User talk:Top Gun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'Bold text'Welcome!

Hello, Top Gun, 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:

• 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!  Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 03:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Hi Top Gun, Please provide WP:References when updating information like the casualty count, especially if it may be controversial. Feel free to ask me about this or anything else on Wikipedia. Happy editing, Tewfik^Talk 01:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Don't revert when a change points to Talk

Dear Top Gun, within a minute of my change of the section head "Results of the conflict" in 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict to "Initial reviews of the conflict after the ceasefire', you just changed it back. As I had referred that change to an explanation in Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, you should at least have read my explanation, and also commented on it, before reverting. I know you're new to Wikipedia, so you may not be aware of the expected conduct of editors. I therefore urge you to read and absorb the Wikipedia etiquette guideline. Best regards Thomas Blomberg 16:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Ramadi-insurgent3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ramadi-insurgent3.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:110306_iraq.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:110306_iraq.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Edits to Coalition casualties in Afghanistan

Hi there, thanks for contributing to the page Coalition casualties in Afghanistan. Please do not include US soldiers killed outside Afghanistan. These deaths belong under Op Enduring Freedom. I have requested a Semi protect on that page, and you will be unable to edit until you register with wikipedia. Any questions, please discuss on the talk page. Motorfix 01:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss changes on the talk page for Coalition casualties in Afghanistan...be patient and lets not start an edit war here. Once there is a consensus weither to include non Afghanistan deaths, then make changes. Until then, propose your definition on that talk page, and everybody can add their input. Cheers! Motorfix 12:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to 2001 war in Afghanistan

Thank you for experimenting with the page 2001 war in Afghanistan on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 01:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 08:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

I don't know if this is the same person, but I wanted to know if you had a source for this edit. Let me know please, Tewfik^Talk 16:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fine work

nice job at updating the page on Operation Together Forward you did it all quite accurately and greatly improved the conflict’s page. Please continue to edit on Wikipedia your contributions are indeed valued.Freepsbane 00:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello again, you have done a fine job gathering sources for the noted battle articles. however they still lack sources for casualties and results and also still tell the events from a single organizations POV; this for the moment prevents them from being “front row” articles. However they have been much improved with your help, and if you wish as soon as a complete other tasks I could aid in rewriting the articles and gathering further sources. Thank you for your patience Freepsbane 22:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah and I forgot here

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Awarded for numerous invaluable contributions to recent military history articles Freepsbane 22:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:BFM4 05 400px.jpg

GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know?

On 10 December 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Mosul (2004), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: New battle to add to the Iraq war campaignbox

Well, I'm not an expert on the war by any stretch of the imagination, so I can't really comment on the substance of the proposal; but, as long as good sources can be found, I can't see any problem with it in principle. Kirill Lokshin 22:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I strongly agreee

I strongly agree, it's not original research - to use published casualty reports to list actual names. I can't swear it's 20, 23 or 33 right now, I can just take your word for the Ramadi/Husaybah deaths, but I assume that it's legitimate. No matter what though, the absolute maximum of possible deaths would be 53, the 83 number is complete bullshit by a journalist who didn't factcheck. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 01:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from calling other users shortsighted or blind[1] [2]and avoid dealing with them in a confrontational manner. And please don’t mess with my signature. Freepsbane 01:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] arbitration process

Hi, noticed your request on Fred's talk page. You can find the arbitration process described at WP:RFAR and the dispute resolution options at WP:DR. ... aa:talk 02:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

A request would be filed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration Fred Bauder 02:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quick question

You have the names of the disputed six guys who belonged to battle groups not in Fallujah? Thanks Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 06:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:2006 12 08t055728 450x331 us iraq basra.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:2006 12 08t055728 450x331 us iraq basra.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 03:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SockPuppet

It has been established that you engaged in sockpuppetry by evidence presented here: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Top Gun.

User:MarshabannanaAKAMarshalbannana•User talk:Marshalbannana(UTC)Marshalbannana 22:07, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Hue City

The article that you recently created, Battle of Hue City, is about the same topic as the article Battle of Hue. You should merge the content of your article into the older article. DHN 08:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of talkpage warnings

Hello! You've removed a recently added user warning template from your user or user talk page. This tends to give the impression that you didn't read it. User warning templates contain valuable information and although you may disagree, it's best if you consider them. Thank you. Marshalbannana 17:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fallujah

Yeah, it's good to be able to shrug off one annoying editor, and get consensus to follow common sense - I think the First Battle of Fallujah article is about as good as it can get now, unless a lot more information becomes available in the future - but it pretty much covers everything the media ever reported on (woefully little, of course). I'm hoping to find another "similarly pivotal" battle to focus my attentions on next, rather than just one of those 12-48 hour skirmishes that the war seems to be made up of.

In a mostly-unrelated matter, I'd appreciate your opinions on Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Blackwater, about the template I created and used in Fallujah, First Battle of Fallujah, United States occupation of Fallujah, Iraq War and elsewhere. There's a handful of "delete" votes at the moment, but even if you disagree on the "exception to the rule" being helpful, I'd still rather hear the opinions of somebody I know works on these articles, rather than just the drones who troll the "deletion pages" all day. Much thanks. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 01:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous vote at WP:IFD

Excuse me, but are you 87.116.171.227? If yes, you might want to fix your duplicate keep vote at the IFD debate of Image:Sadrprotest.jpg (and if you’re often editing anonymously, consider noting that on your user page—it looks odd when an anon signs for a user…). —xyzzy_n 14:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iraq Spring Fighting

I added a "Strong Keep" to the page on the article. The votes support keeping it so far, so hopefully it'll stay that way. Defenestrating Monday 23:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright issue with The Battle for Haifa Street

Hello. Concerning your contribution, The Battle for Haifa Street, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16600849/site/newsweek/. As a copyright violation, The Battle for Haifa Street appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. The Battle for Haifa Street has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:The Battle for Haifa Street. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at The Battle for Haifa Street, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. John Reaves 11:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
You have now violated Wikipedia's copyright policy, by adding copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, after being told not to do so. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked. Original contributions are welcome, however any further copyright violations may result in your account being blocked. John Reaves 12:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Battle for Haifa Street

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. -- Chris 73 | Talk 13:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I want to create The Battle for Haifa Street without plaigarizing. Don't know much about, but it's notable, historical, and interesting. ^_^ --125.60.248.139 23:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to create the article, just don't plagiarize as you have been doing. Lifting direct portions of text from the Newsweek article will just get it deleted again. Just so you know, I'm not an administrator, I just tagged it for deletion. John Reaves 03:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

a) The topic is important, and should have an article. b) You have a history of stealing content from other websites, and even the last version of the article contained text directly from msnbc. You have been warned numerous times by many other editors about images and texts which are copyrigted, yet you keep on adding copyrighted info from other sites (i.e. stealing intellectual property). Wiggling a few words in the text does not change that. Please write something on your own from scratch, otherwise you will be blocked again and your contributions deleted. -- Chris 73 | Talk 08:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Man, Chris. Can't you find a nicer way to express WP:AGF? Top Gun isn't deliberately trying to disrupt things. Can you please give Top Gun guidelines and point out his errors without rubbing in that he's been repeatedly warned? --125.60.248.139 09:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Great article! --125.60.248.139 09:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Hue

You have reverted my removal of a plagiarised paragraph from Battle of Hue. As you know, the copyright policy forbids inserting content into articles which is copyrighted and not licensed under the GFDL. I am going to remove the paragraph again. If you can prove it is usable in the article, I advise you to do so on the talk page; otherwise, please do not add it. In general, always use your own words for writing articles instead of copying from websites or other sources, unless you are certain the content is licensed under the GFDL. Please do read Wikipedia’s policies on content and the articles on copyright issues carefully. —xyzzy_n 16:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Image deletion

I have lots of better things to do, but I’d like this project to succeed, so, among other things, I try to make sure that it contains no copyright infringement. Since I do other things as well, I cannot be even-handed, but when I notice that somebody has uploaded a lot of images that should be deleted, I make an effort to check whether other images might also be affected, as is the case with your images. For the record, I have fixed the source information in one image and am still doing research on three others.

I haven’t nominated for deletion the images of those dozens of other editors you mention because I do not know who they are and I don’t have the time to look for them. This has nothing to do with you personally and everything with your tendency of plagiarism. Stop that and I’ll go do something else. —xyzzy_n 20:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iraqi insurgents

It does not matter if a news agency is using the image or not or how long it has been on Wikipedia. The fact is the image is copyrighted by a news agency and news agencies make their money by selling such images. That is why Wikipedia has strong guidelines against using news agency images and it just took folks a while to find this image. After looking at the image and how it was being used in the articles it was linked to, I found nothing compelling about the image and there was no commentary relating to the image. I even found the images location in some of the articles out of context. Removing the image had no detrimental impact to the article. If you want to appeal my decision, please request a deletion review -Nv8200p talk 16:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Story.fallujah.tues.2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Story.fallujah.tues.2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —xyzzy_n 18:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:05ramadi_pageone.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:05ramadi_pageone.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —xyzzy_n 19:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Battle-1t.jpg

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Battle-2t.jpg

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Battle-3t.jpg

[edit] Iraq and WoT

As a part of the Terrorism and Counter Terrorism project, I invite you to participate in discussion on the topic of the relationship between the Iraq War and the US-led War on Terrorism campaign at this location. ~Rangeley (talk) 02:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Story.fallujah.tues.2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Story.fallujah.tues.2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —xyzzy_n 01:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Iraq campaignbox

So {{Campaignbox Iraq War suicide bombings}}, then? That seems reasonable; please don't forget to add it to WP:CAMPAIGN, though. Kirill Lokshin 22:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

That's not really a good idea; you're just making the box even larger, and overly complicated internal breaks are discouraged by the template usage guideline. I'd suggest actually breaking it apart into two (or even three: phases, engagements, bombings) separate campaignboxes instead. Kirill Lokshin 22:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've created:

• {{Campaignbox Iraq War battles}}
• {{Campaignbox Iraq War bombings}}

Please update the operation and bombing pages to include the needed subsidiary campaignbox in addition to the main one (which is just an overview now). Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 22:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

One of the new ones. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 22:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Karbala Raid

I noticed that you created the article Karbala Raid today. As I was making some copyedits, I found that an article on the same topic — Karbala provincial headquarters raid — was created on 26 January 2007. I placed a {{merge}} tag on your article. We should have only one article on the topic. I think that the title of the Jan 26 article is a more specific title; it also has a number of reliable references. — ERcheck (talk) 17:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bombings in Iraq

I've added some to the bombing-box (btw- I have a plan for creating a box for terrorist campaigns!). For some past bombings in Iraq see my old web page: http://terrorism.9f.com/eng.iraq.attacks.htm

It hasn't been updated for a while but you can find old dates and casualty numbers (which I kept pretty accurate) --TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I created a box for terror campaigns, because I think we cannot use the box that was made for battles (not same colour, width etc.. as the terrorism infobox). I would support another idea but not the blue-white campaignbox. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 21:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. the same could be used for the Chechen and Palestinian terror campaigns.. even Albanian. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 21:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Objasni malo bolje, ne vidim smisla u 2 kutijice sa terorističkim napadima. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC) AA mislis 1 kutijica bombaski napadi druga kutijica otmice itd... mmm mislim da to zajednica nece prihvatiti i glasovati ce za spajanje. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

da to se slazem neka ostane kako je (mislim na box na vrhu - mada po meni gubi smisao ali nema veze) --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Sad imamo dve teroristicke kutijice pa plavu treba redirektirati na bež --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe there's an obvious reason why this isn't considered, but... why not just change the terrorist attack infobox to use the same styling as all the military ones? Then, it would be easy to use it with any of the campaignboxes, as needed.

(I am not at all a fan of creating a second, redundant style of campaignbox here, incidentally.) Kirill Lokshin 22:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Link to Template

The point is that the list isn't just of minor operations; note that it's Military operations of the Iraq War, not Minor military operations of the Iraq War. The general idea is like this:

From the main campaignbox:

1. Reader clicks on "Battles and operations".
2. Reader gets sent to list ("overview article") of all battles and operations.
3. Reader finds battle or operation he's interested in:
   • If it's a minor one, all the information is directly in the overview.
   • If it's a major one, he sees a summary and a {{details}} link to a separate article.

From the battle campaignbox:

1. Reader looks for battle/operation he's interested in.
   • If he finds it, he goes directly to it.
   • If he doesn't find it, he clicks on "Full list of operations" and proceeds from step 2 above.

In general, a full overview article is better than trying to sort things into "major" and "minor" operations. We already have the subsidiary campaignbox for the most major ones (and it's prominently displayed at the top of the overview list, incidentally); it's reasonable to expect that readers interested in some particular event can just find it in the list, rather than wandering between different templates. Kirill Lokshin 18:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

There isn't one; if you actually go to the article, you'll notice that what appears to be the template's link to it in other articles shows up simply as bolded text there. Kirill Lokshin 21:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terror in Iraq

Dobar posao :) malo sam sredio kategorije i pogotovo Imam Ali Mosque bombing. Mislim da bi jos od starijih napada trebalo obraditi onaj o auto bombi na Crveni Krst i Jordansku ambasadu, sto mozes vidjeti na listi na mojem veb linku, koji sam uostalom dodao na Bombings and terrorist attacks of the Iraq War, pod external links--TheFEARgod (Ч) 23:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

da ti olaksam, dodao sam crvene linkove u Bombings and terrorist attacks of the Iraq War --TheFEARgod (Ч) 23:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Karbala provincial headquarters raid sources

Hi,

I have been unable to find sources to support two of the facts in the text you added. If you have them, please provide them.

1. The attackers "first used flash grenades to confuse the Americans." -- although I don't think this is untrue, I haven't been able to find a source for it.
2. "They pulled two soldiers out of an armored Humvee at the entrance. They then proceded to storm into a room where Americans and Iraqis were making the security plans, capturing two more soldiers." -- this CNN article reverses the order of events.

The attackers threw a grenade and opened fire with automatic rifles as they grabbed two soldiers inside the compound. Then the insurgent assault team jumped on top of an armored U.S. Humvee and captured two more soldiers, the U.S. military officials said.

Thanks, Black Falcon 23:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Great! I think everything in the article is sourced now. I made some minor stylistic changes (mostly deleting redundant <ref>s and moving one sentence for sentence flow). Thank you for all the effort--I think we have a more comprehensive and better article now--and it was a pleasure editing with you. Cheers, Black Falcon 03:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Work on List of Insurgent Dead

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For back-filling(and eye-straining) work on the List of Insurgents killed in Iraq. Nice work so far on this repetitive task. Publicus 21:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please DO NOT use cut&paste to move articles--use the Move tab

Cut&paste separates the article edits from their history, violating the GFDL licence, and causing a lot of work for other people to clean up the mess. If you have used cut&paste to move other articles, that haven't been fixed, you should report them to Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. 76.22.4.86 21:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Husaybah

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Battle of Husaybah. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Your original contributions are welcome. John Reaves (talk) 04:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stop arguing

Stop arguing and start asking for help on how you can work with other editors to make sure that you don't infringe on copyright. It is much more important to avoid copyright problems than it is to expand an article immediately. If you can't do this, we will have to block this account. Respect for copyright is not negotiable. Jkelly 02:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll make a suggestion. You are apparantly very good at finding news stories and other reliable sources to use to expand our articles. The next time you do, instead of adding the material directly, ask one of the editors that you work with often to add the material from the source. Pick someone who you think is a good editor. Watch what they do with the source, how much direct quotation they use, how much paraphrase they use, and how they integrate it into the existing text. Then use that as a model for your own editing. In this way you can avoid causing the alarm that has surrounded your editing. Jkelly 03:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Do not, ever, copy text from copyrighted sources. Not even if you’re going to alter it. Since I’m here again, this is your notification that I’m tagging Battle of Husaybah for speedy deletion. My guess is you reposted (nearly) the same content that was deleted the last two times. Anyway, you copied sentences straight from [3] and possibly other places and I can’t be bothered anymore to separate them from the content you wrote yourself or copied from US government websites. —xyzzy_n 03:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You've been blocked before for this and apparently learned nothing from a 24 hour block. This one is longer. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link

Ajde posalji mi odmah link. Onda cu poceti clanak sa kutijicom i stub-om --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked indefinitely

Checkuser has confirmed you have evaded your block to continue adding copyvios; therefore you are now blocked indefinitely. To contest this block please stick {{unblock}} to your talk page; however, you must agree to be done with this behaviour. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Your indefinite block is lifted, on parole, after you have promised not to add any more copyrighted text to Wikipedia. You may be immediately and indefinitely reblocked in the event of any further copyvio edits, vandalism or other infractions. Do not remove this message from your talk page. Request handled by: Sandstein 21:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Note For Top Gun and the reviewing admin, the discussions and specific copyvio accusations are at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive202#Block_evasion.2C_continuing_copyvio and most recently[4] from [5]. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Note on the request: I’d trade the apologies for some indication of understanding of what’s wrong with copying from news agency reports and miscellaneous websites and a credible promise never to do it again. As for the mess that needs to be cleaned up, per the Wikipedia:Copyrights policy, material that infringes on others’ copyright must be removed. This includes material that has since been modified. See the mess now? —xyzzy_n 05:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Again?

You promised that you would not add further copyrighted text to articles. What do you call [6] (from [7])? If I see another one of those, I’ll ask for a new indefinite block. When reporting what has been reported in secondary sources, do so in your own words or post the source on the talk page and ask others to do so; do not copy sentences from a copyrighted source. —xyzzy_n 00:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

And what about [8] (from [9])? —xyzzy_n 19:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irak

Vidi:

Slazem se s tobom. Ali:

• Ukljuci u jedan clanak sve bombe (samoubilačke i druge), takodjer na tvoj spisak dodaj linkove za velike napade, tamo gdje nedostaju
• Neka clanak Terrorist attacks of the Iraq War pokriva sve, kao na šablonu (sredio sam malo)
• Neka campaignbox ostane ovakav kakav je (veci teroristicki napadi)

--TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] kutijice

Mislim da bi trebao znati, zele da obrisu [10] nase kutijice za napade u Iraku, Indoneziji, Čečeniji... dobro bi došao jedan glas s tvoje strane. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 10:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Campaignbox al-Qaeda attacks

Template:Campaignbox al-Qaeda attacks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --— Indon (reply) — 15:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reference

Nemoj stavljati reference od yahoo-a i reuters-a one nakon nekog vremena nestaju. Najsigurnije su BBC i Aljazeera --TheFEARgod (Ч) 09:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Insurgents killed in Iraq

Since you seem to be interested in this article (as I see is noted above) could you please keep an eye on it? User:Accountready is deleting a section List_of_Insurgents_killed_in_Iraq#2007, apparently as part of deleting links to various news sources (e.g. Reuters !) Anyway, his edit summaries have been bogus elsewhere, but because he again mentioned broken links I did "due diligence" and checked January/February links. Of the 27 February links, 4 don't work right now. I've noted which in an inline comment. March still needs to be checked. That alone would still not be a reason to delete the section. Can you think of any reason? Shenme 06:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Chewie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chewie.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:42711911 militants ap203body.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:42711911 militants ap203body.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. 19:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Maravar Battle

I know copyright law is complicated, but copying a text, then altering a few words, is not enough to stop it being a copyright violation. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• The best way to avoid copyright violations is to make bullet point notes while reading the sources, then write the article in your own words based on the notes. That way you are very unlikely to copy the original text unless you have a very good memory, in which you should probably wait a few days so you can forget the original source before writing it. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)