User talk:Thedagomar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive

Archives
As Geo.plrd;1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Old Talk Page

Current:RfAs 12


Hello, Thedagomar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -- Y not? 04:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Frederick Tisdall

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Frederick Tisdall, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 172.149.18.197 13:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union...

I just noticed you pass this article, but you don't appear to of actually reviewed it at all, seeing as there's no review on the talk page. Are you planning on giving one in a subsequent edit? Homestarmy 21:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

In fact, several of your latest reviews show no evidence of any review. All articles which are passed or failed from GAC have to have some sort of comment defending the change, otherwise, there's no way to be sure if a reviewer is honestly grading an article according to the GA criteria or just stamping their favorite topic. Homestarmy 21:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee

Good Evening (GMT time); regarding your querie at the above page, just to let you know I've responded. Remember that this is my personal opinion, and not only is it not that of the Committee, but also this opinion will no doubt vary from member to member.

Kind regards,
Anthøny (talk) 21:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

As I looked at your contributions, I realize you're a new editor. I am concerned about your GA review, particularly Raëlian beliefs and practices. In the article, I found a non-free image (Image:Yes to Human Cloning.png). As a policy of Wikipedia, all copyrighted images must provide a fair-use rationale to qualify its use in Wikipedia. I also cannot find a review comment on the talk page of the article. I'm also concerned about the references in NLRB v. J. Weingarten, Inc.. It looks very confusing to me (and to most people). If you haven't read it, you should take a look at Good Article criteria before assessing any articles. Articles have to meet all the criteria before it can be promoted to GA class. If you have furthur questions, please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 06:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Yes to Human Cloning.png does not have fair use rationale. It needs more than just the summary and type of licensing. Take a look at Image:AMS logo.jpg for what a fair use rationale should have. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Conservapedia

Since your a site admin there, can you help me figure out why User:Tesfan was blocked there? Tesfan 01:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cberlet and LaRouche

I think that you are mistaken -- I don't see anything in the ArbCom decision that prohibits Cberlet from editing the LaRouche article. However, I think he has major behavior problems, which is why I filed the RFC. --Marvin Diode 14:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the duplicate RfCs, I don't see any prohibition. Occasionally an RfC will cover two editors and that would have made sense in this case. However I think El C was right to say that there'd been no serious attempts at conciliation. To my view the RfCs were very weak: the actual evidence didn't support their charges and they aren't saints themselves either. Both of the RfC certifiers appear to have spent a large percentage of their time here complaining about Cberlet
You had a particular concern about COI, but I think you'll find that the COI quideline allows experts to quote their won published material. I recently gained access to a great archive of newspaper articles and had been using it research material on LaRouche's trial 1980s. I've reviewed over a thousand articles. Berlet and King are repeatedly quoted in press accounts as the experts on the topic of LaRouche, and no one else. It's still the case 20 years later. As far as Wikipedia editing goes, Cberlet has been an active, authoritative editor on many difficult fields, like fascism and Neo-Nazism. Dking's edit have been focused more on LaRouche topics and he is obviously passionate about them. Perhaps encyclopedias are edited best by those with little passion, but disinterested editors rarely have the interest to bother editing at all. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 09:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I have filed a request for admin intervention due to the way the new page RFC on Lyndon LaRouche has been transformed into an attack on my editing and reliability as a source. See here.--Cberlet 03:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm not familar with the issues here but the RFC was delisted, and this is just an attempt to sidestep that. I'd suggest moving it into your userspace, though I'm going to consdier deleting it. RxS 03:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that does not list you as a party. However, I think that it would be appropriate for you to join the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Lyndon LaRouche and related articles, and sign on if you agree to mediate. --MaplePorter 07:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAC backlog contest

The Working Man's Barnstar
Thank you for your participation in the GAC backlog elimination drive! ¿SFGiДnts! ¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review! 20:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel 00:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Thanks for helping at GAC backlog elimination drive OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Invitation to GA Sweeps

I would like to invite you to participate at GA Sweeps. We decided it's time to give GA a good sweep to ensure the qualities of all GA articles. You recevied this invitation because we felt that you can improve and uphold the quality of Good articles. This is the reason why only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this sweep initially.

Please take a look at the project page and see if you wish to participate in the Sweeps. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota Aurion

I have reverted your passing of the article as GA as you did not provide a review summary on the talk page of the article. This is required even for reviews that conclude in promoting articles, as it serves as a proof that the reviewer did indeed review against all of the WIAGA and it certifies that he or she did make sure it fulfills all the conditions. As a sidenote, I took a brief look at the article and have found numerous flaws that would merit at least a hold, if not immediate failing of the nom. I cannot get down to reviewing it now, though, I would just like to advise you that you might want to re-review the article and make sure you check against all criteria. Regards, PrinceGloria 19:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello again - I have been discussing the issue with the article's authors and came to the conclusion that I will deliver a complete GA review in the article. In case the issue is of interest to you, let's keep in touch. PrinceGloria 15:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
No prob, same here (sans lunch hour ;) ). Cheers, PrinceGloria 10:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Approved as reviewer

I have approved you as a reviewer. Good luck! Please let me know how you get on. — Thomas H. Larsen 07:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My RfC

Thanks for contributing, I notice you would support a civility probabtion, with the potential of a future block, for harassing Edokter. Of the 19 instances which supposidly "summarise the conflict", only two of these nineteen images listed at the RFC were anything to do with Edokter, both of which were deleted as they failed WP:NFC. I am hard pushed to see how this is targetting one particular user, am I missing something? Fasach Nua (talk) 20:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Cross-Stitched Barnstar
In thanks for draining the entire unassessed article pool for Wikipedia:WikiProject Textile Arts. DurovaCharge! 19:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Carpet GA nomination failure

[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

Upon its review on February 18, 2008, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:

had a virtual or complete lack of reliable sources

thus making it ineligible for good article consideration. According to WP:Verifiability, "Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source."

This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 23:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OhanaUnited's RFA

.: Thank you! :.

[edit] GAN:Persistent carbene

You said that it only needs an infobox for becoming a GA. What type of infobox are you thinking (i.e. what information do you think should be in it)? Nergaal (talk) 23:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I got that, but what information do you think should there be in that infobox? Nergaal (talk) 00:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MedCab and other DR participation

With respect to your inquiry at MedCab; I've discussed this matter with User:Addhoc and I've proposed that you be offered a formal mentorship (beyond what's normally involved in an adoption - closer to a voluntary user probation) to prove that you have reformed, Addhoc has agreed to the idea. Are you interested? You can just give me your answer here but, if you agree, I'd like you to create a subpage at User:Doug/Mentorship/Thedagomar where we can talk about what I'd envision for goals and milestones and what I think would be required to hopefully make things work. Thanks.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

created pageGeoff Plourde (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Human rights in Israel

You might be interested in this - Imad marie (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your mediation. Imad marie (talk) 06:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Textile arts newsletter

Hi, the textile arts project had an exciting month in February: 7 featured pictures, 2 good articles, and 4 Did you know? entries. There's still time to join our featured portal drive. Our March newsletter has all the developments. Regards, DurovaCharge! 00:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ashanti-Stool.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ashanti-Stool.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 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. Mosmof (talk) 05:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: question

Of course you can link to it. :) Just don't edit it, as is conventional with archives here. ~ Riana ⁂ 05:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

No - you can place links on the talkpage. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, the talklink is blue, which should be enough. But if you like, I'll add a section to the notes saying that you've responded on the talk. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
No problem - once you've responded wherever you'd like to, just send me a note and I'll add the section. ~ Riana ⁂ 06:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] hello, i need to ask help :)

hello, i hope you can help me.

a discussion was archivied without resolving it, in fact the issue was in debate and someone cleared the page archiving it.

tha archived page is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alexander_the_Great/Archive12#Alexander_the_Great.2C_an_ancient_greek_king_of_macedon.3F)

the new page is the current talk page of the article "alexander the great" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alexander_the_Great)

maybe the current page is similar for the argument, but not at all, because in this way i can't begin the steps for dispute resolution.

thankyou for the attention, PelasgicMoon (talk) 05:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources needed for Frank P. Belotti

Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Frank P. Belotti are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks! • Gene93k (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you.  :) -- Quiddity (talk) 02:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation on covert incest

Hola,

The page hasn't changed in more than a week, in my opinion you could probably close the case, though you might want to check with User:Forest Path. WLU (talk) 15:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Bender, Moldova.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 18:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] WP Africa

I haven't been very active on Wikipedia this past year, unfortunately. I do hope the project stays alive, and I'll try to contribute when I can. Thanks for the message. — Emiellaiendiay 04:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: Tag & assess

Thanks for asking and for joining in :) To be honest, it's much easier if to do them as a lump at the end as the as-you-go system needs regular time-consuming monitoring. --ROGER DAVIES talk 07:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bender

See talk page on Bender. I protected the page, and then dug up some strong sources for consideration. (CIA, Red Cross, OSCE, CPT, etc. Major international organizations). ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 23:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Found poetry

Hey. I noticed you reverted vandalism on found poetry a few days ago. Maybe you can watchlist to help out more with the vandalism that articles tends to attract. If you can, thanks! --Justpassin (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)