User talk:Watermint/Archive 1

Archive 1

RE: Sea of Japan

Hello! Please exercise better judgement and use the talk page before reverting recent editions to this article to a version for which consensus has not been demonstrated clearly. Various editors involved in this dispute seem to be either unwilling or unable to discuss edits sensibly as required. You wiped out other verifiable information regarding the naming issue. Thanks! Quizimodo 05:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Opening paragraph of Dokdo

next time when you want to change the opening paragraph, would you discuss first in the talk page in order not to get into edit war again? As far as I remember there once was that suggestion to change the opening paragraph to put additional 'one of several names for' but there wasn't any consensus came out of that discussion. In my opinion, that suggestion cannot be justifed by NPOV argument. Otherwise every article regarding any object with more than one name should begin as you suggest when the other party is not happy with the name. What I meant by misleading is that when you begin the article with your opening sentence, the article is expected to be about the name of 'Dokdo' itself, not about the islets. It's confusing and the article becomes not well-written. Therefore the article should begin 'xxx is a group of islands...'. Considering articles like Senkaku islands or Kuril islands are putting the name of the status of quo in their opening paragraph and referring to the object with the name, I think the opening paragraph should be just like before you modified. Same for 'control' and 'administer'. Please discuss before edit as these are heavily debated in the past. Ginnre 02:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Boxing

Time to kick start this again!?--Vintagekits 21:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gonzalez_195.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gonzalez_195.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Rettetast 10:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

JudahZab.jpg

I have tagged Image:JudahZab.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast 10:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Oleg.maskaev.jpg

I have tagged Image:Oleg.maskaev.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 12:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thanks--Watermint 13:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Luis Alberto Perez

The boxer Luis Alberto Perez is not spelled "Pérez" as the Cuban Olympian does... Claudevsq 09:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed unreasonable messages

Removed unreasonable warning messages by blocked sockpuppetly user.--Watermint 05:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Unblocked

I have overturned your block having reviewed the WP:AN3 report as it was evident that there was no revert-warring going on here. Apologies for the block but you should be free to edit again - Alison ☺ 05:01, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your right judgment.--Watermint 09:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Watermint - I'm terribly sorry for this misunderstanding; I didn't even realise the reverts provided were on completely different pages! Hopefully, you can forgive me; I very rarely make mistakes such as these, as I always make a point of double checking small details like the date and the pages (!) but I guess we're all human. Once again, my apologies :) Cheers, Anthøny 13:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem, Anthøny. Thanks.--Watermint 13:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked User:Leavepower for WP:3RR. I left a message on their talk pages which is also applicable to yourself, that I strongly suggest that you take this dispute to the relevant talk pages before continuing. If you have any further question please don't hesitate to get in touch. Regards ^Khukri 11:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, Thank you for your caution. --Watermint 11:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Information

Hello Watermint. I inform you that this report was submitted by Bason0.[1] Thanks. --Nightshadow28 20:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Nightshasow28. Thank you for infomation. Regards,--Watermint 05:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Joan-guzman.jpg

I have tagged Image:Joan-guzman.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Calliopejen1 03:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Thanks.--Watermint 12:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI

no problem at all. feel free to use any quote you think will be useful. take care.Sennen goroshi 14:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, I am sorry in having involved you in this case. However, I seemed to me that you had received serious harassment by the person. --Watermint 10:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi. If you edit the article of Liancourt Rocks, you may add the summary.See "Edit summaries"--Opp2 12:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Opp2. Thank you for your information.--Watermint 12:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Your proposal

bahavior -> behavior, Rfc (Requests for comment) -> RFCU (Request for checkuser), parsonal, pasonal -> personal; But I also had used a misspelling like "suckpuppet"... I feel somewhat ashamed. Now I can not giggle someone's "socket". ;) --Nightshadow28 12:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! hahaha...--Watermint 12:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)