City Police Department (state)" which is out of the scope of the original proposal which wanted "City, State Police Department" moved to "City Police Department (state)". For now I have moved articles where the city name is the primary topic like St. Louis or when Los Gatos redirects to Los Gatos, California. Marcus Qwertyus 23:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

From the editor: Changes to The Signpost

News and notes: Ushahidi research tool announced, Citizendium five years on: success or failure?, and Wikimedia DC officially recognised

In the news: Wikipedia: yesterday's news? Calls for women, doctors, and scholars of humanities; Wales makes Wikimedia work "look easy"

Sister projects: On the Wikinews fork

WikiProject report: Back to school

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: ArbCom narrowly rejects application to open new case

Technology report: MediaWiki 1.18 deployment begins, the alleged "injustice" of WMF engineering policy, and Wikimedians warned of imminent fix to magic word

Popular pages: Article stats for the English Wikipedia in the last year

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

ITN/C and light speed

Please, next time you advance a position try and check your facts. You've responded to commentary and you're very wrong as even a cursory Google search would have shown. I appreciate your efforts but you need to exercise a little more restraint and indulge in a bit more fact checking. Not having a go, just saying. Pedro : Chat 22:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The point of my argument was that the editor's definition of gossip was wrong. Apparently everyone is hung up over a point I wasn't trying to make. This sounds more like a case of Telegraph.co.uk needing to be a little bit more clear. Marcus Qwertyus 22:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The point, good sir, is that you proposed a blurb of "CERN announces that neutrinos were recorded exceeding the speed of light" when CERN announced no such thing, no relevant articles had any updates anyway - and then you proceeded to protest that it was CERN making the announcement when (as has been amply demonstrated) they did not. Bluntly you read it on telegraph.co.uk and assumed it was right. That's not a wise move. We're not a breaking news outlet and we need to exercise caution and look at our reliable sources before posting stuff. Pedro : Chat 22:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I, wise sir, was merely reporting what I had time to read so that others such as yourself could come to some conclusion about what to put up. That I said CERN was making the announcement is totally incidental and unrelated to the central point I was trying to make: that the claim that it was gossip was unfounded. Marcus Qwertyus 22:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011

Opinion essay: The global mission, the image filter and the "German question"

Recent research: Top female Wikipedians, reverted newbies, link spam, social influence on admin votes, Wikipedians' weekends, WikiSym previews

News and notes: WMF strikes down enwiki consensus, academic journal partnerships, and eyebrows raised over minors editing porn-related content

In the news: Sockpuppeting journalist recants, search dominance threatened, new novels replete with Wikipedia references

WikiProject report: A project in overdrive: WikiProject Automobiles

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: "Broadly construed" explained, voting begins on Senkaku Islands case, invitation to comment on CU/OS candidates

Technology report: 1.18 deployment on track, "mythical" Git migration scheduled, editor decline statistics improved

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Requesting Moves

Hi, Please note that when you nominate a page for "Requested Move", if that page move (eg Sean Kelly (cyclist) to Sean Kelly) entails moving another existing page (here, moving Sean Kelly to Sean Kelly (disambiguation)), then you must nominate it as a Multiple page move. Otherwise, people who may be watchlisting the dab page don't get a chance to comment on its being moved: you are claiming the cyclist as the Primary Usage, when it has previously been considered, as shown by creating the dab page at the base name, that there is no primary usage. People interested in the dab page need the chance to know about your proposal. This isn't a one-off, I see you have had a pattern of making such incorrect nominations, perhaps through not reading the small print of the instructions at WP:RM carefully enough. Thanks. PamD 08:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Page moves and cleaning up

Hi, I see that on 18th Sept you moved 29er to 29er (boat), stating that it was not the Primary Topic. You then created a dab page at 29er. As a result, there are now a lot of links which used to lead to the boat page, which now lead to the dab page. It is your responsibility, as the editor who moved the page, to update the links which pointed to it and which now point to the dab page. Please do so, and remember to do so in future when you move a page and create a new page at the old name. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PamD (talk • contribs)

We're still waiting - you've damaged Wikipedia by breaking a whole set of links which used to point to a correct page and now point to the dab page. Please fix this: you made the moves, it's your job to clean up. PamD 07:29, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Ohio Senate changes

Hi, can you take a look at this edit request and revert your last change if it makes sense? I took a look at the links and the IP editor seems to be correct. Thanks, — Bility (talk) 22:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

He's a sockpuppet [25]. Nothing else has been working so we've been trying to deny him as much recognition as possible. Marcus Qwertyus 22:25, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of the sockpuppet, the changes requested are 100% correct and are referenced from the legitimate senate journal. I think it undermines the integrity of wikipedia to not allow the changes. Therefore I have reverted your deletion of the requests. I am appalled by your actions, not only as someone who seeks to trust the authenticity of wikipedia, but also as an Ohio citizen. I have contacted Jimmy Wales regarding your actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.209.140 (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Ohio politics

You need to stop reverting edit requests for these articles. You are causing the articles to become dated and therefore problematic for those who wish to use this information. I'm reverting all of your reverts. 76.250.190.255 (talk) 17:24, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppet. Marcus Qwertyus 23:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

News and notes: Italian Wikipedia shuts down over new privacy law; Wikimedia Sverige produce short Wikipedia films, Sue Gardner calls for empathy

In the news: QRpedia launches to acclaim, Jimbo talks social media, Wikipedia attracts fungi, terriers and Greeks bearing gifts

WikiProject report: Kia ora WikiProject New Zealand

Featured content: Reviewers praise new featured topic: National treasures of Japan

Arbitration report: Last call for comments on CheckUser and Oversight teams

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

edits against banned users

Just thought I'd clear up something you may be unclear about. Your edit summary states that "edits against banned users don't count towards 3rr". This is true, but if an IP is not confirmed as a sock, WP:3RRNO doesn't apply. Thinking someone is a sock doesn't protect you from 3RR, even if you're sure. If an IP is confirmed as a sock, then 3RR doesn't apply, but otherwise the better course of action would be to leave a note on Q's talk page stating that the user is a likely sock, and then an administrator would be able to take a look at it from there. It isn't worth even risking getting blocked for 3RR over a sockpuppet. - Sudo Ghost 23:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Question: Has the IP editor confirmed that they are the blocked user, or is it just editing behavior that matches the banned user that is causing you to believe they are a sockpuppet? - Sudo Ghost 23:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict, originally added to section above, but this one is more to the point) As you know, an IP raised a question regarding these reverts on talk pages (in the future, you don't need to delete such messages on my talk, just leave a message or link indicating your suspicions). I just looked at the ban discussion, and at some of the edits, and I see a similarity, but I just want to be sure. In other words, do you have a specific means for distinguishing a legitimate new editor on the same topics from OSUHEY? As 2012 elections near, we should expect to see legitimate new editors, who may even share a political stance with the banned editor, wanting to edit these articles. I want to be sure that we don't go overboard in labeling every IP editor on Ohio politicians a sock. Perhaps you have specific linguistic or other indicators that tip you off; if so, I'm wondering what they are. Per WP:BEANS, it may be better if you send me an email rather than give anything away on-wiki. Just to be clear, I'm not in any way accusing you, nor do I believe that you are acting out of anything but good faith. I just want to know how you're making the distinction. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I emailed you. Marcus Qwertyus 00:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

My roommate at Ohio State's who happens to be interested in Ohio politics (as am I) has been the one in question who is providing edit requests for these articles that Marcus is reverting. As you can see, they are all referenced by the official senate journal, making the edits requests 100% factual. It is devastating to me that his reverts of the edit requests are blatantly making all of these articles obsolete and dated. I have recently created an account to try to clear these things up, as the IP to our house has been labeled as a "sockpuppet". However, I have been afraid to make edits, as he will almost certainly block this account if I do. We need help! These articles are in danger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LynchburgLongIsland (talk • contribs) 01:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Is your roommate by any chance named Ryan Monell? Marcus Qwertyus 01:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Our tools indicate that you just edited from the same location as OSUHEY. Marcus Qwertyus 02:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

My apologies if I seemed to be supporting the actions of the sockpuppet. I just wanted to remove any doubt that the editor was just a good-faith contributor that just happened to be mistaken for somebody else. I wanted to make sure the editor was confirmed as a sockpuppet before their edits were treated as such, and I apologize if it seemed like I was taking his 'side'. - Sudo Ghost 23:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it needs to be proven that someone is a sock before reverting them as long as it's obvious. Vandals are routinely reverted before any reports are filed. Marcus Qwertyus 00:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I personally didn't see the obviousness in the editor's edits. It is true that vandals are reverted before reports are filed, but this was not the case of a vandal, but a sockpuppet, and what you reverted did not have an obvious appearance of vandalism. - Sudo Ghost 00:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I got the email...I'm just concerned here that it is inevitable that, as we approach the election, your approach is going to be too heavy-handed. It's one thing to revert the edits of a likely sock to an article--but you were also reverting edit requests on talk page, and comments on user pages. Yes, banned editors can't edit anywhere in any way, but when no actual harm is done by the edit, you need to be extremely certain that it comes from the banned editor, not from someone else with a similar POV. Perhaps in the future it would be better to go ahead and revert any article edit you suspect is the banned user immediately, but for other edits actually file an SPI and at least get a second pair of eyes on the issue. As a side note, I personally have no problem with semi-protecting all of the articles on Ohio politicians, as that actually seems to be a safer solution to me, though I imagine that my opinion is in the minority. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The problem is he breaks through semi-protection anyway. I don't always have time to leave a note on every edit request so a temporary revert doesn't seem to do any harm. Marcus Qwertyus 01:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

you have now asked that the entire group of articles involved be deleted. Since the people are unquestionably notable, are you planning to reconstruct them afterwards? I suggest the more appropriate course would be to write a proper stub, and then delete the earlier history. DGG ( talk ) 17:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I would argue against that per WP:One sentence does not an article make. Marcus Qwertyus 20:11, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Iphone5

A tag has been placed on Iphone5, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Derek Leung LM 23:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Ohio State politicians

Hello!

You may have seen that I've reverted your claiming of speedy-deletion from a bunch of clearly in-scope articles on the basis that they were started (in some cases, years ago) by a now-banned user, with the message:

Removing from CSD; just because a bad user created it initially, doesn't mean if the content isn't cited and sourced we should just blindly delete it. IAR, guys, really.

I've now seen that you claim on Jimmy's talk that you're doing it because of copyvio concerns - but you're (a) not nominating them on that basis, ~~(b) nominating articles out of scope of "CSD G5" (it only counts for articles created since the individual was banned),~~ and (c) you're in danger of violating WP:POINT.

Perhaps we could have a dialogue rather than just acting unilaterally? :-)

James F. (talk) 17:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I got approval to mass delete these articles during the ban discussion. WP:Point is reserved for non-serious edits intended to be reverted later because the editor wanted to draw attention to a cause. I just want the edits gone. Marcus Qwertyus 00:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, when an admin removes a request such as here, more so with the reason "decline speedy delete, was not created in violation of Ban, this was created in 2010 and editor was banned in 2011", do not readd the speedy tags. Alexandria (Ni!) 17:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The admin later withdrew his statement and asked me to let another admin review them. Marcus Qwertyus 00:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Upon further review, the articles in question were made after he was banned in 09. The block log was admittedly confusing as he was indeffed in 09 then reblocked by Daniel Case changing the settings. However, WP:CSD#G5 states "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others. G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates." Emphasis mine. A majority of those pages were edited by others (I haven't gone through all of them), thus disqualifying them from G5. If you are worried about copyright, please double check that they do violate copyright, then tag as such. I understand banned users can be frustrating but this comes across as vindictive when the articles themselves would be kept if any other use made them, more so this far after they were made. Alexandria (Ni!) 18:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The majority of the other edits made by ips and accounts were made by socks. The rest were mostly minor copyedits and not substantial enough to save. I also cannot check for copyright problems because a lot of the violations were taken from sites behind paywalls and I'm not about to individually check ~6,000 edits. Marcus Qwertyus 00:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

But that said, sorry if my actions feel confrontational to you - one of the dangers of bots like Twinkle is that they can result in mass-actions that get proportionately mass-reverted. :-(

James F. (talk) 18:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

James F: The tagging and deletion of Bill Thompson (Ohio politician) were, in my view, correct. It was created by a user in violation of a block. (You will see I initially declined this one as well but on further analysis I had it wrong as I hadn't picked up the 2009 indef block). This article had no substantial edits by others. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Mike Dovilla

Pages which have survived a prior deletion discussion cannot be speedily deleted for any reason except newly discovered copyright violations (WP:CSD). This article was kept by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Dovilla (2nd nomination). Hut 8.5 22:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

That AfD addressed his notability not OSUHEY. Marcus Qwertyus 22:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, it can only be deleted by a new AfD now. Hut 8.5 22:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Do try to use common sense please. Marcus Qwertyus 22:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I would be willing to overlook it if there was actually something wrong with the article, however as far as I can tell there isn't. The page was cleaned of copyright violations at around the time of the AfD and very little has been added since. That was the only concern that lead to the banning of the user concerned, apart from sockpuppetry. Hut 8.5 22:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

The two paragraphs can't be checked for copyvios because the copyvios are often taken from sites behind paywalls or other obscure sources. Marcus Qwertyus 22:29, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, remove the paragraphs or revert to this version (which can't have any copyrighted material). It's not an issue which requires the article to be speedily deleted. Hut 8.5 22:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Or why not just delete it and recreate it with the basic information. You'll get credit for creating it (if you want it), remove it from his credits and it will make it easier and faster to tick off on his CCI casepage. Either way, it qualifies as G5 should be deleted as such. Marcus Qwertyus 22:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted and expanded it a little. Deleting it would make it harder to salvage useful older content (yes, there is some) from this history. Hut 8.5 22:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

==Political positions== was created by a sock. Marcus Qwertyus 22:56, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Well that sentence is referenced to someone else's campaign site so it ought to go anyway. Hut 8.5 23:06, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ross Boggs and Ed Core

Can't delete these without wheel warring. Just FYI. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think Jdforrester realized that I actually looked these over for substantial contributions by other editors and that most of the other edits were either minor or other sockpuppets. I am now re-adding the speedies to ones I have confirmed have not had content by others added. Marcus Qwertyus 00:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Was that a test?

Did I just mess things up over at File:CV9030_turret.jpg? --Lexein (talk) 19:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

It's an image on commons that I accidentally put categories on the en.wiki version. db-self. Marcus Qwertyus 19:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Ohio Legislature

I'm sick and tired of all the commotion surrounding these pages, and I want to help clean them up. Let me know what I can do to help. I've just created a username after using an IP for a few edits (which was blocked, by the way, apparently inadvertently). I work for Gongwer News Service, which is a nonpartisan, statehouse news bureau with a lot of knowledge about these guys.

One thing that I want to focus on is the fact that a lot of my material has been used here, and was at one point deleted, but now has returned. As a journalist, this is very insulting to me and I cannot believe that it is tolerated here. Almost all of the pages I have looked at have plagiarized my material and referenced it with other articles, which is a serious issue.

Once again, let me know how I can be of a service to you and your team on how to clean up this mess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteShirtLongJacket (talk • contribs) 19:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You probably can send a cease and desist letter to Ryan Monell who has apparently been adding the copyright violations. He worked for Joe Schiavoni as of June 2010. You can try this contact information: [26]. Marcus Qwertyus 21:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Opinion essay: The conservatism of Wikimedians

News and notes: Largest ever donation to WMF, final findings of editor survey released, 'Terms of use' heavily revised

In the news: Uproar over Italian shutdown, the varying reception of BLP mischief, and Wikipedia's doctor-evangelist

WikiProject report: The World's Oldest People

Featured content: The weird and the disgusting

Arbitration report: Senkaku Islands closes; administrators authorized to place articles on discretionary sanctions

Technology report: 1.18 deployment and HTTPS switchover completed, but developer help now needed with new projects

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Sentry (AUV)

You moved the page to Sentry (submersible)

I fail to see how AUV is ambiguous and I would apreciate some further explanation. As I see it, submersible is rather more vague than AUV - which tells everyone which specific type of submersible it is.

I am contesting that move, though would rather we sort it out here than me just move it as contested as you may have a valid argument that I cannot yet discern :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Two problems. AUV is an obscure term to non-experts experts. Overprecision also should be avoided. Marcus Qwertyus 22:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm curious

as to why you protested the deletion of Second wind (sleep). It is poorly written and, IMO, not a topic worthy of an encyclopedia article. It would be ok at Wictionary. Are you planning to do something with the article? --Hordaland (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

It is a well known topic in sleep research. Marcus Qwertyus 17:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Abuse response case

I have rejected your case on the grounds that it's users. Go make a report on LTA instead. So I admit, we used to do user reports, but we decided not to anymore. Soon, I will action the LTA. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) ^talk
_Contribs (For Abuse Response) • 22:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Monell has been using ip socks hasn't he? LTA is also more for on-wiki responses than off-wiki intervention I guess. Marcus Qwertyus 23:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It is, but if there's users involved, LTA, like JAT6624. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) ^talk
_Contribs (For Abuse Response]]) • 10:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Actioned. Contacted. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) ^talk
_Contribs (For Abuse Response) • 21:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Marcus Qwertyus 22:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

EMERGENCY: Hullabaloo Wolfowitz vandalizing more Janet Morris' pages in retaliation for decision on Gilgamesh in the Outback page

(→Evolution of the fictional Sacred Band of Stepsons: dubious, subjective, inadequately sourced) (undo)

(cur | prev) 20:32, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (15,861 bytes) (→History, myth, and philosophy meet fantasy: or/subjective/synthesis, unsourced) (undo)
(cur | prev) 20:31, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (16,353 bytes) (→The ancient viewpoint: OR/subjective/synthesis, unsourced) (undo)
(cur | prev) 20:30, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (17,325 bytes) (→Evolution of the fictional Sacred Band of Stepsons: ce) (undo)
(cur | prev) 20:29, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (17,452 bytes) (→Evolution of the fictional Sacred Band of Stepsons: fix typo) (undo)
(cur | prev) 20:01, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (17,453 bytes) (→Reception: add review) (undo)
(cur | prev) 19:56, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (17,190 bytes) (→Lovers and brothers and friends: pair-bonded characters driving the fiction: more obviously promotional text) (undo)
(cur | prev) 19:55, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (18,383 bytes) (nfcc violation, multiple nonfree images without image-relevant discussion in text) (undo)
(cur | prev) 19:52, 17 October 2011‎ Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)‎ (18,461 bytes) (→Evolution of the fictional Sacred Band of Stepsons: wretchedly excessive promotional text) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:46, 17 October 2011‎ Orangemike (talk | contribs)‎ (20,081 bytes) (it's a copyright violation; we don't continue a copyright violation while some nebulous process is taking place) (undo)
(cur | prev) 22:22, 16 October 2011‎ Marcus Qwertyus (talk | contribs)‎ (20,174 bytes) (Let this go through the process first.) (undo)

Please see if there is an emergency procedure to stop this vandalism as soon as possible.Hulcys930 (talk) 21:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

News and notes: Arabic Wikipedia gets video intros, Smithsonian gifts images, and WikiProject Conservatism scrutinized

In the news: Why Wikipedia survives while others haven't; Wikipedia as an emerging social model; Jimbo speaks out

WikiProject report: History in your neighborhood: WikiProject NRHP

Featured content: Brazil's boom-time dreams of naval power: The ed17 explains the background to a new featured topic

Arbitration report: Case requests on ethnic strife and a WikiProject declined, Abortion case stalls but topic bans look to be lightened on amendment

Technology report: WMDE renew investment in Toolserver, first offsite backup programme of Wikimedia begun

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:39, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Google+ Stream.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Google+ Stream.png. 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) 18:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Consensus of the Heroes in Hell Merge - Did it include all of the Books and Stories?

According to my memory during the Lawyers in Hell AfD discussion about merging the Heroes in Hell articles into one large article, it was decided ALL the articles were to be merged. No mention was made of leaving any of the articles separate.

When I went to merge the one remaining article, one editor got really upset saying that the merge discussion did not include this article, Gilgamesh in the Outback. I believe that the consensus was for all articles. The admin who is currently handling the dispute was not involved at the time, and needs to see a show of hands. If you have any opinion on the issue could you please make your opinion known at Talk:Gilgamesh in the Outback. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 16:34, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

From the editors: A call for contributors

Opinion essay: There is a deadline

Interview: Contracting for the Foundation

In the news: Are Wikipedians reluctant journalists?; Wikipedia:The Musical

WikiProject report: Great WikiProject Logos

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Abortion; request for amendment on Climate Change case

Technology report: WMF launches coding challenge, WMDE starts hiring for major new project

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content
Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power
Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Opinion essay: The monster under the rug

Recent research: WikiSym; predicting editor survival; drug information found lacking; RfAs and trust; Wikipedia's search engine ranking justified

News and notes: German Wikipedia continues image filter protest

In the news: Citizendium on the rocks, Shankbone celebrated, and the week in vandalism

Discussion report: Proposal to return this section from hiatus is successful

WikiProject report: 'In touch' with WikiProject Rugby union

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Abortion case stalls, request for clarification on Δ, discretionary sanctions streamlined

Technology report: Wikipedia Zero announced; New Orleans successfully hacked

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

Special report: A post-mortem on the Indian Education Program pilot

News and notes: Wikimedia Norway awarded, Halloween on the Main Page, Wikimedia UK recognised

In the news: The Economist assays the encyclopaedia's challenges, Jimbo speaks on net future, and an inclusionist alternative emerges.

Discussion report: Special report on the ArbCom Elections steering RfC

WikiProject report: Booting up with WikiProject Computer Science

Featured content: Slow week for Featured content

Arbitration report: Δ saga returns to arbitration, while the Abortion case stalls for another week

Technology report: Full steam ahead on Visual Editor, the avoidance of lock-breaking and 1.18b1 release

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ask.com homepage screenshot.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ask.com homepage screenshot.png. 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) 18:16, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

News and notes: ArbCom nominations open, participation grants finalized, survey results on perceptions on Wikipedia released

In the news: Fundraising vs ads redux, WikiConference India nigh, a world lit up with articles

WikiProject report: Having a Conference with WikiProject India

Featured content: Writing featured content: Advice from Sturmvogel 66; Sports, sports, sports!

Arbitration report: Abortion and Betacommand 3 in evidence phase, three case requests outstanding

Technology report: Coding Challenge results; Wikimedians to wait and see if Athena really does represent "wisdom, courage and inspiration"

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Email vs e-mail

I'm not sure if it's "eliminate hyphens day" or something, but it's usually a good idea to get consensus for a large set of pagemoves before you do them... Not that I care, I guess. 99.92.159.47 (talk) 20:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Under normal circumstances, yes, but I feel I can defend my moves to anyone who objects. "E-mail" is antiquated. Even the AP Stylebook recommends it as of the 2011 edition. It is also not affected by WP:ENGVAR. Lastly, most of these articles were formerly located at "email" but were moved without a reason. Marcus Qwertyus 20:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

In the UK The Guardian's style guide, which I take as a guide to good contemporary UK English style, gives "email". PamD 21:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Unauthorized Move of "Comparison of e-mail clients"

Hello,

The correct spelling of the word e-mail is e-mail, not "email." See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/e-mail and http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/183816/e-mail. It is a compound formed from two words — electronic and mail. It wasn't created as a single word. You should have started a discussion about moving on the talk page before having Malik Shabazz do it for you.—Best Dog Ever (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Email is the common name regardless of whether it is incorrect or not. Marcus Qwertyus 22:00, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Lexicographers (the people who write dictionaries) are the ones who determine what is the most-common spelling of a word. If they determine that the word is spelled that way in publications, they will rename their entry to the new spelling. It's not really your job to tell us how people spell words. In other words, dictionaries spell words based on what is common usage. You're essentially using original research to determine how we should spell words. I will bring this issue up at the administrator's noticeboard.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Read Email#Spelling. Marcus Qwertyus 23:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

OK. I looked into it and at least one respectable dictionary — The Oxford English Dictionary is spelling it now as email. So, I think you are correct.—Best Dog Ever (talk) 02:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Canary

Google Chrome Canary is a part of Google Chrome's (Chromium's) development project. I don't see any reason as to why it should not be included. It is a project undertaken to test more cutting-edge features so that they can be pushed into a more stable release f dev or beta and eventually into the most stable release of Google Chrome. It features the same base coding as the development or stable releases of Chrome at any given time. I would recommend that you please don't remove Canary from Wikipedia's Google Chrome page, leading to partial or misinformation to its readers and users. Thanks avish2217 (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There is a discussion about it on Talk:Google Chrome/Archive 2#Canary build. Marcus Qwertyus 21:53, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

News and notes: Last-minute candidates for ArbCom, the Sue Gardner European Tour hits London

In the news: Indian wikiconference heralds expansion, fundraiser in Silicon Valley major donor coup, import of Wikipedia reconsidered

Discussion report: Much ado about censorship

WikiProject report: Working on a term paper with WikiProject Academic Journals

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: End in sight for Abortion case, nominations in 2011 elections

Technology report: Mumbai and Brighton hacked; horizontal lists have got class

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

John Smiley

Hello, Marcus. Since you moved John Smiley to a new title, and moved the disambiguation page over the old title, I hope you also plan to help WP:FIXDABLINKS by reviewing all the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "John Smiley" and retargeting those links to the correct article. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:The South Butt logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:The South Butt logo.png, which you've sourced to INSUFFICIENT OTRS OVER 1 MONTH OLD. 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 take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File 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 created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ask.com homepage screenshot.png

⚠

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) 17:31, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content
Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing
Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

News and notes: Arb's resignation sparks lightning RfC, Fundraiser 2011 off to a strong start, GLAM in Qatar

In the news: The closed, unfriendly world of Wikipedia, fundraiser fun and games, and chemists vs pornstars

Recent research: Quantifying quality collaboration patterns, systemic bias, POV pushing, the impact of news events, and editors' reputation

WikiProject report: The Signpost scoops The Bugle

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Voting underway in the elections, finally a final decision on Abortion, scant movement on requests

Technology report: Foundation appears correct to back improved smartphone support; and how a Reddit slip meant no-one could read anything for thirty minutes

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

News and notes: Amsterdam gets the GLAM treatment, fundraising marches on, and a flourish of new admins

In the news: A Wikistream of real time edits, a call for COI reform, and cracks in the ivory tower of knowledge

Discussion report: Trial proposed for tool apprenticeship

WikiProject report: This article is about WikiProject Disambiguation. For other uses...

Featured content: This week's Signpost is for the birds!

Arbitration report: Elections due to finish this week, little activity on Betacommand 3, Abortion case amended

Technology report: Incremental dumps help mirrors, full screen search helps mobile visitors, and two MediaWiki releases help external sites

MILHIST Military Aviation Questionaire

Hi Marcus Qwertyus! As your MILHIST Military Avation Task Force coordinator, I'd like to conduct a short questionaire to give me an idea of what you would the task force to achieve and the capabilities of yours that might contribute positively to the task force. The four questions of this questionaire are:

What are your strengths on Wikipedia?
Which four military aviation articles would you like to see be promoted to at least GA?
What detailed resources (books, journals, etc) about military aviation do you have access to? Please provide the publications' authors, titles and ISSNs/ISBNs.
Which three military aviation articles are you wiling to provide assistance? This can be expansion, copyediting, reference formatting, etc.

Please reply by copying and pasting the following at User talk:Sp33dyphil#MILHIST Military Aviation questionnaire and filling it out.

; ~~~
#My strengths
#Articles I'd like to see the task force improve
#:
#:
#:
#:
#Sources which I have
#:
#:
#Articles I'm willing to provide assistance
#:

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

Opinion essay: Wikipedia in Academe – and vice versa

News and notes: Research project banner ads run afoul of community

In the news: Bell Pottinger investigation, Gardner on gender gap, and another plagiarist caught red-handed

WikiProject report: Spanning Nine Time Zones with WikiProject Russia

Featured content: Wehwalt gives his fifty cents; spies, ambushes, sieges, and Entombment

Arbitration report: Betacommand 3 workshop revived, two cases set for acceptance and the ArbCom elections finish on a whimper

Technology report: Trials and tribulations of image rotation, Article Feedback version 5, and new diff colours

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Hand grenades of the United States

Category:Hand grenades of the United States, 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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

News and notes: Anti-piracy act has Wikimedians on the defensive, WMF annual report released, and Indic language dynamics

In the news: To save the wiki: strike first, then makeover?

Discussion report: Polls, templates, and other December discussions

WikiProject report: A dalliance with the dismal scientists of WikiProject Economics

Featured content: Panoramas with Farwestern and a good week for featured content

Arbitration report: The community elects eight arbitrators

Technology report: Visual editor demo launched, hailed as "most important change to our user experience ... ever"; but elsewhere over-hasty deployments criticised

Season's tidings!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results
Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars
Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein
Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:49, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

Opinion essay: Openness versus quality: why we're doing it wrong, and how to fix it

Recent research: Psychiatrists: Wikipedia better than Britannica; spell-checking Wikipedia; Wikipedians smart but fun; structured biological data

News and notes: Fundraiser passes 2010 watermark, brief news

WikiProject report: The Tree of Life

Featured content: Going through the roster with Killervogel5 and a plethora of featured content

Arbitration report: Three open cases, one set for acceptance, arbitrators formally appointed by Jimmy Wales

Technology report: Wikimedia in Go Daddy boycott, and why you should 'Join the Swarm'

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Interview: The Gardner interview

News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

CSDs

I'll be happy to oblige in deleting the articles if you could present evidence of copyright violation. There is no reason to delete perfectly fine articles, just because they have been created by a banned editor. —Dark 11:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Based on the ongoing/abandoned CCI it can pretty much be assumed without fail that all or most of the articles created by this user are blatant copyright violations. Per WP:CV "If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately." Unfortunately there are over tens of thousands of edits by this contributor that I don't have the patience to to deal with. Marcus Qwertyus 11:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Technological roadmap: 2011's technological achievements in review, and what 2012 may hold

News and notes: Fundraiser 2011 ends with a bang

In the news: Wikipedia ends annual fundraising drive; Monmouthpedia launches

WikiProject report: From Traditional to Experimental: WikiProject Jazz

Featured content: Contentious FAC debate: a week in review

Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Betacommand 3

Technology report: December in more detail; and why the MediaWiki codebase was "slushed" this week

188.158.121.29

Gee, I got suckered by a sock puppet! Thanks for removing the comment. Cheers! Jim1138 (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah this happens all the time. Thanks for keeping a lookout. Marcus Qwertyus 19:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:44, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

Mass rollback

Hey Marcus. You're doing sterling work chasing those OSUHEY sock around the place—keep it up. Anyway, I just wondered if you had come across the mass rollback script? It allows you to revert all edits by a particular user in one click from their contributions page. You're welcome to steal it from the first line of User:HJ Mitchell/monobook.js if you want. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Even if I could get it to work I can also accomplish the same by holding down ctrl and rolling back everything in a few clicks. Thanks for letting me know this exists. Marcus Qwertyus 18:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Special report: English Wikipedia to go dark on January 18

Sister projects: What are our sisters up to now?

News and notes: WMF on the looming SOPA blackout, Wikipedia turns 11, and Commons passes 12 million files

WikiProject report: WikiProject Beer

Featured content: Lecen on systemic bias in featured content

Arbitration report: Four open cases, Betacommand case deadlocked, Muhammad images close near

Technology report: ArticleFeedback moves into new trial phase; and how MediaWiki integrates with Facebook, IPv6, and PostgreSQL explored

Orphaned non-free image File:Propper logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Propper logo.png. 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) 05:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content
Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books
Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator
Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Why are you requesting deletion of today's motto? - benzband (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

There isn't any justification for putting fair-use song lyrics on hundreds of userpages. Stuff like that is for articles only and when the context is relevant. Marcus Qwertyus 14:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

This is two lines from a song. Many mottos from WP:MOTD include similar material. Would you like me to direct you to them so you can delete them all too?

benzband (talk) 14:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this WP:OTHERSTUFF needs to go too. Marcus Qwertyus 14:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Please see this discussion for an update on the subject. Cheers, benzband (talk) 20:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Kim Schmitz

I've left a comment at Talk:Kim_Dotcom#Changing_name_to_Kim_Dotcom regarding the article's title. Since you reverted my move, I'd appreciate a response. --Conti|✉ 11:32, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Please ensure that whatever name you move the article to, you also move the corresponding archives and change the archiving settings on the Talk: page. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi, I am still looking for adoption and think you would be an excellent person to adopt me :) Adam Barnes (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

News and notes: SOPA blackout, Orange partnership

In the news: World watched as Wikipedia shut down for SOPA blackout

WikiProject report: The Golden Horseshoe: WikiProject Toronto

Featured content: Interview with Muhammad Mahdi Karim and the best of the week

Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Muhammad images, AUSC call for applications

Technology report: Looking ahead to MediaWiki 1.19 and related issues

Template:Welcome-bio missing description details

Dear editor: The Template you made as Template:Welcome-bio is missing a Template Documentation and/or other details on its Template page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the template, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Wikipedia:Template documentation. Thank you. SENATOR2029 talk 16:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

News and notes: Update on Global Development, Wikipedia Day NYC is a success, JFK audio on Commons

In the news: Zambian wiki-assassins, Foundation über alles, editor engagement and the innovation plateau

Recent research: Language analyses examine power structure and political slant; Wikipedia compared to commercial databases

WikiProject report: Digging Up WikiProject Palaeontology

Featured content: Featured content soaring this week

Arbitration report: Five open cases, voting on proposed decisions in two cases

Technology report: Why "Lua" is on everybody's lips, and when to expect MediaWiki 1.19

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Google Chrome, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Future of MOTD

I've decided to start a project discussion on this. Please see WT:MOTD. Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 17:45, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

News and notes: The Foundation visits Tunisia, analyzes donors

In the news: Leading scholar hails Wikipedia, historians urged to contribute while PR pros remain shunned

Discussion report: Discussion swarms around Templates for deletion and returning editors of colourful pasts

WikiProject report: The Eye of the Storm: WikiProject Tropical Cyclones

Featured content: Talking architecture with MrPanyGoff

Arbitration report: Four open cases, final decision in Muhammad images, Betacommand 3 near closure

Technology report: October's coding challenge: results now in; progress on 1.19 steady; and why for a while interwiki links were no more

Ohio House of Representatives

I am assuming your revert of my edits was a mistake. You can check the official directory of members to see that yes, "seriously", all of my updates were correct. Please let me know before your roll back more of my edits. Frietjes (talk) 16:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

He's another sock of User:OSUHEY. I thought you knew based on the many times he's spammed your talk page with edit requests. Just ignore him and any edit requests on OGA-related articles for now. Marcus Qwertyus 21:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Please point me to the page where it states that edits made by non-sock editors are reverted just because a sock requested the edit? This would mean that we will never be able to update these pages, if a sock requested the change first. Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

See WP:BAN#Edits by and on behalf of banned editors. Marcus Qwertyus 23:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you actually read that link? It states "unless they are able to confirm that the changes are verifiable and they have independent reasons for making them." So, again, I am asking, where does it state that you are allowed to revert my edits just because a sock requested the edit. If this were the policy, we would never be able to update articles if a sock requested the update first. I have verified that the updates are verifiable, and I have independent reasons for making the edits. Frietjes (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

You have independent reasons? No you don't. You're just approving his edits wholesale. Marcus Qwertyus 19:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Special report: Fundraising proposals spark a furore among the chapters

News and notes: Foundation launches Legal and Community Advocacy department

In the news: Scholars and spindoctors contend with the emergent wikiorder

In focus: Skirmishes in the 'great sectarian war of the Internet'

WikiProject report: WikiProject Stub Sorting

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Betacommand 3 closed, proposed decision in Civility enforcement, AUSC candidates announced

Technology report: January sees prototype new geodata API; but February looks to be a testing time for top developers

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Special report: The plight of the new page patrollers

News and notes: Fundraiser row continues, new director of engineering

Discussion report: Discussion on copyrighted files from non-US relation states

WikiProject report: WikiProject Poland

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Civility enforcement closed, proposed decision in TimidGuy, two cases remain open

Technology report: Major strands of development cycle coalesce as 1.19 is deployed to first wikis

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results
Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books
Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

Help uploading a snapshot

Hi there! Can you help me upload a snapshot of the Uzbek Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons? I've started an article about the Uzbek Wiki in the English Wiki and would like to add a snapshot to it. I can't figure out how to make a snapshot that shows the whole page from top to bottom. Nataev (talk) 14:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the initiative on creating that article. This extension is one of my favorite screenshot applications for Google Chrome. Marcus Qwertyus 18:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

What consensus?

Where do you find a consensus for moving Propaganda in the People's Republic of China As far as I could see one editor was in favor three against.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The overarching consensus is China is PRC. WP:CONLIMITED. Marcus Qwertyus 01:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

So you move the page based on a supposed higher level consensus without even weighing in in the discussion on the talkpage first. I think that is a disrespectful way of acting to the people involved in the discussion on the talkpage. Who says that consensus even applies to this article which is not about China but only about PRC period China? Please move the article back and take the discussion. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I didn't say Propaganda in China would be about Mainland China. _{I also never saw the talk page's discussion.} Marcus Qwertyus 01:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

All the more reason for reverting your move and participating in the discussion.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Convince me that Propaganda in China is a special circumstance that doesn't fall under the consensus. Marcus Qwertyus 01:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No. That is not my job, participate in the discussion and we'll find out whether it does. Now please undo your move and respect that decisions in wikipedia are made through discussion, not by someone enforcing what they see as consensus. If you wish set up an RfC on the talkpage to get more input.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

If it's not unique, why bother? Marcus Qwertyus 02:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, nice talking to you. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Note that I undid several of these PRC->China page title moves by Marcus Qwertyus because it is my understanding that consensus should be formed on each page at which a move is desired, and because I am unaware of, and was not pointed to, some sort of policy that extends the consensus about the naming of one page title to every page which has a shared characteristic with that title (in this case, "China" being a stand in for "PRC".) If there was such an executive order, or whatever it might have been, I missed it and would welcome being corrected. The policy-standing of it is just unclear. Short of that I imagine consensus needs to be formed in each case. I don't agree with the move, necessarily, because it seems unnecessary and even potentially confusing. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 03:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

News and notes: Finance meeting fallout, Gardner recommendations forthcoming

Recent research: Gender gap and conflict aversion; collaboration on breaking news; effects of leadership on participation; legacy of Public Policy Initiative

Discussion report: Focus on admin conduct and editor retention

WikiProject report: Just don't call it "sci-fi": WikiProject Science Fiction

Featured content: By plane, by ship, and by stagecoach: Featured content goes trekking this week

Arbitration report: Final decision in TimidGuy ban appeal, one case remains open

Technology report: 1.19 deployment stress, Meta debates whether to enforce SUL

Pi π

But why not? Its a fact, and its fascinatingly interesting. Its useful Information. Bismarck rules the sea (talk) 03:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

It has been discussed at length and editors agreed that it was excessive. Marcus Qwertyus 03:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:50, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For I remember seeing your name on an anti-vandalism Barnstar. {{shiver}} W alex 03 W (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Your work is appreciated here. Marcus Qwertyus 00:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

News and notes: Chapter-selected Board seats, an invite to the Teahouse, patrol becomes triage, and this week in history

In the news: Heights reached in search rankings, privacy and mental health info; clouds remain over content policing

Discussion report: COI and NOTCENSORED: policies under discussion

WikiProject report: We don't bite: WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles

Featured content: Best of the week

Arbitration report: AUSC appointments announced, one case remains open

Technology report: With the 1.19 deployment now (mostly) complete, developers consider possible "mini" deployment later in the month

Unexplained

Hello, why did you undo this edit? I did not remove or contest the speedy deletion, just made it so that the page redirects correctly while a sysop can see to it. --hydrox (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah. I see. Sorry about that. Marcus Qwertyus 14:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Missile vehicle Redirect page

For your information, a {{db-move}} tag was placed on a Redirect page you once created called Missile vehicle. This is so that an article specifically about missile vehicles can be moved into that title. The current Missile vehicle page redirects to Combat vehicle, which does not say a single thing about missile vehicles. H Padleckas (talk) 05:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

What is going to be moved there? I didn't know we had an article about missile vehicles. Marcus Qwertyus 15:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

An article named Missile truck was just moved to Missile vehicle because some of the vehicles discussed were not exactly trucks in the usual sense. Missile truck was converted into a Redirect page to it. Now we have an article on missile vehicles, which are military vehicles used to transport or launch missiles. I notice you have a lot of experience editing articles on military topics such as military vehicles. If you like, you can review the Missile vehicle article and make any expansions or corrections you see fit. H Padleckas (talk) 16:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Marcus Qwertyus 18:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Missile vehicle History merge

Why do you want a History Merge of Missile vehicle and User:H Padleckas/Missile vehicle/Draft? I'm the only one who contributed to the User:H Padleckas/Missile vehicle/Draft page, and the only thing it shows it that I wrote the article over the course of 19 edits. The User page was written because I felt the article was not ready to be presented to the public as a formal encyclopedia article until I placed in in the mainspace. The User:H Padleckas/Missile vehicle/Draft page History is junk. There is no reason to save it or show it to the public, not that it's a secret. Actually, I plan to delete that Draft User page, although there is no hurry. H Padleckas (talk) 10:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Copying text to other articles requires some form of attribution. Marcus Qwertyus 13:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

From the very page you cited (linked to) here, specifically according to the second sentence in the section Where attribution is not needed, attribution is not required if the re-user (of content) is the sole contributor of the text at the other page (page where text is copied from). I was the sole contributor to User:H Padleckas/Missile vehicle/Draft, and I am listed in the initial entry of article history of Missile vehicle as the contributor of content up to date there. Anyway, the merging of Histories has been completed, and we might as well leave the situation as is; the heck with it. H Padleckas (talk) 19:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Interview: Liaising with the Education Program

Women and Wikipedia: Women's history, what we're missing, and why it matters

Arbitration analysis: A look at new arbitrators

News and notes: Sue Gardner tackles the funds, and the terms of use update nears implementation

In the news: Britannica runs out of print as Jimmy Wales anointed UK transparency tsar

Discussion report: Nothing changes as long discussions continue

WikiProject report: WikiProject Women's History

Featured content: Extinct humans, birds, and Birdman

Arbitration report: Proposed decision in 'Article titles', only one open case

Education report: Diverse approaches to Wikipedia in Education

Technology report: Git learning curve steep but not insurmountable, plus a diff style we can all agree on?

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

News and notes: Chapters Council proposals take form as research applications invited for Wikipedia Academy and HighBeam accounts

Discussion report: Article Rescue Squadron in need of rescue yet again

WikiProject report: Lessons from another Wikipedia: Czech WikiProject Protected Areas

Featured content: Featured content on the upswing!

Arbitration report: Race and intelligence 'review' opened, Article titles at voting

Technology report: Bugmeister to leave at end of May, but developers keen to "chart" a path ahead

iPod Touch

In this edit and others you revert imploring editors to discuss edits, when doing so you should at least initiate a discussion on the talk page, a slow edit war is still and edit war, discussion should take priority. You should follow the bold, revert, discuss cycle, edits are being reverted, just saying "discuss" does not mean an discussion is going to take place. Cheers. Яehevkor ✉ 22:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the burden of evidence falls on them. The iTouch name has been there since April. Marcus Qwertyus 23:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Being stubborn doesn't help. When I've been faced with similar edit disputes, I will initiate the discussion even if I'm the one supporting the status quo. Discussion -> consensus -> article content, so I have an interest in trying to build consensus to support my opinion of what the article's content should be. If the disagreeing editors are not interested in getting consensus for their point of view, then it's their loss—and if the consensus that emerges turns out to be contrary to my view, then I will accept that because it is consensus. Avoiding a discussion makes me think you're not confident that your view will be the prevailing one. /ƒETCH COMMS / 17:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

News and notes: Controversial content saga continues, while the Foundation tries to engage editors with merchandising and restructuring

WikiProject report: WikiProject Rock Music

Featured content: Malfunctioning sharks, toothcombs and a famous mother: featured content for the week

Arbitration report: Race and intelligence review at evidence, article titles closed

Recent research: Predicting admin elections; studying flagged revision debates; classifying editor interactions; and collecting the Wikipedia literature

Education report: Universities unite for GLAM; and High Schools get their due.

Technology report: A busy week: Git switchover, mobile site upgraded, and still time for three security releases

Thank you

Thanks for updating Category:Wikipedia personalities Ottawahitech (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Smile!

A smile for you

You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.0.115 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Interview: An introduction to movement roles

Arbitration analysis: Case review: TimidGuy ban appeal

News and notes: Berlin reforms to movement structures, Wikidata launches with fanfare, and Wikipedia's day of mischief

WikiProject report: The Signpost scoops The Signpost

Featured content: Snakes, misnamed chapels, and emptiness: featured content this week

Arbitration report: Race and intelligence review in third week, one open case

Technology report: Somewhere amongst the endless discussions about Gerrit lie details of hackathons, performance blips explained and more

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Schierbecker. 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!} 02:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Democratic Party?

What's this with changing the article titles reflecting the Democratic Party?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The democratic party is just one example. Most articles already have a United States dab. In rare exceptions some have U.S. dabs. Marcus Qwertyus 17:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you are talking past each other. Marcus, are you aware that you moved numerous pages with each of your edit summaries saying things like, and I quote, "

Marcus Qwertyus moved page Talk:Church of God International (USA) to Talk:Church of God International (United States): Democratic Party (United States))

" I believe that is what brought Doug here. That edit summary made it look like you were moving the pages to a new name with Democratic Party (United States) in the title. What I suspect happened is that you meant to copy "(United States)" and use that as the same paste on each move from a USA title, but somehow copied the entire wiklink for the democratic party (United States) article, and then pasted that on every moved without looking at the edit summary.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I actually intentionally put Democratic Party (United States) but I think I can see the confusion now. Marcus Qwertyus 23:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

My identity

I've noticed that you have been floating my identity around and that I am the target of an "investigation" here on wikipedia. I have solely tried to work on a lone Senator's wikipedia page a few years back. I have no idea who is your "sockpuppet" that has apparently caused issues. This is a serious problem for me. Please email me asap at ryan.monell@ohiosenate.gov. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RDDFF (talk • contribs) 05:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: Opera South (United States)

I don't get it. Are these two companies affiliated? Marcus Qwertyus 18:03, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so; they simply share a name. I can't remember why the page was created. It may have been a merge or a request. I have nothing to do with either company nor do I remember how I came across them. In fact, the article should probably go up for deletion. Sorry I can't be much help. Gaia Octavia Agrippa^Talk |_Sign 18:31, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you split those two from the main Opera South page. I'm going to start splitting those two and see if at least one of them needs to be deleted. Marcus Qwertyus 20:14, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Wikidata: The next big thing? An interview with Wikidata

Interview: Funds, fiduciaries, and the Foundation: the complex dynamics of scaling

News and notes: Projects launched in Brazil and the Middle East as advisors sought for funds committee

WikiProject report: The Land of Steady Habits: WikiProject Connecticut

Featured content: Assassination, genocide, internment, murder, and crucifixion: the bloodiest of the week

Arbitration report: Arbitration evidence-limit motions, two open cases

Technology report: Next Wikimedia deployment already in the pipeline and details of recent performance improvements

Portal:United_States_Air_Force

Hi. I would like to take over this project. I see you asked to take over a few tasks back in 2010. If you don't mind, I'd like to take those off your hands.--v/r - T P 19:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Go right ahead. This iGoogle gadget will help. Marcus Qwertyus 04:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Arbitration analysis: Inside the Arbitration Committee Mailing List

Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Facilitator: Silver seren

News and notes: French language outreach, WikiTravel debate, and HighBeam reloaded

Discussion report: The future of pending changes

WikiProject report: The Butterflies and Moths of WikiProject Lepidoptera

Featured content: A few good sports: association football, rugby league, and the Olympics vie for medals

Arbitration report: Evidence submissions begin in Rich Farmbrough case, proposed decision in R&I Review

Technology report: MediaWiki 1.20wmf01 hits first WMF wiki, understanding 20% time, and why this report cannot yet be a draft

ASUS/Asus

Hi, I see that you have moved ASUS to Asus. I don't have a big problem with this in principle as I think this is one of those cases where good arguments can be made for either approach. However I do have a problem with the article text and article title not being in agreement. Either *every* use of the company name in the article (apart perhaps from a "styled as "ASUS" wording in first sentence of the lead) should be "Asus", or the article should be titled "ASUS". A standard approach should also be followed in all ASUS related articles, such as for products, and all templates. Rangoon11 (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

That's fine by me unless you want to do a formal WP:requested move. Marcus Qwertyus 14:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I have now conformed the main article but the treatment of product and other related articles is a real mess of inconsistency. We should really try to harmonise all of these.Rangoon11 (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll get on those. Marcus Qwertyus 16:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Investigative report: Spin doctors spin Jimmy's "bright line"

News and notes: Help-space revamp, WikiTravel RfC, and Justin Knapp scores a million edits

WikiProject report: Skeptics and Believers: WikiProject The X-Files

Featured content: A mirror (or seventeen) on this week's featured content

Arbitration report: Evidence submissions close in Rich Farmbrough case, vote on proposed decision in R&I Review

Technology report: Wikimedia Labs: soon to be at the cutting edge of MediaWiki development?

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Consultant: Pete Forsyth

News and notes: Showdown as featured article writer openly solicits commercial opportunities

Recent research: Barnstars work; Wiktionary assessed; cleanup tags counted; finding expert admins; discussion peaks; Wikipedia citations in academic publications; and more

Discussion report: 'ReferenceTooltips' by default

WikiProject report: The Cartographers of WikiProject Maps

Featured content: Featured content spreads its wings

Arbitration report: R&I Review remains in voting, two open cases

Technology report: What Git means for end users, design controversies and pertinent poll results

Nomination for deletion of Template:AFVs in the United States

Template:AFVs in the United States has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jenks24 (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you plan on doing anything with this? Otherwise I'm going to speedy it as dependent on a non-existent page. I can also userfy it if you'd like. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 04:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Communicator: Phil Gomes

News and notes: Hong Kong to host Wikimania 2013

In the news: What does Wikipedia call an expert; and untruths in biographies ... again.

WikiProject report: Say What?: WikiProject Languages

Featured content: This week at featured content: How much wood would a Wood Duck chuck if a Wood Duck could chuck wood?

Arbitration report: Proposed decision in Rich Farmbrough, two open cases

Technology report: Search gets faster, GSoC gets more detail and 1.20wmf2 gets deployed

Great American Wiknic for St Louis in June

Hi Marcus. Can you update Wikipedia:Meetup/St. Louis for the Great American Wiknic in June? Also, please confirm details at Wikipedia:Wiknic#2012 Wiknic.--Pharos (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Special report: Wikimedia and the "seismic shift" towards open-access research publication

News and notes: Finance debate drags on as editor survey finds Wikipedia too bureaucratic

WikiProject report: Welcome to Wikipedia with a cup of tea and all your questions answered - at the Teahouse

Featured content: Featured content is red hot this week

Arbitration report: R&I Review closed, Rich Farmbrough near closure

Technology report: Cross-wiki watchlist controversy; and is "go file a bug" really a useful response?

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at talk:Smartphone.
Message added 19:01, 4 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Mark, would you please help me understand your rationale for rolling-back the phone change on the Smartphone page? Thanks. Ltomuta (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Flinders Petrie's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello. You have a new message at Flinders Petrie's talk page.

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Awesome article on the Webster Grove Patch website. Very inspiring! I'm impressed! Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 00:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It certainly does a lot to offset the run-of-the-mill news about Wikipedia that seems to be the only thing reported about us. (e.g. Picture of Hitler put on Alvirne High School Facebook page). Thanks. Marcus Qwertyus 05:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

From the editor: New editor-in-chief

News and notes: Two new Wikimedia fellows to boost strategies for tackling major issues

WikiProject report: Trouble in a Galaxy Far, Far Away....

Featured content: Lemurbaby moves it with Madagascar: Featured content for the week

Arbitration report: No open arbitration cases pending

Technology report: On the indestructibility of Wikimedia content

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation endorses open-access petition to the White House; pending changes RfC ends

Recent research: Supporting interlanguage collaboration; detecting reverts; Wikipedia's discourse, semantic and leadership networks, and Google's Knowledge Graph

WikiProject report: Experts and enthusiasts at WikiProject Geology

Featured content: Featured content cuts the cheese

Arbitration report: Fæ and GoodDay requests for arbitration, changes to evidence word limits

Technology report: Developer divide wrangles; plus Wikimedia Zero, MediaWiki 1.20wmf4, and IPv6

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Special report: WikiWomenCamp: From women, for women

News and notes: Editors want most funding for technical areas, while widespread ignorance of WMF board elections and chapters persists; voting still live on Commons best picture

Discussion report: Watching Wikipedia change

WikiProject report: Views of WikiProject Visual Arts

Featured content: On the lochs

Arbitration report: Two motions for procedural reform, three open cases, Rich Farmbrough risks block and ban

Technology report: Report from the Berlin Hackathon

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

Special report: Springer's misappropriation of Wikimedia content "the tip of the iceberg"

News and notes: Foundation finance reformers wrestle with CoI

WikiProject report: Counter-Vandalism Unit

Featured content: The cake is a pi

Arbitration report: Procedural reform enacted, Rich Farmbrough blocked, three open cases

Technology report: To support or not to support IPv6, and why knowing when this report was last updated might be getting easier

Media

Out of curiosity, how did you manage to get the attention of the local media?-Cntras (talk) 13:10, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I mentioned to Webster University journalism professor that my article, Pinterest, had over a half million views at the time. I assume he passed this information on to St. Louis native Jay Byrne who, unbeknownst to me, researched and blogged about me. I probably wouldn't have noticed this coverage if it weren't for the Patch. Marcus Qwertyus 13:28, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Good to get publicity I suppose. Nice work. -Cntras (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Come on, Marcus!

I saw your RfA and went there wanting you to give me a reason to support—you've come a long way since your last RfA—but a single-sentence nomination statement that says nothing about why you want to be an admin isn't much help. In fact, it gives the impression that you can't really be bothered. I really hope you'll add a more substantial statement before the lack of one starts to attract opposes. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I was trying not to be a Braggasaurus. Thanks for the tip. Marcus Qwertyus 03:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with the RfA. If this one fails, I'd be happy to nominate you on the next one. Just hit me up. -Scottywong | talk _ 16:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Scotty. Marcus Qwertyus 17:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, at least you know what you need to work on for next time. A lot of people seem to be criticizing the brevity of your nomination statement and answers to the questions. See my second RfA for what I think is a good example of a successful self-nom statement, which shows that prior shortcomings have been acknowledged and addressed. -Scottywong | communicate _ 14:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

And, this is probably obvious already, but ... not everyone who votes in an RFA has good advice on what candidates should or shouldn't do. Take anything you read there with a grain of salt. One of these days, we'll fix RfA :) - Dank (push to talk) 21:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey Marcus. Just so you know, I have no serious issue with you or your work, and I meant my comments to be helpful. Personally, I feel as though those that are piling on really aren't helping provide constructive feedback (heck, they might as well echo some of the other points and just say it), but I really do value your work and I look forward to working with you in the future. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:29, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

MotD Nomination for the Opening Ceremony of the London 2012 Olympics (27 July 2012)

We at the Motto of the Day would be extremely grateful if you could review a couple of "special" nominations for the Opening Ceremony of the London 2012 Olympics on the 27th of July 2012. Here is the link to the first nomination, if you can help. The others follow it, and you can add your own ones or improve the existing nominations, of course.
Thank you so very much in advance! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

Investigative report: Is the requests for adminship process 'broken'?

News and notes: Ground shifts while chapters dither over new Association

Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

WikiProject report: The Punks of Wikipedia

Featured content: Taken with a pinch of "salt"

Arbitration report: Three open cases, GoodDay case closed

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

MOTD

Hi there, Marcus Qwertyus! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottoes. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottoes there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help Desperately!

Delivered By Ankit Maity ^Talk _Contribs 17:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Please note this has been given to random users.

--Ankit Maity ^Talk _Contribs 17:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Good luck on the RfA!

Bearian (talk) 18:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

RFA

I will give credit where it is due, you have hung on and been persistent, and I think in a good way. My concerns are still there, but I didn't see a reason to pile. Or I could be completely wrong and your answers just aren't reflecting your usual self and you do understand the purpose of the policies better than it appears. I don't know, I can only see what I see. I can see voting for you in the future when I'm a bit more comfortable with your familiarity. I didn't see any real negatives with you, just didn't see a deep enough understanding of the reason for the policies, the nuances, which is much more important than the policies themselves.

That is the primary purpose of WP:IAR, by the way, to insure we apply the spirit of the policy first, and not just the letter. IAR is so we don't wikilawyer ourselves into mediocrity by becoming slaves to the actual wording, and instead focus on the intent of the policy or guideline, so we can ignore the wording when an action is clearly within the spirit, but not the text. This is why so many of us are hounds about IAR, it keeps us from painting ourselves in a corner, and it is the best tool to develop new guidelines, or destroy old ones. If a policy is clearly against what is best for the encyclopedia, WP:IAR says we need to change that policy and should ignore it until we do. At its heart it says "Do what is best for the encyclopedia, rules be damned", and that common sense always trumps written rules. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

It is linked at IAR, but worth linking here. Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

A coffee for you

Enjoy! Cntras (talk) 07:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Your RfA was unsuccessful

I'm sorry to inform you that I have closed your recent Request for Adminship as unsuccessful. I hope you will not be too disheartened by this outcome and will consider reapplying once you have addressed the issues raised by those who opposed. I know the RfA process can be rather demoralising but trust you will keep in mind the positive comments that were made. Thank you for volunteering your time to help out on Wikipedia. WJBscribe (talk) 12:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Marcus, don't worry if your RFA didn't pass; Try again next time. :) Mr.Wikipediania (Stalk • Talk) 17:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

Op-ed: A call for editorial input in developing new Creative Commons licensing

News and notes: "Mystical" Picture of the Year; run-up to Wikimania DC; RfA reform 2012

In the news: Wales enters extradition battle; Wikipedia's political bias

Recent research: Edit war patterns, deleters vs. the 1%, never used cleanup tags, authorship inequality, higher quality from central users, and mapping the wikimediasphere

WikiProject report: Summer Sports Series: WikiProject Athletics

Featured content: A good week for the Williams

Arbitration report: Three open cases

Technology report: Second Visual Editor prototype launches

Category:Internal security vehicles by country

Category:Internal security vehicles by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Tanks of the Axis powers

Category:Tanks of the Axis powers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:48, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Someone else brought you up at WP:AN

See the "user Marcus Qwertyus and Ohio" section of WP:AN. Have you been fighting OSUHEY, or is this a different issue? Nyttend (talk) 20:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, all of my deletions have been directed against OSUHEY. Looks like another incarnate. His IPs are one reason I don't look forward to IPv6. I wonder if Salvatione was connected. You mentioned Charleta tavares, an article created by Salv that was tagged for copyright violations. I wonder if that was him too. Marcus Qwertyus 18:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Great American Wiknic Barnstar

You are awarded this mighty Great American Wiknic Barnstar for your valorous efforts in helping to organize the 2012 Great American Wiknic in the great city of St. Louis. -—Pharos (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hope to see you at WALRUS Congress if I make it. Marcus Qwertyus 18:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

Analysis: Uncovering scientific plagiarism

Op-ed: Representing knowledge – metadata, data and linked data

News and notes: RfC on joining lobby group; JSTOR accounts for Wikipedians and the article feedback tool

In the news: Public relations on Wikipedia: friend or foe?

Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: Burning rubber with WikiProject Motorsport

Featured content: Heads up

Arbitration report: Three open cases, motion for the removal of Carnildo's administrative tools

Technology report: Initialisms abound: QA and HTML5

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at WP:REFUND.
Message added 21:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category:Internal security vehicles of Iraq

Category:Internal security vehicles of Iraq, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 16:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

Special report: Reforming the education programs: lessons from Cairo

News and notes: Russian Wikipedia blackout; WMF tools; Wikitravel proposal revisited

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Football

Featured content: Keeps on chuggin'

Arbitration report: Three requests for arbitration

Technology report: Optimism over LastModified and MoodBar, but change in clock time causes downtime

Was this you?

Hello! I'm patrolling pages and ran across FCm Travel Solutions. I was looking at the creating editor's userpage, User name two, and saw the note that the account had essentially been abandoned due to a lost password. Did you find it again and simply not remove the template or has someone hijacked that account? OlYeller21^Talktome 01:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes it was was me. It is abandoned but not lost. Marcus Qwertyus 14:16, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm somewhat surprised. The article currently has some issues and the history holds a copyright violation. I don't know how to phrase this but what gives? You're a well established editor who created a copyright violation from a throw away account. In my opinion, it's close to qualifying for G11 and that's if we revdelete the copyright violations. Rather than jump to conclusions and possibly assume bad faith, I thought I'd ask. OlYeller21^Talktome 14:25, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The Copyright problems were created by another user. I'll have to take a look at the article later as IIam currently editing from aamobile phone. Marcus Qwertyus 15:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Please help with conversion / infobox on Avenger page

Hi,

I found some disagreement in the stats of the AN/TWQ-1_Avenger article; mainly the metric weight and width have been miscalculated. Both were off by about 10%, and I corrected that in the main column.

As the "Military vehicle" taskforce member I found in its edit history, could you please adjust the data in the infobox, which I could not edit? There should be an edit link at the top but it doesn't show up for me. I hope my last edit didn't break anything... I tried to bypass the browser cache but that doesn't fix it either, I'm about to give up.

Please tell me what I did wrong - the article talk page would be fine, or put your reply in here, my IP goes up an d down between edits and I would have to come back here anyway to find what it is right now.

CU - 217.251.164.75 ([[User talk:217.251.164.75| t) 08:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm at Wikimania and will get back to you by Sunday. Marcus Qwertyus

Done You just need to hit the Edit tab right of the Read tab. Does this not appear?

Registered users get an additional opt-in edit button in square brackets at the top of the page. This may be what you may have been looking for. Marcus Qwertyus 00:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops. I looked for an "edit" link at the top of the infobox rather than the top of the page. Looks like Help Desk pointed me to it quite accurately (in July 9) but I still missed it. Thank you for pointing it out. 217.251.156.29 (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

Special report: Chapters Association mired in controversy over new chair

News and notes: WMF enacts reforms at Wikimania; main page redesign; 4 millionth article milestone

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: French WikiProject Cycling

Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

Wikimania: Young chapter shows experience beyond its years

Featured content: Taking flight

Technology report: Tech talks at Wikimania amid news of a mixed June

Arbitration report: Fæ faces site-ban, proposed decisions posted

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

Paid editing: Does Wikipedia pay? The skeptic: Orange Mike

From the editor: Signpost developments

News and notes: Chapter head speaks about the aftermath of Russian Wikipedia shutdown

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Olympics

Arbitration report: Fæ and Michaeldsuarez banned; Kwamikagami desysopped; Falun Gong closes with mandated external reviews and topic bans

Op-ed: The future of PR on Wikipedia

Featured content: When is an island not an island?

Technology report: Translating SVGs and making history bugs history

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	For your continual diligence in editing! CTS *talk* 12:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You are awesome too. Marcus Qwertyus 22:32, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

EduWiki Conference 5-6 September in Leicester, UK

I am writing to you as you have signed up to the Education Meetup at Wikimania 2012 and perhaps are interested in how Wikipedia links to education. Wikimedia UK is now running a education related event that may be of interest to you: the EduWiki Conference on 5-6 September in Leicester. This event will be looking at Wikipedia and related charitable projects in terms of educational practice, including good faith collaboration, open review, and global participation. It's a chance to talk about innovative work in your institution or online community, and shape the future of Wikimedia UK's work in this area!

The conference will be of interest to educators, scholarly societies members, contributors to Wikipedia and other open education projects, and students.

For details please visit the UK Chapter Wiki.

Please feel welcome to register or promote within your network.

Thank you, Daria Cybulska (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Mozilla Editathon Saturday 18 August

You are invited to attend the Mozilla Editathon, where, among the like minded people, we will look at improving the Mozilla related articles on Wikipedia. For more information visit http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Editathon

Thanks! Daria Cybulska (talk) 10:47, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin High School (New Orleans, Louisiana)

Thanks for pointing out the mistake. The behaviour of "unlock further option" (an admin interface button for decoupling or coupling edit-locks and move-locks) isn't what I expected. I'll check page history right after I perform this kind of action next time, thanks! Der yck C. 10:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy.
Message added 12:03, 28 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 12:03, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:St. Charles County, Missouri

Thanks for the spelling fix. Obviously wasn't paying attention — I went there because I'd just moved the St Charles city article per someone else's request, and apparently I changed the spelling from the new way to the old way! Nyttend (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Trying to remember

... the username of the 73-yr-old from NY who was sitting beside you at Wikimania; I'm not talking about Rjensen. I wanted to include him in today's Bugle story. Do you remember? - Dank (push to talk) 23:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

Recent research: Conflict dynamics, collaboration and emotions; digitization vs. copyright; WikiProject field notes; quality of medical articles; role of readers; Best Wiki Paper Award

News and notes: Wikimedians and London 2012; WMF budget – staffing, engineering, editor retention effort, and the global South; Telegraph's cheap shot at WP

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Horse Racing

Featured content: One of a kind

Technology report: Talking performance with CT Woo and Green Semantic MediaWiki with Nischay Nahata

Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Ezhiki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Phablet

FYI: In anticipation of your April 2012 plan to create an article on Phablets, I just changed the redirect you created, pointing it to a section in the Tablet computer article instead of the Tablet (disambiguation) page it was pointing to before. 67.101.5.248 (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Maybe I'll go ahead and create that article today before I forget. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 04:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

Op-ed: The Athena Project: being bold

News and notes: FDC portal launched

Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

Featured content: Casliber's words take root

Technology report: Wikidata nears first deployment but wikis go down in fibre cut calamity

WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Martial Arts

City of New Orleans

Unless I missed something City of New Orleans wasn't covered by the discussion at Talk:City of Los Angeles, and I don't think it should have been moved. If someone specifically looks for "City of New Orleans," they're probably looking for either the song or the train that inspired it. Mackensen (talk) 21:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

No, City of New Orleans was not covered by the discussion, but is there any reason to believe this situation is unique? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 08:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, for the reasons I listed. Anyone who types in City of New Orleans is not looking for the city of New Orleans. They're looking for the song or the train. That wouldn't be the case with "City of St. Louis" or "City of Denver." If it had been listed with the others it would have generated dissent. It's in a different category. Could you please revert your move? Mackensen (talk) 14:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

That wouldn't be the case with "City of St. Louis" or "City of Denver" still does not answer my question. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 14:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

You asked why the situation might be unique. I pointed out that it's not clear what the primary topic for "City of New Orleans" is, given the existence of the folk song. So, yes, the situation is different. There are no popular folk songs named City of St. Louis nor City of Denver. I've now pointed this out three times; what else do you need? Mackensen (talk) 14:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

So the train is not the primary topic? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it probably is, since the song is about the train. It's definitely not "New Orleans." It should not have been moved. Mackensen (talk) 14:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

And by extension, the train is named after the city, so the city is the primary topic. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:00, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

You may be right. I welcome you to request such a move and get consensus for it. In the meantime I've reverted your move since it wasn't covered by the move request. Please don't do that again. Mackensen (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

And you broke a crapload of redirects with these changes. I can see several train articles where the link to City of San Francisco alone now links to the wrong article. If you're going to change the target of a link, please go through other articles to fix what you broke. Otherwise you are causing disruption by having to have several others fix your mess. Note that California Zephyr alone has 3 or 4 broken links now. Dave (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes St Louis photo event

I'd like to encourage you to start a St Louis page with Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes America#Event page wizard. Or you can do the same at the regular St Louis meetup page if you like.--Pharos (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you say so. WP:Wikipedia Takes St. Louis. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 11:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I thought it looked really good unitl I realized which Basilica you meant. Do you actually have pre-designated routes of photographic interest? Do they include relevant bus schedules because the Mississippi is really, really far from the Loop in my mind. Not that I have ever ridden a bus in St. Louis, but I always use public transport when I am actually a tourist and it is always better than expected. If we are driving we will spend as much time parking and walking to and from closest parking as anything else, and that is assuming people don't get lost driving to place they know how to get to only from other directions.. If we were bigger and more sure of the turnout I would volunteer to ferry groups between designated points without needing to park, as I am not much of a photographer. But I don't think that would be useful with only a few groups. I just think that is a huge distance to cover for only a small number of groups.

If we started at the other Basillica and hit the numerous things around there and Forest Park and went through to the Loop. That would be a very full day to my mind. We can do Downtown another year. The larger idea could be done, but it would take alot more work. I am just not sure we will have the turnout to make good use of the larger idea. Those are my thoughts anyway, and I certainly could be wrong. So don't let this discourage you if you are actually finding the idea of taking on all the planning work to be motivating. It would be a chore for me and this makes a great difference--BirgitteSB 16:38, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I plan to advertise this event to Flickr and OpenStreetMap contributors and maybe involve the Missouri Historical Society somehow. Weather permitting, I'm sure this will guarantee a rather sizable group of attendees.

I think public transport is a very good idea. This bus map is provided by Metro. Somehow I don't think that map is quite up to date. I've found Google Maps to be excellent at giving public transit directions on the go. Hopefully each group will have at least one smartphone user. Also useful is Google's mapping of places with Wikipedia articles. This may not only help us decide what areas to photograph, but also discover places that don't yet have a Wikipedia article.

One thing I may change is to assign sectors instead of routes. I'm not sure I can get each group to stay to an assigned route as most will want to just do their own thing.

Check back at the page later for more details. I'll paint a clearer picture in the coming days. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

Op-ed: Small Wikipedias' burden

News and notes: Bangla-language survey suggests the challenges for small Wikipedias

Arbitration report: You really can request for arbitration

Featured content: On the road again

Technology report: "Phabricating" a serious alternative to Gerrit

WikiProject report: Dispute Resolution

Discussion report: Image placeholders, machine translations, Mediation Committee, de-adminship

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

Op-ed: Wikimedians are rightfully wary

News and notes: Core content competition in full swing; Wikinews fork taken offline

In the news: American judges on citing Wikipedia

Featured content: Enough for a week – but I'm damned if I see how the helican.

Technology report: Lua onto test2wiki and news of a convention-al extension

WikiProject report: Land of Calm and Contrast: Korea

Block request

Since you gave the last warning to User Talk:121.54.92.42 and we now have this can you do the honours? Thanks and have a ncie day ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 10:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

It has been too long since the last warning. I'll keep an eye on it though. Cheers. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the reply and have a nice day/evening ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 18:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

News and notes: Tough journey for new travel guide

Recent research: New influence graph visualizations; NPOV and history; 'low-hanging fruit'

Technology report: Just how bad is the code review backlog?

Featured content: Wikipedia rivals The New Yorker: Mark Arsten

WikiProject report: From sonic screwdrivers to jelly babies: Doctor Who

Discussion report: Sidebar and main page alterations; Recent Deaths; Education Program extension

Ivory Coast templates

If you don't know how to move templates, please ask for help. Yours aye, Buaidh 15:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the Userbox Barnstar. I'm always happy to help. Buaidh 14:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes St. Louis

Have you dropped people talk page notices of this yet? I'm surprised by the lackluster response.--Chaser (talk) 18:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm dropping the notices tonight. In the meantime I've been working on getting a Geonotice and a CentralNotice approved. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to post my end product here before I have to go back and change all my invites. Would you change anything here?

== Your invited to Take St. Louis! ==

Dust off your Polaroid camera and show off that inner photographer in you. The first-ever Wikipedia Takes St. Louis photo hunt kicks off Sat, Sept. 15, around noon in downtown St. Louis. Tour the streets of the Rome of the West with other Wikipedians and even learn a little St. Louis history. This event is a fun and collaborative way to enhance St. Louis articles with visual content. Wikipedians of all skill levels are welcome! Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

In the section title, "your" --> "you're".--Chaser (talk) 23:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah. Good eye. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 03:30, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, sounds like a great opportunity, but I'm going to be traveling. Good luck and good weather!Parkwells (talk) 11:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Help with Kindle Fire HD

Hello. I know that it was not an CSD concern, but I would still like it merged with Kindle Fire. Can you guide me through that process?

Thank you! larsona 01:47, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

You would place {{merge}} on the top of the page and start a discussion on the talk page. I don't recommend a merge because even minor updates like the iPad (3rd generation) can be considered worthy of an article. The new kindle Fire an all new design and is three different models. If anything, I would suggest we treat the Fire HD to ~~four~~ three articles: one for the family and one for each model. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Also please be advised that you need to link your two accounts as per WP:SOCK#NOTIFY. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 04:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

News and notes: World's largest photo competition kicks off; WMF legal fees proposal

Technology report: Time for a MediaWiki Foundation?

Featured content: Wikipedia's Seven Days of Terror

Op-ed: Dispute resolution – where we're at, what we're doing well, and what needs fixing

Military history coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes America prettification

Hi Marcus! I saw you've put some effort into cleaning up the Wiknic-type pages earlier; do you think you might want to take a go at "prettifying" the Wikipedia Takes America 'confirmed-planned' events sections, maybe even with tables or something? If we find a decent solution here, this might be applicable to all sorts of future USA multi-event campaign planning.--Pharos (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

All I can think of right now is Confirmed and its counterpart, Possible. My event in St. Louis is still a go (I'm willing to travel 100 miles and back by bike to get there) but I haven't gotten the response I wanted. I emailed three organizations including the Missouri Natn'l register and nobody has responded. Any ideas. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 06:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

From the editor: Signpost adapts as news consumption changes

Op-ed: Fixing Wikipedia's help pages one key to editor retention

In the media: Author criticizes Wikipedia article; Wales attacks UK government proposal

Featured content: Not a "Gangsta's Paradise", but still rappin'

WikiProject report: WikiProject Fungi

Special report: Two Wikipedians set to face jury trial

News and notes: Researchers find that Simple English Wikipedia has "lost its focus"

Technology report: Mmmm, milkshake...

Discussion report: Closing Wikiquette; Image Filter; Education Program and Momento extensions

Disucssion and possible AfD nomination for Phablet

Hey Marcus, I wanted to quickly discuss this page, looks like you first created a redirect-placeholder for it back in April, since then a few other editors have cobbled together a stub of a page for it. Now I consider myself an inclusionist but I'm seriously wondering if this page is AfD worthy, of course I don't want to nominate it myself as I recognize that I'd have a hard time adopting a NPOV on the issue as I personally think that it's a stupid label created by tech bloggers, and it seems that most of them have even given up on using it. The article as it exists now seems to be poorly sourced and should be deleted per WP:N but I'd like to see someone a little more NPOV take a look at it.

Thanks for your input Raitchison (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it is a term that is still used [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] and I speculate that it will become a term used by manufacturers themselves if they want to carve this out as a distinct category. I will work at incorporating some of these sources later today. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

IPhone 6 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect IPhone 6. Since you had some involvement with the IPhone 6 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). TheChampionMan1234 01:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

We are late!

Chaser and I are now here.--BirgitteSB 17:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

From the editor: Signpost expands to Facebook

WikiProject report: Action! — The Indian Cinema Task Force

Featured content: Go into the light

News and notes: Tens of thousands of monuments loved; members of new funding body announced

Technology report: Future-proofing: HTML5 and IPv6

Adopt-a-user

Hi Marcus Qwertyus. I'm leaving you this message because you have previously been involved as an adopter with Wikipedia's Adopt-a-user program. A clean-up of this program is currently underway, and as part of the process I am trying to find out who is and isn't still interested in remaining an adopter.

If you would prefer not to be part of the adoption program anymore, you need do nothing; when the overhaul of the project is completed your name will be removed from the list of active adopters. However, if you have current adoptees, an active adoption school or an interest in adopting in the near future, then please let us know by signing here.

If you want to remain in the project and can currently take on more adoptees, there is a serious backlog at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user; it would be enormously helpful if you could take on one or two of the users there. Please do keep an eye on the project for upcoming changes, we could use your opinions and your help! Yunshui 雲‍水 09:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Schierbecker. Thanks for agreeing to stay on at Adopt-a-user. I've recently updated the list of adopters and I have included you, per your original comments on that page and your comments at User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adopters staying on. You can see your new profile at the list of adopters. Why not update your profile with an image and maybe have another look at your description? You can also include a list of any adoptees you currently have. If you are also willing to mentor problematic users, possibly as part of a conditional unblock, please include "mentorship=yes" in your profile. Thanks again for all your help. Worm^TT(talk) 13:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Vaio

The rest just need {{db-move}}ing. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 11:49, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Mobli screenshot.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Mobli screenshot.png. 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).

Beverly Hills, again

For reasons explained at Talk:Beverly_Hills,_California#Premature_close, I've opened a new RM request/discussion at Talk:Beverly Hills,_California#Requested move. You're receiving this notice because you participated in the last one. --Born2cycle (talk) 23:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Plaza of the Americas (Dallas)

Just a note. When you moved the page, you accidentally put a backslash in the title. I fixed this. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)}

Good eye. Thanks. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 04:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Bradley Fighting Vehicle

Hi. I'm a little confused about Bradley Fighting Vehicle and M2 Bradley. Did you fork one into the other? —Emufarmers^(T/C) 19:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I renamed M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle to Bradley Fighting Vehicle and split M2 and M3. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

So the M2 and M3 are specific models of a general class called the Bradley IFV? I'm not sure Bradley Fighting Vehicle makes the taxonomy clear: its infobox is substantially identical to the one on the M2 page. —Emufarmers^(T/C) 05:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I've made changes to make the BFV infobox to make the distinction clearer but a distinct lede pic for the BFV would be nice. Maybe a pic with the M2 and M3 included would help? Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

In the media: Editor's response to Roth draws internet attention

Recent research: "Rise and decline" of Wikipedia participation, new literature overviews, a look back at WikiSym 2012

WikiProject report: 01010010 01101111 01100010 01101111 01110100 01101001 01100011 01110011

News and notes: UK chapter rocked by Gibraltar scandal

Technology report: Signpost investigation: code review times

Featured content: Dead as...

Discussion report: Image filter; HotCat; Syntax highlighting; and more

Côte d'Ivoire

"necessary"? I'd disagree. Desirable, maybe. I won't rv it again, tho, since I don't feel that strongly about it. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Founder: Jimmy Wales

News and notes: Independent review of UK chapter governance; editor files motion against Wikitravel owners

Featured content: Mooned

Technology report: WMF and the German chapter face up to Toolserver uncertainty

WikiProject report: The Name's Bond... WikiProject James Bond

Orphaned non-free media (File:Leopard 2a7.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Leopard 2a7.png. 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).

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Loves_Libraries

Any thoughts on this upcoming event?--Chaser (talk) 04:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I would love to make it happen. I asked the Webster Groves Public Library director if we could use their facilities in time for the library's grand re-opening and he said that would depend on some fire permits but would be glad to have us. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'm available that afternoon, but not that morning.--Chaser (talk) 02:20, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Missouri Botanical Garden needs your help!

Hi Marcus Qwertyus! The Missouri Botanical Garden is currently working on the Art of Life project, which might build a very useful collaboration with the Wikimedia Commons. They plan to use computational techniques to identify the hundreds of thousands of illustrations in the 39 million pages scanned and published online by the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL). The identified illustrations are going to be pretty metadata-poor: the BHL only has bibliographic information on each book, and won't be able to add much more information to the images. The BHL is thinking about uploading these illustrations (those in the public domain, anyway) to the Commons, where they could be used to illustrate Wikipedia articles and (hopefully!) have additional metadata added to them.

I worked with the BHL over the summer preparing the groundwork for this process, including setting up a collaboration page, setting up a category and creating a template for BHL metadata. But the next step -- building bridges between the BHL and the Commons -- is going to be critical, and I'd really appreciate your help in making that happen. User:Pharos suggested that you might be interested, or know other St. Louisans who might be interested, in working with BHL and the Missouri Botanical Garden. I think your experience in tracking copyright on the Commons will be incredibly useful to the BHL in planning this project!

Let me know if you'd like to find out more, either on my talk page or by e-mail ! -- Gaurav (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

News and notes: Education Program faces community resistance

WikiProject report: Ten years and one million articles: WikiProject Biography

Featured content: A dash of Arsenikk

Technology report: The ups and downs of September and October, plus extension code review analysis

Discussion report: Closing RfAs: Stewards or Bureaucrats?; Redesign of Help:Contents

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

Op-ed: AdminCom: A proposal for changing the way we select admins

In the media: Wikipedia's language nerds hit the front page

Featured content: Second star to the left

News and notes: Chapters ask for big bucks

Technology report: Wikidata is a go: well, almost

WikiProject report: WikiProject Chemicals

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

Special report: Examining adminship from the German perspective

Arbitration report: Malleus Fatuorum accused of circumventing topic ban; motion to change "net four votes" rule

Technology report: Wikivoyage migration: technical strategy announced

Discussion report: Good articles on the main page?; reforming dispute resolution

News and notes: Wikimedians get serious about women in science

WikiProject report: Where in the world is Wikipedia?

Featured content: Is RfA Kafkaesque?

iPad mini vs iPad Mini

You says "Yes, it is a proper noun". But Apple uses "iPad mini" in its materials, e.g. https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/10/23Apple-Introduces-iPad-mini.html "Apple Introduces iPad mini".

May I also ask you not to modify TITLEs of external articles (linked in the <ref> </ref> tag) like there: diff :

 - [https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/10/23Apple-Introduces-iPad-mini.html 
  Apple Introduces iPad mini]
 + [https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/10/23Apple-Introduces-iPad-mini.html 
  Apple Introduces iPad Mini]

because it was the original title of the work and we are generally not allowed to "fix something that we think to be an error" in titles. `a5b (talk) 09:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

We are not forced to use the official name. Ten times out of ten the title is the common name. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:PersonalLifeMedialogo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:PersonalLifeMedialogo.png. 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).

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

News and notes: First chickens come home to roost for FDC funding applicants; WMF board discusses governance issues and scope of programs

WikiProject report: In recognition of... WikiProject Military History

Technology report: Improved video support imminent and Wikidata.org live

Featured content: On the road again

Recent research: WP governance informal; community as social network; efficiency of recruitment and content production; Rorschach news

Talkback

Hello, Schierbecker. You have new messages at Yunshui's talk page.
Message added 08:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yunshui 雲‍水 08:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

^ McLaughlin, Sheila (2011-06-08). "Retired chemist replaces Coley in House". Cincinnati Enquirer. Retrieved 2011-06-08.