User talk:Renamed user e8LqRIqjJf2zlGDYPSu1aXoc/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Another gentle ping from WP:VG

Dear Mendaliv,

You are receiving this message because either [[Category:WikiProject Video games members]] or {{User WPVG}} is somewhere in your userspace, and you are currently listed in the "Unknown" section on the project's member list.

The member list is meant to provide a clearer picture of active membership. It is recommended that you update your status if you plan to regularly:

• Edit video game-related pages in the Article namespace
• Participate in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Members listed in the "Unknown" section will be removed from the membership list and category at the end of January 2010. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

Sincerely, the Video Games WikiProject (delivery by xenobot 21:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Coma_film_poster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Coma_film_poster.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

RE; Animal slaughter - thanks for looking at the section that I restored. My rvt was due to lack of edit summary, but you're right that the content didn't belong at all. I don't know why some editors have trouble doing edit summaries. With your explanation, it's obvious that the section didn't belong. Bob98133 (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem; unexplained section blanking is a big problem. I'm sure that I've done the same in patrolling myself. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 18:51, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fuck film poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fuck film poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3. I thought you might want to sign up for Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Chicago 3.1 from 10:30-11:45 a.m. on Saturday May 1, 2010 at the UIC Student Center West,.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MenaJet.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MenaJet.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 03:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walther arms.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Walther arms.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 02:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Starwood Hotels.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Starwood Hotels.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 06:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cloudy with a chance of meatballs theataposter.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cloudy with a chance of meatballs theataposter.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 14:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Call-of-juarez-bound-in-blood-Ray-and-thomas.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Call-of-juarez-bound-in-blood-Ray-and-thomas.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Burlington Northern.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burlington Northern.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz ^talk 02:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kiki's Delivery Service Screenshot 02 Kiki and Jiji flying to a delivery request.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kiki's Delivery Service Screenshot 02 Kiki and Jiji flying to a delivery request.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

No action warranted on my part. I wasn't the original uploader, and I have no opinion on the FUR. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 21:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HowlsMovingCastleMoviePosterJapan.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HowlsMovingCastleMoviePosterJapan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

No action warranted on my part. I wasn't the original uploader, and I have no opinion on the FUR. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Clean movie.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Clean movie.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Restored; edits had broken infobox. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Content removal

Dear Mendaliv, You removed a huge piece of text from my entry Judith Dupre. I understand that you were trying to help avoid a conflict of interest. However, the sentences that you removed were one, true and two, took me hours to craft. I am new to Wikipedia, and do not understand how to add citations. Every single item on my page is widely, hugely verifiable. If it is possible to restore the text that you removed, I would appreciate it. I would also appreciate help in citing items on my page. Thanks, Judith Dupre Judithdupre (talk) 15:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Judith. Please refer to the page history of Judith Dupré (here). I didn't delete the text to which you refer, though frankly I agree with the editor who removed it. The content of which you speak (which was removed with this edit) strikes me as difficult to support as written, even with references. Such a paragraph would need to be entirely rephrased to directly attribute such descriptions of your work in order to comply with Wikipedia's policy of maintaining a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV).

With respect, as this is an article about yourself, may I suggest stepping away from editing it? While I understand that you are an accomplished author, it can be extraordinarily difficult to write autobiographical Wikipedia articles, and Wikipedia's editorial guidelines themselves strongly discourage the practice (see WP:AUTO). I'm not saying you shouldn't have anything to do with the article, as you're very much invited to participate in discussion at Talk:Judith Dupré, the article's talk page.

I don't want to discourage your participation- quite the opposite. Wikipedia always needs more experienced editors across a wide variety of subject areas. And your personal knowledge would be invaluable in keeping this article about yourself accurate. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:15, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Mendaliv, thanks for being gracious. Others have been quite unkind in their assessments. The text about my work in the design of unusual illustrated books is correct and verifiable. However, I'll ask the people who originally posted the article to update it. Thanks again. JudithJudithdupre (talk) 00:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm very glad to have been of help. Please let me know if I can help any more! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 11:43, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Your autobiography

Please see my comments at WP:EAR, then take a look at the page about you and its Talk:Judith Dupré page. I've spent a while cleaning the article up to Wikipedia standards for you, so you can now see what you are left with. Use the article page history to compare side-by-side the two versions so you can see exactly what I have done, and why. If there is anything you don't understand, or you wish to discuss the suitability of any sources you may wish to use, please do not hesitate to ask me on my talk page. I'm here to help. --Kudpung (talk) 09:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you've got the wrong user talk page... —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 11:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes I have. My humblest apologies! --Kudpung (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Quite alright! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 07:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Continued issue with Hornet24

You remember the issue with ships of the Russian Navy? Hornet still persists to edit pages while claiming to be getting the information from 'daily update' sources but fails to actually list them in his edits. His English isn’t that great, it’s quite obvious he wandered onto the English article and decided to edit the article as he saw fit. Hornet is also adding links on Russian Navy pages by changing the links to direct to the article that he is vandalising. I may be a bit forceful as you said, but what ells do you do when an editor persists to commit vandalism after you make it clear not to do so? It may be an issue of national pride causing the problem with Hornet. Recon.Army (talk) 11:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Recon, please try to assume good faith on the part of Hornet. I understand that this can be hard to do after a protracted dispute, but he's not vandalising anything as far as I can tell, and I haven't been shown any evidence to suggest a nationalistic bias. But I agree, there's a problem here... I'll try to drop him a note sometime today to engage him directly. I'll also try to take a look at the articles in question. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 12:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I would try to assume in good faith, However he is clearly destructive. For example I had to revert his edit on the article List of active ships of the Russian Navy which he wrote "This page is whole copy of uncoplete list copyed from warfare.ru by User:Recon.Army".

Also please observe his recent edit that I had to revert in the intro to this page List of ships of the Russian Navy. Its clearly madness. He wrote;

"For this page are used materiels from warfare.ru, rusnavy.com, rian.ru, defenceindustrydaily.com, russianforces.org, thebulletin.org, janes.com, nti.org, etc. Data is uncomplete, becouse some users try to sabotage it with only one source (warfare.ru), and i hope, will be in short time fully updated. Thanks for comprehension. --Hornet24 (talk):

I had moved the entire list of active ships of the Russian Navy from the old name List of ships of the Russian Navy to the new List of active ships of the Russian Navy. The old articles title isn’t suitable in the context of a list of active ships of the Russian Navy. Thus List of active ships of the Russian Navy lists all the ships currently in-service in the Russian navy, while the old article List of ships of the Russian Navy, lists a group of direct links to every ship ever in service in the soviet and Russian navy’s.

But Hornet however is intent on reverting that and using the old article List of ships of the Russian Navy as his own un-referenced version of the Russian navy. In other words it’s a vandalised, un-referenced duplicate of the real article.

I never said it was national bias on Hornets part, I just said it may be. As he is trying to boost the number of ships of the Russian Navy and yet cannot provide an ref that his edits are facts.

Thank you for your help mate, and I hope we can sort this out. Recon.Army (talk) 16:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

With respect to the article title and content, it may be appropriate to have a list of active ships separate from a general list of ships. I'm not sure though as I don't know much about naval articles on Wikipedia. The people at WikiProject Ships and WikiProject Military History might be better suited to resolve much of this.

Recon, please refrain from calling Hornet's edits vandalism; only deliberate attempts to damage the integrity of Wikipedia should be called vandalism, and I see no evidence that Hornet's edits qualify as vandalism. Persisting in calling Hornet's edits here vandalism qualifies as a personal attack. Hornet's edits are out of frustration and may be disruptive but are not vandalism.

Hornet, your edits are not in line with Wikipedia editing guidelines in multiple respects. We need consistency between articles, and while sourcing is clearly a problem in this article, your edits are not improving things.

May I suggest you both take a look at List of current ships of the United States Navy as an example of what a "current ships" article for the Russian Navy might look like? Note the inline references (i.e., every single entry has a reference right there). I think that if this sort of format develops, we should be able to rapidly develop a decent and properly sourced list article. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 17:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I understand your point on Hornets edits as not being Vandalism. You may of mis-read what I wrote, the List of active ships of the Russian Navy and a genural list of every ship ever in service in the Russian Navy are seperate.For example;

• List of active ships of the Russian Navy - For a list of currently active ships of the Russian navy
• List of ships of the Russian Navy - for a genural list of links to all types of ships ever in service in the Russian navy

It is the latter article List of ships of the Russian Navy that Hornet has been disrupting. Hornet feels he can edit in any infomation he thinks of and provide no refs for this infomation. Recon.Army (talk) 17:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Well... as to the naming dispute, I think you're in the right as far as standard practices are concerned Recon. The list of active ships belongs at an article with a title that indicates that, and the general "list of ships" article should be a disambiguation page essentially.

As to the sourcing problem... I think once we remove the issue of where the information belongs, you'd still be left with a dispute over sourcing. Hornet, I can tell you that if you're going to add new information to articles, you need to cite your sources with reference tags. See WP:CITING for more information on how to cite sources. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 17:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Advisory - posted on all related talkpages:

Right guys, slow down and consider things. I've merged the 'active ships' page, which is a WP:CFORK. As you will see from the AN/I thread note I posted, both Russian and Western navies have different ideas about whether a ship is actually in service or not. Recon.Army, warfare.ru is just another source - we cannot accept it as superior to Jane's or whatever else is being used. The proper route is to add the status-disputed ships you want to add to List of ships of the Russian Navy and to list explicitly there which source says so. Then readers get a flavour of the difficulties involved in counting operational ships - I doubt Headquarters Northern Fleet's assessment would match what U.S. Naval Intelligence would list or what JAne's would list; they all have different standards!! I will copy this to the other person involved in the dispute, and advise you both to use Talk:List of ships of the Russian Navy to work out problem issues. I know the Russian Navy's status reasonably well - I've published articles on it - and am quite happy to help you two work out areas where your two sources of information may contradict each other. Golden rule: list both sets of information, with the source attached, and let the reader figure it out - they're intelligent enough to know we may not all have a full picture. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)