User talk:Osaboramirez

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hey, Osaboramirez, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions. I hope you like the site and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful (some of them may sound stupid, but I recommend you check them out):

While editing, please remember:

You should introduce yourself here at the new user log. I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name, the date, and the time.

For your first edits, I suggest searching for articles that you think might interest you. You could also be audacious and try a random page.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome and happy editing! Cbrown1023 02:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Lexluthor1981.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lexluthor1981.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Punctuation.

Stop putting periods at the end of caption. Per Wikipedia's style guide, this is NOT the preferred style. ThuranX 14:33, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop deleting your vandalism warnings.

You have been warned on multiple occasions. You keep hiding them. Please stop deleting them. ThuranX 14:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia style

Pleas stop disrupting the use of wikipedia's guides to style by remobing bolding, quotes, and other punctuation nd code on all the pages you've vandalized. ThuranX 14:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Superman Enemies

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Superman enemies, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ThuranX 15:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the second Test4 warning you've been given. You continue to remove valid information over and over. Stop vandalizing wikipedia. You have already been reported to the admin board.ThuranX 15:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do not blank your talk page.

Please do not remove any legitimate vandalism notices from your user talk page. Your user talk page does not belong to you, it belongs to the Wikimedia Foundation. (see WP:TALK) If you blank and/or vandalise this page in the future, you could be blocked from editing without prior notice. SonicChao talk 04:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV content removal

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Jack Napier. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

[edit] OEF-HOA

Do you have any specific issue with the al-Qaeda flag icon you keep reverting at the Operation Enduring Freedom - Horn of Africa article? I don't see any problems with it. NeoFreak 17:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the explanation. Do you have the link to the discussion, it sounds interesting. In the future it might save you some trouble and avoid back and forth reverts if you left a note in the edit summary or talk page when you make a change like that. Otherwise it might be misconstrued as vandalism. Thanks again. NeoFreak 04:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't classify good faith edits as vandalism

Hi Osaboramirez. I see you reverted Centrx's and my changes on Template:War on Terrorism back to your previous edit, classing our edits as "vandalism." Please don't classify good faith edit as vandalism again. I quote from policy page Wikipedia:Vandalism: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." (emphasis mine.) Can you please explain your objection to our changes? Thanks. Picaroon9288 22:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All your edits have been reverted.

If you believe this block to be unjustified, you can contest it by adding {{unblock|reason}} to the bottom of this page and replacing reason with an explanation of why you think this is an unjust block. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.
TomTheHand 15:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I haven't even been given a reason for the block (only a template), so why should I mention one? YOU have the burden of the proof."

Decline reason: "You have been blocked as a sock puppet of Copperchair, as established by CheckUser. TomTheHand 04:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

I haven't done anything wrong. My edits have been constructive and have respected consensus and by reverting them you have vandalized facts and correct number figures. If you care for Wikipedia you should at least revert your destructive reverts. Osaboramirez 02:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

You've done something wrong by repeatedly evading your ban. You are not entitled to edit Wikipedia, whether you are being constructive or not. TomTheHand 02:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I haven't been banned. I am not Copperchair. You keep saying EVERYONE whose edits you don't like is Copperchair, just to ban them. You are abussing your role as administrator for personal reasons, and then have vandalized some articles. Osaboramirez 04:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Your connection has been proven by CheckUser. Please do not remove warnings and block notices from your talk page. TomTheHand 13:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CW-CRSC-art-2006.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:CW-CRSC-art-2006.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. Videmus Omnia Talk 13:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)