User talk:Muppet317

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Sources for Non-Intervention

Hello, good work on Non-Intervention, and thanks for the contribution. However, you forgot to add any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. What websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Non-Intervention? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? Thank you very much. - SimonP 04:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Mogwai_young_team.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mogwai_young_team.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 16:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Self Determination

Hello, in respect to what seems to be an honest effort on your part to better understand and edit subjects such as this, I thought I would offer my input and allow you to decide if and how to apply it to the article.

I am greatly alarmed by the opening inferred claim that self-determination is only a theoretical concept. I guess that this was the result of people quoting 'examples' that seem to contradict every available explanation. Having spent several years on the self-determination of West Papua issue, I am reasonably familiar with the legal realities and opposition efforts to confuse the issue.

Three main points, 1) "self-determination" being a compound English title of course can have both a range of literal dictionary meanings to confuse the real subject, as well as the actual political subject which it is used for; 2) the basis of "self-determination" was the post-WW-II response at the United Nations to try and understand and end most conflicts, it is based on the UN Charter, the Human Rights declaration, UN GA Resolution 1514, and most importantly a set of guidelines was provided by UN GA Resolution 1541; 3) the actual application of any international law or convention is based on the willingness of the involved parties to submit to said conventions, i.e. just because it has not been properly used or someone has tried to abuse its intent does not invalidate intended application of 1514 and 1541.

It was never intended that "self-determination" be used by groups hundreds of years later to try and succeed from the United States or any other nation in which consent of union had already been deemed to have been given by that and other groups. The intent was that colonies had a human right to self-determination; and that any ethnic group in a new State during formation also had an equal right to self-determination (even if it had not been allowed at the time).

Hope this helps :). 58.107.10.239 05:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)