User talk:Metaspheres
Welcome!
Hello, Metaspheres, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 23:07, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
You voted keep on the deletion vote. Cyde deleted it when the votes for either opinion were equal which is quiet bbizarre. If it is ok with you then let's take it to deletion review? Hope to here from you asap. Unitedroad 06:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you[edit]
I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your confidence in me at RFA, and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! -- nae'blis 23:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Conference pic[edit]
Your addition of the anti-Semitic articles on display at that wretched conference has been reverted. I agree that the picture is damning, but the caption states the materials were from the conference, and that is not true. They were actually on one of the denier's writing tables at the guest house of the Iranian Foreign Ministry. Please see the article discussion page for more info on the image. Jeffpw 11:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I closed your complaint, because no personal attacks, as described at WP:NPA had taken place. In fact, both users dealt with you in a civil manner, which is realistically all we can ask between parties involved in a disagreement. Mangojuicetalk 17:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thought I'd look into things more carefully. Yes, I see your point about the edit summaries, but still, those are comments that sharply criticize your edits, they don't criticize you directly, so they aren't personal attacks. Furthermore, your edit summaries are similar -- now that you see how they can feel to the other side, I hope you'll reconsider that kind of edit summary in the future. However, it's pretty obvious that things have gotten pretty heated in this dispute. Still, calling Haiduc's inclusion of his view of the dispute on the LGBT page (in a signed comment) harassment is going over the line: there is a dispute, that section of the page is for listing disputes, and the listing didn't comment on you. Harassment is a very serious accusation -- to me, what would establish it is another editor's pattern of following you from page to page, including to unrelated edits you're involved in to oppose and frustrate you. If you think this is really going on, could you show me in more detail? What I saw was a conflict in which both sides were active -- just because you were the only one on your side doesn't mean they were harassing you. Mangojuicetalk 20:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Jay, an editor of the Walk-in article. You've put up a copyright violation tag on that article, apparently under a misapprehension that the content was lifted from Crystalinks, a New Age website.
In my experience, the usual procedure or etiquette when thinking of applying a tag to an article is to discuss it on the talk page for that article first. I'm sure that if you had brought it up there,, you would have found out that it was Crystalinks that reprinted (with credit, at the bottom) the Wikipedia article, not the other way around.
Please come into Talk:Walk-in and discuss this with me and the others who have worked on this article. Also, check the page history for the article. I want to work something out so that we can notify the administrators before the article gets deleted. Also, please feel free to contact me through my talk page. This is very easily resolved. --Bluejay Young 20:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am contacting all non-anonymous editors who participated in the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Québécois. It has been very difficult achieving consensus on the appropriate scope of the article, and the use of the word Québécois in a series of articles proposed by one editor. I am requesting input at Talk:Québécois. Joeldl 23:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Holocaustconference.JPG[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Holocaustconference.JPG, which you've attributed to http://web.archive.org/web/20061225172441/http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/2006December/contents_articles_Guest.htm. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Category:Free encyclopedias has been nominated for discussion[edit]
Category:Free encyclopedias, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2019 (UTC)