User talk:Liftarn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Troll warning This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not.


Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Persecution of Germanic Pagans

I just took the really needed look at the version history and saw that the article was mostly your contribution. I hope you agree that the historical parts about the middle ages should be treated in the respective articles on Christianization. That still leaves the 20th century part, about the Neopagans. I made suggestion where to move then, I hope we can find something that you can agree on. -Zara1709 00:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually I disagree about the move, but there is nothing that don't say you could have the same information in two different articles. // Liftarn
Could we possibly agree to first use the material to improve the other articles, and improve them so much that they are undisputed and based on solid literature? Then maybe we could write a summary for the instances that have been considered Persecution of Germanic Pagans by some people. -Zara1709 15:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
What is disputed? // Liftarn
Well, we need to improve: Christianization, Germanic Christianity, Christianization of Scandinavia, Germanic neopaganism, Religious persecution, Persecution of ancient Greek religion, only the last two are actually tagged, by the other ones need improvements, too, IMHO.
Disputed are: Historical persecution by Christians and Constantinian shift, among other. Basically everywhere, where it is about Christianity and Paganism, there are some conflicting views. Without having the historical facts in the respective articles first , I think it would not be of much use to have an article Persecution of Germanic Pagans. -Zara1709 16:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Institute for Middle East Understanding

Why did you ignore that I had tagged the article with {{hangon}}? // Liftarn

Because your only assertion of notability was "because I say it's notable", which is not valid. If you wish to try again you could use your userspace; try User:Liftarn/Institute for Middle East Understanding. This way you can work on it at your leisure without worrying about it being deleted. Cheers, Fang Aili talk 15:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
What kind of assertion is needed? // Liftarn
See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). A few sources would help too. --Fang Aili talk 15:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
IMEU have "placed numerous commentaries in the mainstream media and connected journalists with good Palestinian spokespeople for their publications and shows"[1] and is recognised as a good source by Washington Report on Middle East Affairs[2]. ADL is (for obvious reasons) less happy, but mentions them[3]. // Liftarn
Good enough for me. :) Restored. Go ahead and add some notability assertions. Cheers, Fang Aili talk 15:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I have also stored a copy in my user space just in case of a drive by deletion. // Liftarn

[edit] The Commons Ambassador Barnstar

The Commons Ambassador Barnstar
For your wonderful and varied image contributions, I salute you. Yours, Smee 23:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Feel free to post to your user page and/or leave on your talk page as you see fit, except (of course) this part itself... Smee 23:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC).
Thanks! I have. // Liftarn

[edit] Image:Cups-large.png

Hi, I have reverted your change to the licence shown for Image:Cups-large.png, for the reasons that I have explained on the image talk page - basically, I am confident that the image is available under the GPL and that we therefore do not need to assert fair use. -- AJR | Talk 23:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] If you are not a bot...

Please take time to read the big red templates at the top and bottom of this userpage. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. // Liftarn

[edit] Street Sleeper

Hi - I notice you put a "to commons" tag on a Street Sleeper photo. I've already uploaded that photo to the Commons here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Street_Sleeper_1_by_David_Shankbone.jpg The one on Wikipedia is a shadow. --David Shankbone 19:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, it should have been tagged with {{ncd}} then. // Liftarn

[edit] Fair Use or PD?

Regarding your addition of {{logo}} to this image, it can't be both "fair use" and "PD". Whilst I accept that there may be some legal issues here, I have previously asked for clarification of WP's position on this, but got nowhere. Since it is a wide-ranging issue, I would assume that there is some form of agreed-upon policy based on sound legal advice that we can rely on, rather than having IANALs applying their interpretation of the law on a case-by-case basis.

This is something I feel strongly about; if we're not allowed to "PD" stuff like this, fine, we shouldn't be doing it. However, if we are, then I consider it unacceptable to remove the licenses from user-submitted images based on flawed IANAL guesswork. If you know of a link to any such WP policy, I'd be grateful to see it. Thanks! Fourohfour 19:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] moved image

Hi, could you explain what the entry in Image:Spline01.gif means? Also why is the use of this on Nonuniform rational B-spline not referenced in Links? Freeformer 20:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you refering to "This picture/multimedia file is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Image:Spline01.gif."? That means the image is now availabe to use for all Wikimedia projects. It appears the image is not used in the Nonuniform rational B-spline article so that's why it isn't listed. // Liftarn


[edit] Talk:Pallywood

Thanks for your contribution to Pallywood, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the Sandbox to get started. Thank you.

notice per this threadWP:POINT relating to this edit1,2,3 and also this editexternal links blanking per not getting it your way.

i'm sure you're aware that this is not the proper way to deal with content disputes and i hope that you will refrain from such dispute escalating behaviour. Jaakobou 09:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to work within Wikipedia guidlines, but with so much double standards going on it is very difficult to tell what actually is the right way to do it. ~// Liftarn

[edit] History with user

I find it notable to remind you at this point of this warningcarlos latuff that you've taken the liberty to remove from your talk page[4]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaakobou (talk • contribs) 09:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm perfectly within my rights to remove bogus "warnings" posted on my user page by an anonymous user. If they were real warings for real stuff posted by a real user it would be another matter. // Liftarn
(1) do not transfer warnings to my userpage. it creates confusion and you can be sure i follow up on given warnings.
(2) that's the way you wish to reason/present the removing of a serious warning that clearly has the username noted in the talk page/discussion history tab?
(3) quite frankly, i don't think there is a need to reply to the 2 issues above. it would be a redundant waste of time for the both of us. Jaakobou 11:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
(1) OK, I had no way of knowing that.
(2) Huh?
(3) It was you who started it, but you may want to read Wikipedia:Vandalism, especially "Do not use these templates in content disputes". // Liftarn

[edit] Image:Flavorcrest peaches.jpg

Hello. You moved Image:Flavorcrest peaches.jpg to the Commons with User:Krimpet/CommonsHelper Helper (hadn't seen that before). However, all that does is add ncd, but for ASRS or CDC or Geograph (and presumably others, but those at least) tagged images that leaves them still sitting in the Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons. No big deal. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's a bit annoying. The copyright tag shouldn't add it to the category. // Liftarn
Yep. I think I'll ask a template guru to have a look at those. Cool Cat was telling me how great he was, so I think he would be the man for the job! Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems the way it is now there is extra work that is not needed. // Liftarn
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/f/User_talk%7ELiftarn_0324.html"