User talk:Tarc/Archive0

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Hezbollah

"In a non-binding resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 10 March 2005, The EU Parliament considered that clear evidence exists of terrorist activities by Hezbollah and recommended that 'The EU Council should take all necessary steps to curtail them'. MEPs urged the EU Council to brand Hezbollah a terrorist organization. However, the Council is reluctant to do so, as France, Spain, and Britain fear that such a move would further damage the prospects for Middle East peace talks.[16]"

So, they haven't officially branded Hezbollah as an organization yet, but, at the same time, a non-binding resolution recognizes Hezbollah as one (see Hezbollah article) WhisperToMe 17:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Chiming in

Ah, well, thanks - it's good to have a registered users confimation sometimes. —Xyrael / 06:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sayyid

Syed is actually the most common spelling, but the editors of that article contend that "Sayyid" is the spelling most often used in academic texts, so I doubt a change would go undisputed. BhaiSaab talk 05:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Israel and the UN

Being subject to some considerable buffing and POV pushing - can you have a look please?

86.27.55.184 13:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please see talk page - don't revert

also are you suggesting we merge God and redirect allah to God ? Zeq 21:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

RE: this edit.

It doesn't appear to me that this user's (189.162.8.77 (talk · contribs)) contributions to TV Land were in any way bad-faith or intentionally disruptive. Asserting that you were reverting "vandalism" is disingenuous and does not accurately explain why you reverted those edits. If you didn't believe those changes were helpful, explain why. Thanks, Scientizzle 19:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. I have responded here. -- Scientizzle 23:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Embargo

Mad because I reverted your edits on the Nasrallah article? Do not provoke me. I blanked my own talk page because the block was expired. Go find another Arab to harass. Embargo 19:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation of Inayat Bunglawala conflict

Hey, I've been trying to mediate at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-02-19 Inayat Bunglawala. Zeq is getting pretty irate and hysterical, however, because I don't agree with him. Have a look. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zeq's collusion

The three revert rule implies that, even if one hasn't reverted three times in 24 hours, the user may still be blocked:

The rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique; rather, the rule is an "electric fence".[1] Editors may still be blocked even if they haven't made more than three edits in any given 24 hour period, if their behaviour is clearly disruptive. — WP:3RR

So if one is clearly abusing the 3RR or "gaming the system", as it were, then that user can still be blocked (at an admin's discretion). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 18:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed compromise

A compromise has been proposed. It is toned down to simply state that the allegation was made, and that the allegation was denied. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Stevegrogan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stevegrogan.jpg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nomination as a good article

Salam. I think Hezbollah has reached to good article criteria and I want to nominate it. Please write your idea in talk:Hezbollah#Good article nomination--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 06:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Millennium (TV series)

Regarding your comment, the image was not deleted. It was moved down the page to eliminate whitespace. Dustbunniesmultiply 07:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assume good faith

My understanding was that this is what was agreed. If you undersod differently let's re-open the mediation or maybe you can point out to me where I agreed to what you claim I did.

always assume good faith . Please appologize for calling me a liar. Zeq 18:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racism by Country

Thanks for offering feedback from the RfC (I assume that's how you got there). WilyD 14:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikistalking

Tarc,

Since we had a diagreement on bugalwa I noticed you follow me around, vote where I vote, revert my edits etc... This kind of behaviour is a violation of policy. so buglawa or not: cut it out ! Zeq 23:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removal of clinton pic

great edit summaryTvoz |talk 01:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email me

Please will you email me ASAP and I'll forward you an email regarding Emabargo's userbox? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Never bothered to validate an e-mail address, so it won't let me. Soon as I get my validation thing, I will drop you a line. Tarc 22:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool, I'm going to bed now so I'll sort it tomorrow. G'night Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Sent, please take the comment in the email about no further seriously. Let me know (via email) your opinions Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Viridae

Hey. Any suggestions on how to deal with and possibly report admin Viridae? I reported two userpages that WERE offensive and inflammatory, User:Politicallyincorrectliberal and User:Matt57, and he replied by saying "Once again, none of which are as offensive as your original. The second one I can't see anything offensive about at all...?". He has to be reported, this admin is obviously biased. Emбargo 17:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like User:FayssalF deleted some of the stuff from User:Politicallyincorrectliberal's page. I agree, that was pretty ridiculous of Viridae to not delete that. What's wrong with User:Matt57 though? You can't really object to someone saying that they're an atheist.
BTW, you really got to get rid of that "Judaism Without Embellishments" image though. Putting historical anti-Semitic cartoons on your page is going waaaaay over the line of something that I can support/condone. Tarc 22:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The userpage of user:Matt57 contains a citation he claims to be Muhammad's that I find more offensive and inflammatory than the anti-Semitic cartoon and the original version of my userbox. And I find it very worrying that those who objected to my userbox refrained from dealing with these two user, among others. Emбargo 23:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I realize that, but "two wrongs don't make a right", and all that jazz. Anyways, Provoubiac deleted matt57's quote, and matt promptly restored it. It won't really accomplish all that much of you or I revert it, so let's wait and see what happens next. Particularly if the admins leap right to blanking + locking as they were so quick to do to yours. Tarc 03:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re polemical User pages

One of the problems with this is that after the hoopla dies down, the offending users just go right back to the versions of their user page that they had before (e.g. User:Prester John) Tarc 14:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Tarc. I am dealing w/ it. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 14:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] straw poll

Hey Tarc. Please share your thoughts at Talk:Allegations_of_Israeli_apartheid#A_quick_straw_poll. Thanks, --Urthogie 14:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit warring

Please refrain from edit warring, as you have been doing at Mohammad Amin al-Husayni. If you have a dispute with another user, resolve it with polite discussion, or dispute resolution if that doesn't work, but repeated undiscussed reversions are unproductive. Thanks. Dmcdevit·t 21:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I have attempted such things in the past with this user, and found him to be abrasive and unresponsive. He's been cautioned before about leaving these insipid "tidying" edit summaries, and when even other admins find him to do nothing but "push the POV" [1] ...well, he ain't worth my time. Tarc 04:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
That's why I said to pursue dispute resolution if discussion doesn't work. You'll notice that that dispute resolution isn't just one thing to be tried, but a series of processes, even including, at the very end, arbitration, which has the power to impose bans. If past dispute resolution has failed, and it's because of conduct issues as you indicate, I would suggest you try something like arbitration, or maybe some of the steps that come before that. Dmcdevit·t 07:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not well up on this topic, but if you had your e-mail engaged, I could have sent you some supposedly good information! Or post me on andy.dyer9@tiscali.co.uk PalestineRemembered 17:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The e-mail link should work now, try it again. Tarc 19:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accuastions about Bad faith

Tarc,

You have been violating WP:AGF. Plaese appologize and retrac your accusations. You can disagree with my viwes but not to question again and again my good faith editing to improve this encyclopedia. Zeq 20:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

May I quote from WP:AGF ? "This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary."

Tarc 22:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. & Hezbollah

I dont have the time right now to do a search, but I do recall that Sec. of State Rice as well as the Pres. did declare the Hezbos as a Terrorist Org. They definitely did give Israel the green light to take necessary action against them. That in my book is in effect policy. I do have a strong background in poly-sci and I do work for a contractor that deals with Israeli companies and Hezbollah is definitely treated as a terrorist organization in regard to rebuilding of infrastructure and aid. Jilbear 02:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Jilbear

[edit] Out Out

Hi, the nominator of this AfD now agrees the band passes WP:MUSIC, so I think you're probably good to go if you want to try cleaning the article up. I'm not good at that sort of thing - I can't get my head around Wikipedia style and format (it took me hours to do the tiny bit at Kirlian Camera (band), for example), and never heard of Out Out. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 21:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks. Tarc 01:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fatah Misuse of Funds

I now realize the way the wikipedia system works. I apologize for my previous errors. I dont currently have the time to add to the article about the misuse of sunds but here are some reputable reportign sources on it: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30653 http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1991to_now_pa_corrupt.php http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/2006/rubin/02_07.html http://www.theprismgroup.org/articles/eu_inquiry_into_funds_misuse.html Jilbear 22:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Jilbear

If you think that trash like worldnetdaily or palestine facts are legitimate sources, then apparently you still have a long ways to go. Tarc 23:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Might be interested

I noticed that you took part in State terrorism by United States of America argument for deletion. You may be interested that there is a user right now who is deleting large portions of the article. 69.150.209.15 17:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racism by country

Hello, a request for mediation has been filed given the deadlock at racism by country. You previously offered comment on it, but were not involved in any edit warring. As such, I'm inviting you to add yourself to the RFM if you feel that you're part of the dispute. You can do so here. If you feel you're not involved in the dispute, please disregard this message and thanks for your earlier opinion. WilyD 21:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your userbox...

...is one of the only ones I've ever agreed with. Accordingly, I'm sure you'll be happy to see this: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Louis88/Mormonism Thanks for bringing it to my attention, and always feel welcome to do likewise in the future.Proabivouac 09:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I just don't see the need to make pretty boxes to tell people about their liking cheese or fluffy clouds or whatever, there is some really, really stupid shit out there. I did poke around for some formalized place to put/report these kinda things, never though to look in the Miscellany for Deletion. I can just bring em there rather than bugging you every time, but thanks. :) Tarc 13:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfC on User:Mike18xx

Hi Tarc. As you have participated at the ANI discussion regarding the behaviour of the abovementioned user, i just wanted to let you know that I opened an RfC on themselves in response to the concerns raised during the discussion at the ANI and their avoidance to solve the issue. The RfC is located here. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 10:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Funnypop12

Hi Tarc, I won't go into why I thought to create that "admin-bashing" barnstar, but suffice it to say that I thought the better of it nearly immediately and removed it. ALM scientist must have found it useful, for he restored it. Thanks for blanking it again. (SPA has since moved onto User:Albertbrown80.)Proabivouac 16:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:NirvanaNevermindalbumcover.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:NirvanaNevermindalbumcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 14:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:POINT

It seems you are trying to prove some WP:POINT at Image:Dying to Kill by Mia Bloom cover.jpg. I suggest you stop it. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

If you need assistance with Wikipedia policy, then point your little browser to the Village Pump. They are always more than happy to help out newbies. Tarc 23:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, this was an interesting revelation tonight. I assumed you were just another POV warrior who was in need of a bit of refresher on the Wikipedia's fair use policy, hence the pointer to V.P. But now I see you're an administrator, so I really don't know where to direct you to, since you shoulda known this stuff already. Tarc 02:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Chicago8.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Chicago8.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. Rlest 12:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Soundgarden - Bleed Together.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Soundgarden - Bleed Together.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. 20:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)