User talk:Veggies/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Dude

The article I read claimed he was killed in the attacks, so when I used Wikipedia to look up this dude's background, I thought I might change it. I guess Yahoo! isn't always right.

If you're going to block me for that, go ahead! I hardly ever edit anything anyways, unless I see a grammar issue.

Whatever! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.237.29.216 (talk) 13:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Bizarre

Hello VegitaU,

I was just typed in the words "BMB Group" which is a clothes retailing company group in the UK and although it's not got a page I did have a message for me which I thought was strange as I've never ever had one on here. I opened it and got this:

"May 2008 Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to :Image:Google Earth.png. 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. VegitaU (talk) 17:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)"

I've never in my life seen that image from Google Earth and so far I've made hardly any edits to anything on Wikipedia (ones I have done were political articles). Anyone else who has used the PC has never edited anything on Wikipedia so I'm just perplexed that I got a message that should be directed at someone else. Also congratulations on your military service to the USA, and to your helping Wikipedia it does you credit :) . Mr Frostie 82.20.6.101 (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

Hi, VegitaU. I just checked my User Talk page and I got message and quote: "There you go again; nominating articles that have no business being nominated" What does that mean? 24.1.4.241 (talk) 23:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It means you're repeating the same mistakes you were blocked for yesterday. Nominating pages that don't fall within GA or FA parameters by any stretch of the imagination. If you said, you learned your lesson yesterday and weren't going to repeat your mistakes, why do I see you repeating them? -- Veggy (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

veggy

hi, why you called veggy? Does that mean vegitarian? Kaaskop6666 (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Nickname of my signature. -- Veggy (talk) 14:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Feedback

I am disgusted by the way you talk to people who don't share the same opinion as you on the talk page of September 11th, 2001 attacks article.

I feel you have attempted to take dictatorial control of the article by demeaning anyone who puts forward a suggestion you disagree with.

It is in the spirit of Wikipedia to value all contributions to improving the encyclopedia; even if you may not agree with all of them.

You will probably scoff at this post and reply with a patronising and probably intimidating comment but if I was an administrator, you would be apologising.

81.151.140.33 (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The "genius" may have been over the top, but I'm not going to hold back on people who constantly refuse to acknowledge past discussions and consensus and repeat tired old arguments. -- Veggy (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

9/11 'Warning's

Hey man, just wanted to point out that perhaps you shouldn't post warnings about edit wars or the abcon ruling on people's talk pages. It's usually better to report the person to an ourside admin and let them do it. That way you don't appear to have a conflict of intrest. Just a thought, I might be wrong about this. --Tarage (talk) 09:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I think you're right about that. I definitely have a history of short-fusedness here. I'll try and be cool. -- Veggy (talk) 09:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Raid article

No problem...I even got the article on ITN! Did I respond already? I though I did, but if not, thanks for the barnstar. Cheers, Spencer^T♦C 19:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

takbir

Sorry, I didn't see the previous link. Must've been something in my eyes... :-( —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 02:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For improving United Airlines Flight 93. You should feel great about yourself, you have restored honor to the passengers who gave their lives' names. —Sunday Scribe 19:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

UA93

Re a revert, you wrote: "They were remains, read the aftermath section to see they were fragmented; All incidents are reconstructed from evidence, wordy"

That first phrase complex comes across as condescending, but I don't see why it should be. Yes, the aftermath section does mention fragments, but it's many paragraphs later. A summary should fairly reflect the article as a whole. As noted in the comment, the summary's wording suggests that there were whole (or mostly-whole) bodies left, while there were really (as revealed much later) only very small parts (the largest would fit in your hand), scarcely fitting the image of "remains".

Most incidents are reconstructed, in whole or in part, from eyewitness accounts. By contrast, this one was reconstructed entirely from forensic evidence and, as the article suggests, there is considerable room for disagreement as to exactly what happened. An up-front reminder/caveat seems appropriate. As to "wordy", that's an odd criticism of a five-word addition to a 10,000 (or so) -word article.

As to the renumbering, other airline disaster articles in Wikipedia cite the new numbers of the flights. Citation observation duly noted; citation added.

--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

WTC collapse photo

Just to let you know the photo, Image:Wtc collapse.jpg, is not attributed correctly on Flickr. This is one of a series of photographs taken from an NYPD helicopter, thus the NYPD holds the copyright. I highly doubt ComerZhao, a Flickr user in China, took the photograph. I'm having trouble remembering where I originally found these pictures, in order to give you a link. But, I'm quite sure these are not free to use (except maybe fair use). --Aude (talk) 03:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Darn. I'm floored by the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of people in New York photographed the events, but no one wants to release their footage under a free-use license. -- Veggy (talk) 03:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

You would think that the NYPD would allow use, but they copyright everything. I also had to take out Image:White House photo by Eric Draper.jpg, which is an AP photo and not public domain. Arguably that photo could be justified as fair use, but it needs to be taken of commons which doesn't host fair use material. --Aude (talk) 03:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Islamic terrorism

Hi, as you can see here, then here and here there isn't any consensus over the title of the article and I think it's the worst title which could be chosen.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit help needed

I know you are busy. But if you have some spare time, I have one of the 9/11 hijacker articles at FAC - Khalid al-Mihdhar. The article needs someone to go through and copyedit. You did a great job with the Flight 93 and other articles, so hoping you might help with this one. Of course, if you see any substantive issue, please bring them up. Cheers. --Aude (talk) 16:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:October 2008

I am unsure to which edit you are referring. Could you please enlighten me as to what material I uploaded that was copyrighted? Jfingers88 18:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

9/11 Pull-over location

I've undone this edit of yours because the cited ref does support the claimed statement. Wikipedia strongly depends on verifiability even more than claimed truth, and editors can't be forced to choose "who is right". If you have a reliable source that supports a different location, please add that information and let readers see "what we know". DMacks (talk) 03:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted back to VegitaU's version, and left a note on the article talk page with sources. --Aude (talk) 03:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Please do not leave any messages on my talk page.

the title says it all.

I am starting to consider you posting unwelcome messages on my talk page to be harassment, if this continues I will report it to ANI and request that you are blocked from editing.

This message does not require a response.

Sennen goroshi (talk) 13:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to do whatever you want. I'd love to discuss the issue if you feel like bringing it up. -- Veggy (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: You Need to Preview Your Edits

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

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

"Pointless image" is not pointless at all

I noticed this at American Airlines Flight 77 [1]

Isn't it a service to the reader to show an image of the aircraft or a similar build of the aircraft involved in the incident? An image of an AA 757 in an article about Flight 77 is not a "pointless" image. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

HistoryLink.org is a "malicious link"??

What's Google's rationale for this? HistoryLink,org pages often contain bits of history nobody else covers, and in scanning this article I do not see what is offensive about it. Google is not the arbiter of moral judgements on content, if tha'ts waht this is about. Please explain.Skookum1 (talk) 03:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

reply on my talkpage.Skookum1 (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Removed proposal for deletion at Murder of Eve Carson

Explanation given in edit summary. Fletch81 (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed prod tag on Wrap rage

Explanation is in the edit summary; note that I will be improving/adding sources. tktktk (talk) 02:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

DRG Flight 77 Page

On the flight 77 page you reverted *all* of my edits citing David Ray Griffin as an unreliable source, yet my edits outside the Conspiracy section cited Goldberg et al. as a source.

Regarding DRG, reliable sources are:

credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand.

---

I only used DRG in the conspiracy section of the flight 77 article and he certainly is regarded as trustworthy in relation to conspiracy theories. Other DRG books are cited in the main 9/11 Conspiracy Theories page that is linked to in the flight 77 conspiracy section. Therefore, I'm undoing your revert. 97.104.226.129 (talk) 04:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Main page articles

FYI: There is some discussion of whether or not to run one of the September 11 flight articles on the anniversary this year.

• Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests#September 11 anniversary

--Aude (talk) 12:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Atta in airport.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Atta in airport.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.

Orphaned non-free images

Hi, File:Pierce-Zits.png, File:SaraToomey.png, File:HectorGarcia.png, File:WaltDuncan.png, and File:ConnieDuncan.png are nominated for deletion. Regards Hekerui (talk) 13:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

help me fix this, I believe the license I used makes it ok for these photos to be used on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Joey_Eads#Copyright_Problems —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.250.225 (talk) 18:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Photos Removed

I need you to help me fix this, as I think you didn't fully understand the rules or license used when you flagged my photos for removal

I believe the license I used makes it ok for these photos to be used on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Joey_Eads#Copyright_Problems

I grant any entity the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.250.225 (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JeremyDuncan.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JeremyDuncan.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. Skier Dude (talk) 02:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Paintball

Hello Veggies/Archive 7, you have received this notice because you have placed your name on the list of members of WikiProject Paintball. We are currently looking to make the wikiproject more active, and in doing so, we need to have a list of active members on the wikiproject. If you wish to stay an active part of wikiproject Paintball, please add your username to Active users. Conversely, if you wish to leave the wikiproject, please remove your name from the list of members at Wikipedia:WikiProject Paintball. Thank you.

Veterans Day

I went ahead and restored Bubsty's revision on that article. If the veteran pictured is 86, that puts him being born in 1924 as of 2010, right? And World War I ended, like, in 1918 or so; therefore, unless he was fighting Germans as a sperm cell, he was not around. —Duncan^{What I Do} / _{What I Say} 19:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops. WP:TROUT me if you'd like. ;-) —Duncan^{What I Do} / _{What I Say} 04:42, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

SophiaBLiu's Research Request

My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like the 9/11 attacks. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia --Sophiabliu (talk) 05:53, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Moqtada-al-sadr.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Moqtada-al-sadr.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. Rob (talk) 03:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Ellen Asher

Mportolano (talk) 09:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC) Moving this from the Ellen Asher talk page: I guess off-topic comments belong here. All I can say is: woo-hoo! Go Navy beat Air Force! (Seriously, I'm so pleased to see an experienced Wikipedia editor on this project!)(talk) 18:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Where Are My photos Now?

Where are the photos now? Are they lost forever? Those photographs were valuable, historic evidence that documented an incredibly dynamic environment that is home to critically endangered species such as the Kemp's ridley Sea Turtle and the Perdido Key beach mouse whose numbers were down to 40 individuals at one recent point. Had they not been deleted they would have been used to compare to current photos in order to document and understand how the sand dunes on this unique barrier island form and change over time.

Joey Eads (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

They were deleted two years ago. Please see WP:IUP for relevant information. -- Veggy (talk) 16:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

According to the requirements on WP:IUP those photos should not have been deleted or even flagged/tagged. A reasonable effort was not made to alert me that they were going to be deleted although my email address is clearly visible on my talk page.

The photos were mine, I took them, I released them under license on Wikipedia first and for whatever use anyone wanted to use them for.

I do hope you understand / Those photographs were valuable, historic evidence that documented an incredibly dynamic environment that is home to critically endangered species such as the Kemp's ridley Sea Turtle and the Perdido Key beach mouse whose numbers were down to 40 individuals at one recent point in history. Had they not been deleted they would have been used to compare to current photos in order to document and understand how the sand dunes on this unique barrier island form and change over time, how the dunes are used and effected by native species and humans and how we can better protect these CRITICALLY ENDANGERED SPECIES.

Since you are clearly in error regarding this matter there will no doubt be other instances where your overzealous edits have caused irreparable damage to Wikipedia. We can also reasonable assume that because of your actions at least one animal will die prematurely because you have destroyed scientific evidence that would have been used to conserve this natural resource. I sincerely hope that you have learned a valuable lesson, I can assure you that I have. Joey Eads (talk) 16:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

==WP:IAR ==

PLEASE READ WP:IAR before you do anything that would kill anymore sea turtles or other critically endangered species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joey Eads (talk • contribs) 16:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Joey Eads (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

from Wikipedias Five Pillars "Red pillar #5 Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Rules on Wikipedia are not carved in stone, and the spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joey Eads (talk • contribs) 17:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Joey Eads (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Although they are of the same area, the photos on Google Earth are not the same as the photos that were deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joey Eads (talk • contribs) 17:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Joey Eads (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Please go to WP:DISPUTE to resolve your problem. It happened two years ago and I can't really remember the issues. I most likely flagged Google Earth or Google Maps images that were copyrighted. -- Veggy (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

As you can clearly see at the bottom of ALL Panoramio image pages...

© All Rights Reserved by joeyeads -

Clearly an error was made, how to fix it now? Joey Eads (talk) 01:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox hiking trail

Just wanted to let you know that a template you created, Template:Infobox hiking trail, is breaking in a truly mystifying manner: it appears normally except with the text fjlkdj;' after the box. If you're still involved in its development then please take a look; if not, ignore this message. Thanks! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

And nevermind. Problem was in an included template. Sorry for the bother. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:28, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Question for Washington Post story: Dear VegitaU, I am a reporter at the Washington Post, writing about how the Wiki pages on the Virginia earthquake went up so quickly. It's a moment to write about history being written in the minute, which is part of what Wiki is all about. I note that you seem to be the first one to launch the Virginia earthquake page. I'd love to talk to you. Can you contact me please?? Best, david montgomery, the washington post, 202-334-7224, montgomery@washpost.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.44.4 (talk) 17:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Question for Washignton Post story on Virginia Earthquak Page

Dear VeitaU, I am a reporter at the Washington Post, writing about the Wiki pages on the quake going up so fast. It's a moment to look at history being written in the minute, which is part of what Wiki is all about. I note you seem to have made one of the first, or the first, entries on the quake. Can you contact me please? Thank you. Best, david montgomery, the washington post, 202-334-7224. montgomery@washpost.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.44.4 (talk) 17:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for misspellings on previous note....

On deadline, my fingers aren't typing correctly! I should know how to spell "Washington" and "Earthquake"! -- david montgomery, the washington post, 202-334-7224

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Port Stanley Airport - Google Earth.JPG

Hi VegitaU, you're right in that {{Non-free historic image}} is out of place, sorry. The image is from Google Earth today. Port Stanley Airport was bombed during the Falklands War as explained in the article. There is a controversy whether the bombs from the second attack exploded or not. Unless some Wikipedian builds a satellite, it can't be replaced by non-copyright images. Images of a single bomb crater doesn't convey the general view. I've replaced the "Licensing" with {{Non-free fair use in|Port Stanley Airport}}. The image isn't just a map from an atlas, to illustrate the area depicted. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi VegitaU, since you're having a wikibreak I took the liberty of deleting your contribution at File:Port Stanley Airport - Google Earth.JPG. I don't want it to be administratively deleted at Friday, 9 September 2011, and I've changed the template. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 12:23, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi VegitaU, what do you mean by no arguments? Look above, if Wikipedia is going to build a satellite, fine with me, else... What is your argument for deleting it? And please don't refer to some WP:XX-123456. Talk to me, I'm a human. Remember, fair use is an assessment. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 22:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

By necessity, I have to cite a Wikipedia policy to make a valid, supported argument on Wikipedia. There's no argument that can get around one of two things:

1. That the image in question is unfree.
2. That the image is freely replaceable.

The Wikipedia foundation doesn't need to build a satellite in order for a photograph to be freely replaceable. A user on an airplane or touring the airport can take a snapshot of the whatever is in focus. Being that the photo is not historical or dependent on the Google corporation, I can't see any arguments that can bypass these facts. If you think you have a valid argument place the wikitag {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|Your reason that a free replacement can not be found or created}} on the file page as stated. Otherwise, you can ask an administrator to intervene at WP:DRR or WP:IUP. -- Veggy (talk) 04:51, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Way to be fast!

		The Earthquakes Barnstar
		Nice job getting the 2011 Virginia earthquake article started so quickly! And a write-up in the Post! Well done! Wikipelli Talk 13:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 11, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 11, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

American Airlines Flight 11 was American Airlines' morning, daily scheduled transcontinental flight, from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California. On Tuesday, September 11, 2001, the aircraft flying this route—a Boeing 767-223ER—was hijacked by five al-Qaeda terrorists, and deliberately crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City, as part of the September 11 attacks. Fifteen minutes into the flight, the hijackers forcibly breached the cockpit, and overpowered the pilot and first officer. Mohamed Atta, an al-Qaeda member and trained pilot, took over the controls. Air traffic controllers noticed the flight was in distress when the crew stopped responding to them. They realized the flight had been hijacked when Atta mistakenly transmitted announcements for passengers to air traffic control. On board, Amy Sweeney and Betty Ong contacted American Airlines, and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew. The aircraft crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 08:46 local time; the impact killed all 92 people aboard. Many people in the streets witnessed the collision, and the Naudet brothers captured the impact on video, as did Pavel Hlava, along with Fox 8 news reporter Mark Burnback. The impact and subsequent fire caused the North Tower to collapse, which resulted in thousands of additional casualties. During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified dozens of remains from Flight 11 victims, but many other body fragments could not be identified. (more...)

Please read

As requested by BusterD I am passing this along for you to read so that you know that your efforts are appreciated.--MONGO 21:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Some personal gratitude

I was just reading the Talk page of today's featured article and I must say, your persistence in honest debate with people of questionable motive is really remarkable. I would've given up long before. So I just wanted to say thanks, and that your efforts were not wasted. calr (talk) 22:49, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Your edit at OWS

Hi, your edit to the Occupy Wall Street article is being discussed on the talk page[2]. B^e——C_ritical 01:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. When you recently edited Puerto Rican Day Parade attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sixth Avenue (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) 11:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Puerto Rican Day Parade attacks

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:05, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

You placed a speedy on File:Camp_7,_Guantanamo,_via_google_-a.jpg, claiming it was replaceable.

And how do you suggest someone could replace this image of a secret base? Geo Swan (talk) 09:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Annotated aerial CMC view.png

File:Annotated aerial CMC view.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Clearly a watermarked, copyrighted Google image Veggy (talk) 09:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
• This file is not "passed off as the user's own work" - I resent your suggestion that the image is plagiarised. It is quite clearly a Google Earth image, with all identifying marks left intact, and its description states that it shows: "Two sites of the Torrens Island Internment Camp overlaid on a Google Earth image". I have taken a Google Earth image, which I understood to be in the public domain for uses of this kind, acknowledged the source transparently and in good faith, blurred the image slightly and then overlaid my own art work. If there is a problem with that, then please explain what it is, and what needs to be done. I am prepared to edit the image, or if necessary to use another base plan. Peter Bell (talk) 13:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

SUL

Hi! de-User Veggies is now available. Regards, FritzG (talk) 20:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

New Section

Veggies, please allow me to edit our own page. I am the web editor of the Estate web page and I was correcting the the errors in our wiki page that a person known to be involved in a legal case with us is making incorrect statements on our wiki page. I am deleting his posts. I suggest you legally allow me to edit out his insertions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.139.51 (talk) 05:10, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

If you have an issue with the accuracy of cited sources, please go to dispute resolution to resolve the problem instead of blanking entire sections of cited material. -- Veggies (talk) 05:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I will take this further if you persist. It is up to you. Next time I delete the in-correct mis-information. I cannot comment on an on-going legal case in the courts. Thank you for respecting the legal owners rights and not the perpetrators. His cited sources are his own manufactured sources and not fact at all that he has posted elsewhere on the web and not factual. Anyone can post mis-information themselves and then refer to it as fact. I suggest you allow official correct information to stand on our page as it did before WGS edited the page in back in December. Thank you.

I understand that you're frustrated with the regulatory restrictions on Wikipedia, but I strongly advise that you seek administrative help in resolving your issue. If the info on your page is defamatory, that can be resolved. Also, please be aware that legal threats are not allowed on Wikipedia. If you think the info is defamatory, please email the Wikipedia administrators here: [3]. -- Veggies (talk) 05:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting this post in new section. I will contact Wikipedia help. I can't edit my own posts?

I'm assuming you're the same editor as a few hours ago, then? Usually, editing your own comments is discouraged and I typically revert those changes so that a clear record is kept on this talk page of what went on. -- Veggies (talk) 14:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes I am. You can check my IP and see it belongs to the Estate. Please delete this section altogether. I was trying to talk to you privately, not publicly. I appreciate it's deletion since you have given me the contact info to talk to Wikipedia about defamatory statements made.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8