User talk:RightCowLeftCoast

ged

well i am trying to get my ged and need to know what philipians are please help me.....(6/29/11)

The Right Stuff: September 2011

September 2011

FROM THE EDITOR

An Historic Milestone

By Lionelt

Welcome to the inaugural issue of The Right Stuff, the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. The Project has developed at a breakneck speed since it was created on February 12, 2011 with the edit summary, "Let's roll!" With over 50 members the need for a project newsletter is enormous. With over 3000 articles to watch, an active talk page and numerous critical discussions spread over various noticeboards, it has become increasingly difficult to manage the information overload. The goal of The Right Stuff is to help you keep up with the changing landscape.

The Right Stuff is a newsletter consisting of original reporting. Writers will use a byline to "sign" their contributions. Just as with The Signpost, "guidelines such as 'no ownership of articles', and particularly 'no original research', will not necessarily apply."

WikiProject Conservatism has a bright future ahead: this newsletter will allow us tell the story. All that's left to say is: "Let's roll!"

PROJECT NEWS

New Style Guide Unveiled

By Lionelt

A new style guide to help standardize editing was rolled out. It focuses on concepts, people and organizations from a conservatism perspective. The guide features detailed article layouts for several types of articles. You can help improve it here. The Project's Article Collaboration currently has two nominations, but they don't appear to be generating much interest. You can get involved with the Collaboration here.

I am pleased to report that we have two new members: Rjensen and Soonersfan168. Rjensen is a professional historian and has access to JSTOR. Soonersfan168 says he is a "young conservative who desires to improve Wikipedia!" Unfortunately we will be seeing less of Geofferybard, as he has announced his semi-retirement. We wish him well. Be sure to stop by their talk pages and drop off some Wikilove.

---

ARTICLE REPORT

3,000th Article Tagged

By Lionelt

On August 3rd Peter Oborne, a British journalist, became the Project's 3,000th tagged article. It is a tribute to the membership that we have come this far this quickly. The latest Featured Article is Richard Nixon. Our congratulations to Wehwalt for a job well done. The article with the most page views was Rick Perry with 887,389 views, not surprising considering he announced he was running for president on August 11th. Follwing Perry were Michele Bachmann and Tea Party movement. The Project was ranked 75th based on total edits, which is up from 105th in July. The article with the most edits was Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 with 374 edits. An RFC regarding candidate inclusion criteria generated much interest on the talk page.

Project

Portal

Join

Archives

Newsroom

Subscribe

Suggestions

The Right Stuff: October 2011

October 2011

INTERVIEW

An Interview with Dank

By Lionelt

The Right Stuff caught up with Dank, the recently elected Lead Coordinator of WikiProject Military History. MILHIST is considered by many to be one of the most successful projects in the English Wikipedia.

Q: Tell us a little about yourself.
A: I'm Dan, a Wikipedian since 2007, from North Carolina. I started out with an interest in history, robotics, style guidelines, and copyediting. These days, I'm the lead coordinator for the Military History Project and a reviewer of Featured Article Candidates. I've been an administrator and maintained WP:Update, a summary of policy changes, since 2008.

Q: What is your experience with WikiProjects?
A: I guess I'm most familiar with WP:MILHIST and WP:SHIPS, and I'm trying to get up to speed at WP:AVIATION. I've probably talked with members of most of the wikiprojects at one time or another.

Q: What makes a WikiProject successful?
A: A lot of occasional contributors who think of the project as fun rather than work, a fair number of people willing to write or review articles, a small core of like-minded people who are dedicated to building and maintaining the project, and access to at least a few people who are familiar with reviewing standards and with Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

Q: Do you have any tips for increasing membership?
A: Aim for a consistent, helpful and professional image. Let people know what the project is doing and what they could be doing, but don't push.

If you've got a core group interested in building a wikiproject, it helps if they do more listening than talking at first ... find out what people are trying to do, and offer them help with whatever it is. Some wikiprojects build membership by helping people get articles through the review processes.

---

DISCUSSION REPORT

Abortion Case Plods Along

By Lionelt

The arbitration request submitted by Steven Zhang moved into its second month. The case, which evaluates user conduct, arose from contentious discussions regarding the naming of the Pro-life and Pro-choice articles, and a related issue pertaining to the inclusion of "death" in the lede of Abortion. A number of members are involved. On the Evidence page ArtifexMahem posted a table indicating that DMSBel made the most edits to the Abortion article. DMSBel has announced their semi-retirement. Fact finding regarding individual editor behavior has begun in earnest on theWorkshop page.

Last month it was decided that due to the success of the new Dispute Resolution Noticeboard the Content Noticeboard would be shut down. Wikiquette Assistance will remain active. The DRN is primarily intended to resolve content disputes.

---

PROJECT NEWS

Article Incubator Launched

By Lionelt

Was your article deleted in spite of your best efforts to save it? You should consider having a copy restored to the Incubator where project members can help improve it. Upon meeting content criteria, articles are graduated to mainspace. The Incubator is also ideal for collaborating on new article drafts. Star Parker is the first addition to the incubator. The article was deleted per WP:POLITICIAN.

WikiProject Conservatism is expanding. We now have a satellite on Commons. Any help in categorizing images or in getting the fledgling project off the ground is appreciated.

We have a few new members who joined the project in September. Please give a hearty welcome to Conservative Philosopher, Screwball23 and Regushee by showing them some Wikilove. Screwball23 has been on WikiPedia for five years and has made major improvements to Linda McMahon. Regushee is not one for idle chit chat: an amazing 93% of their edits are in article space.

Project

Portal

Join

Archives

Newsroom

Subscribe

Suggestions

The Right Stuff: November 2011

August 2018

PROJECT NEWS

WikiProject Conservatism faces the ultimate test

By Lionelt

On October 7, WikiProject Conservatism was nominated for deletion by member Binksternet. He based his rationale on what he described as an undefinable scope, stating that the project is "at its root undesirable". Of the 40 participants in the discussion, some agreed that the scope was problematic; however, they felt it did not justify deletion of the project. A number of participants suggested moving the project to "WikiProject American conservatism". The overwhelming sentiment was expressed by Guerillero who wrote: "A project is a group of people. This particular group does great work in their topic area[,] why prevent them from doing this[?]" In the end there was negligible opposition to the project and the result of the discussion was "Keep". The proceedings of the deletion discussion were picked up by The Signpost, calling the unfolding drama "the first MfD of its kind". The Signpost observed that attempting to delete an active project was unprecedented. The story itself became a source of controversy which played out at the Discuss This Story section, and also at the author's talk page.

Two days after the project was nominated, the Conservatism Portal was also nominated for deletion as "too US-biased". There was no support for deletion amongst the 10 participants, with one suggestion to rename the portal.

In other news, a new portal focusing on conservatism has been created at WikiSource. Wikisource is an online library of free content publications with 254,051 accessible texts. One highlight of the portal's content is Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke.

October saw a 6.4% increase in new members, bringing the total membership to 58. Seven of the eight new members joined after October 12; the deletion discussions may have played a role in the membership spike. Mwhite148 is a member of the UK Conservative Party. Stating that he is not a conservative, Kleinzach noted his "lifetime interest in British, European and international politics." Let's all make an effort to welcome the new members with an outpouring of Wikilove.

Click here to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism.

---

DISCUSSION REPORT

Timeline of conservatism is moved

By Lionelt

Timeline of conservatism, a Top-importance list, was nominated for deletion on October 3. The nominator stated that since conservatism in an "ambiguous concept", the timeline suffers from original research. There were a number of "Delete", as well as "Keep" votes. The closing administrator reasoned that consensus dictated that the list be renamed. The current title is Timeline of modern American conservatism.

Project

Portal

Join

Archives

Newsroom

Subscribe

Suggestions

The Right Stuff: January 2012

January 2012

ARTICLE REPORT

Wikipedia's Newest Featured Portal: Conservatism

By Lionelt

On January 21, The Conservatism Portal was promoted to Featured Portal (FP) due largely to the contributions of Lionelt. This is the first Featured content produced by WikiProject Conservatism. The road to Featured class was rocky. An earlier nomination for FP failed, and in October the portal was "Kept" after being nominated for deletion.

Member Eisfbnore significantly contributed to the successful Good Article nomination of Norwegian journalist and newspaper editor Nils Vogt in December. Eisfbnore also created the article. In January another Project article was promoted to Featured Article. Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias, a president of Brazil, attained Featured class with significant effort by Lecen. The Article Incubator saw its first graduation in November. A collaboration spearheaded by Mzk1 and Trackerseal successfully developed Star Parker to pass the notability guideline.

---

PROJECT NEWS

Project Scope Debated

By Lionelt

Another discussion addressing the project scope began in December. Nine alternatives were presented in the contentious, sometimes heated discussion. Support was divided between keeping the exitsing scope, or adopting a scope with more specificity. Some opponents of the specific scope were concerned that it was too limiting and would adversely affect project size. About twenty editors participated in the discussion.

Inclusion of the article Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was debated. Supporters for inclusion cited sources describing the KKK as "conservative." The article was excluded with more than 10 editors participating.

Project membership continues to grow. There are currently 73 members. Member Goldblooded (pictured) volunteers for the UK Conservative Party and JohnChrysostom is a Christian Democrat. North8000 is interested in libertarianism. We won't tell WikiProject Libertarianism he's slumming. Let's stop by their talkpages and share some Wikilove.

Click here to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism.

DISCUSSION REPORT

Why is Everyone Talking About Rick Santorum?

By Lionelt

Articles about the GOP presidential candidate and staunch traditional marriage supporter have seen an explosion of discussion. On January 8 an RFC was opened (here) to determine if Dan Savage's website link should be included in Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The next day the Rick Santorum article itself was the subject of an RFC (here) to determine if including the Savage neologism was a violation of the BLP policy. Soon after a third was opened (here) at Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality. This RFC proposes merging the neologism article into the controversy article.

The Abortion case closed in November after 15 weeks of contentious arbitration. The remedies include semi-protection of all abortion articles (numbering 1,500), sanctions for some editors including members of this Project, and a provision for a discussion to determine the names of what are colloquially known as the pro-life and pro-choice articles. The Committee endorsed the "1 revert rule" for abortion articles.

Project

Portal

Join

Archives

Newsroom

Subscribe

Suggestions

This is a crime

There is absolutely nothing to eat on this talk page. You must be starving. Here, I know it isn't Friday, but munch on this:

Lionelt has given you a McDonald's Filet-O-Fish sandwich! Filet-O-Fish sandwiches are very popular during Lent and promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Filet-O-Fish sandwich, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of Filet-O-Fish sandwiches by adding {{subst:Filet-O-Fish}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Image galleries

In accordance with WP:Galleries, I have removed the unit crests at Distinctive unit insignia. If you look at Category:Wikipedia image galleries, you'll see it's duplicating a number of existing image gallery articles, all of which, in accordance with WP:Galleries, should be on Commons (eg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Field_Army_insignia_of_the_United_States_Army). Buckshot06 (talk) 03:11, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. When you recently edited 40th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (United States), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 40th Infantry Division (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

This was a very poor edit. We do not include lists of non-notable "victims" on Wikipedia per WP:NOTMEMORIAL; and, per Help:Reverting, the reversion tool is to be used only in cases of vandalism or edits which degrade the article in a manner akin to vandalism. If you abuse your revert right it will be revoked. As the editor wishing to depart from project consensus the onus is on you to present compelling reasons in talk to include this material, or to point to such a consensus having already been reached. This you have not done. In the future, you should try to find a compromise version rather than just blind-reverting changes you do not like. Your call. --John (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Please see WP:CIVIL & WP:AVOIDYOU. The above statement does not adhere to either and appears to be a threat against my editing.

The action, (the removal by the above editor) in question, was done boldly and thus is subject to reversion; furthermore, the content was verified by use of reliable sources. If there is consensus for removal of the content, than the content can be removed after a discussion on the talk page per WP:BRD

In the future please do not threaten myself or other editors as have been done above. Further threats maybe reported per normal protocal.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Uh huh. I see bluster but I do not see any substantive response to my concerns. I stand by everything I said. WP:DRNC is an interesting essay which may help you to avoid running into sanctions by repeating your mistake. Again, it is totally up to you how you wish to proceed. I strongly suggest learning from this and improving your adherence to our norms in future if you wish to retain your privileges, but you must do as you see fit. It isn't necessary to send me a {{tb}} template, as I will watch this page. --John (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to the essay. However, the statement above still contains content, being the threat of reduction of editing privileges because the above editor disagrees with a reversion of an edit, that does not appear to adhere to WP:CIVIL. I understand that other editors may disagree with edits from time to time, but that does not mean that editors, especially those entrusted with administrator privileges, should threaten other editors due to disagreements that they may have with one another when those times arise.

Please in the future, refrain from threatening other editors.

If, in regards to this disagreement, a simple please see template was used to direct myself to the discussion that is ongoing at the talk page of the War on Terror article, the incivility would not have been created; the incivility in this case being the threat of reduction of editing ability.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

If you perceive my polite message reminding you of your obligation to adhere to our policies as a threat, that is your problem, not mine. You were wrong to revert me without a rationale based in policy. You were wrong to blanket-revert my changes, rather than the ones you specifically disagreed with. You are wrong on the content issue too, which is ok, but it is not ok to just revert edits you disagree with. If you continue to do this, it is likely your privileges will be restricted. If you wish to avoid this, you should change your editing behaviour. I am not sure why you refer in your message to he War on Terror article, as it was not the one we were discussing. Other than that, I have nothing further to say to you regarding your conduct, and I think you should concentrate on crafting a proper rationale for the material you wish to include in the article, if you still wish it to be included. --John (talk) 17:12, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Please again, see WP:AVOIDYOU, the message above appears to be incivil. I thank other editors in attempting to improve my editing, as I have remained a positive contributor to Wikipedia. That being said, incivility leads others to stop editing and thus reduces the number of positive editors that wikipedia has. In the past I have taken WikiBreaks due to incivility from other editors which negatively impacted my ability to positively contribute to wikipedia as a whole.

Again, please refrain from threatening other editors.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I am intimately familiar with WP:AVOIDYOU; I am not making a personal attack however, as I am not commenting on you but on your edits. Please muse on this distinction; if you are able to learn to take others' criticism of your conduct in your stride, you have the potential to become a better editor. If you are not, you will have a miserable time here and probably end up being blocked. You are free to now have the last word as I will not reply further here, but I undertake to keep an occasional eye on your edits in the future to ensure you do not repeat this sort of behaviour, for your good and that of the encyclopedia. All the best, --John (talk) 17:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:WIKIHOUNDING, please do not as stated above "keep an occasional eye on your edits in the future to ensure you do not repeat this sort of behaviour". Such action would violate WP:CIVIL, and be a determent to my positive contribution to Wikipedia.

Additionally, the previous statements have contained threats, as described at WP:HA#Threats.

As such I will notify the appropriate noticeboard.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2012 Roanoke Obama campaign speech

Hello! Your submission of 2012 Roanoke Obama campaign speech at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Ryan Vesey 04:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of 2012 Roanoke Obama campaign speech for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2012 Roanoke Obama campaign speech is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Roanoke Obama campaign speech until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

That was fast.– Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 04:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Have you seen this {{Infobox speech}}? – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 04:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't. Thanks for letting me know about it.

Also, the image below, is that meant as something like a Barnstar, or a wikicookie?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:50, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Cookie. Take a bite--he's delish.– Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 05:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

← If you believe that this particular speech is worthy of a standalone article, do you also believe we should write a standalone article entitled "corporations are people, my friend"? The phrase gets 56 million Google hits, and 20,000 Google News hits, thus fulfilling the criteria under which you've advocated for the Obama speech article. How about Romney Hood (26 million Google hits, 49,000 Google News hits)? What do you think? MastCell ^Talk 02:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm still interested in your response, if you'd care to provide one. MastCell ^Talk 18:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Notability is to be determined on a case by case basis while looking at the appropriate notability guidelines that cover the subject. I would not object to other users creating articles which they believe are notable; other editors may differ on their opinion, and other may feel strongly enough to bring at article up for AfD due to their opinion. That is all I will say regarding the two subjects which you are inquiring about.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll let you plead the Fifth and draw my own conclusions. MastCell ^Talk 21:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI

An Editor has taken your name here [1] but has not informed you , AS per the ANI policies I am informing you, regards--DBigXray 17:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

You are a STAR!

This may be a little premature, but with the !voting about to close and the Keeps at +2, I'll bet ψ100 wikidollars you get a "No consensus."
– Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 04:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

KEEP! My wikimoney was on No consensus. Impressive save. – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 05:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Although there were statements about the dislike of the "wall of text" and the unnecessary actions of replying to every new !vote that occurred, I believe that the practice helped focus the though process on both sides on why we believed that it should be kept, and they believed it should not be. By discussing their reasoning thoroughly and rebuking that reasoning with a logical argument, it is my belief that is why a KEEP was the outcome rather than no consensus.

Thanks for the acknowledgement by the way, and your continued efforts.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

How did you like the T-shirt I made for you and added to the article? – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 00:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

Hi. When you recently edited Demographics of Filipino Americans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bicol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

You didn't build that page history

I have restored the original creation history at You didn't build that according to your suggestion. Thanks for that. "G6: Deleted to make way for move" is an automatically generated message when an admin moves a page thereby overwriting a redirect (see WP:MOR). Such deletion is necessary to prevent the automatic mixing up of page histories. I apologise on behalf of the MediaWiki developers that it gave you the false impression of a "unilateral" deletion. Deryck C. 08:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Deletion Review of Sandra Fluke

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sandra Fluke. Because you participated in the original deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and a question

With regard to how those who self identify as military experts came to the {{afd}} on articles I started -- I have always been aware that normal and policy-compliant use of deletion sorting could easily explain this, without leveling suggestions of non-policy-compliant off-wiki solicitation of !votes. I too have been unfairly accused of off-wiki solicitation. It it not pleasant.

Thanks for your friendly good faith advice on my suggestion we initiate a new guideline that would cover all extrajudicial captives.

What I was hoping for was that those who read the reasons in User:Geo Swan/BLPs started 2011-02 to 2012-08 would help clarify how we interpret "one event" by taking a stand, like "IMO those are all second events, except being listed on a 'most wanted' list." Or, "IMO 'writing a book' is a second event -- all the other reasons you suggest remain part of the original 'single event'."

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 11:08, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Asian Americans

Thanks for your award from last year [2]. I'm interested in becoming more active on articles about Asian Americans. Could you direct me on how to find articles that need work? I found Asian Americans in arts and entertainment by a fluke. thanks--Aichikawa (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Copied your comment

The discussion on the most decorated person in the Viet Nam War has moved to Talk:Joe Hooper (Medal of Honor) now that Jorge Otero Barreto is no longer in the running. Since I thought it was pertinent, I took the liberty of copying your post to the new discussion (after editing out material pertaining to Sgt Otero).--Lineagegeek (talk) 20:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

RTAFB

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Royal Thai Air Force Bases Petebutt (talk) 00:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Military history of Asian Americans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Argonne Forest

San Diego Comic-Con International (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chuck

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.flickr.com/photos/kristi_decourcy/7565862422/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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-enwikimedia.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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} 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 the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I have emailed the publisher, requesting permission. I am awaiting a response.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Decorations in Viet Nam

My question for you is should this be kept up. I see the dispute tag has once more been removed by Tony the Marine, who apparently thinks recent edits have removed any conflict. I don't agree. On the other hand, I have told him that I think this issue has degenerated into bickering. The poisition of the "removers", if I understand it, is that being the most decorated soldier in the Viet Nam War does not conflict with being called the most decorated soldier in the Viet Nam war. I could agree with this if proper emphasis were given to the "being called" through caveats. None exist in the article at present. I do not believe that the average encyclopedia reader would see this distinction. If this continues, I intent to at least point out that the statement as currently inserted in the article violates WP:MOS. It contains quotation marks and is followed by three cites. None of the cites makes the statment in the article verbatim. Lineagegeek (talk) 22:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest that since there is still disagreement, and thus not consensus (see WP:DEFINECONSENSUS#Not a majority vote), to continue discussing in a a WP:CIVIL manor regarding the concerns that may still exist with the article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Hello. Please stop edit warring on You didn't build that. Also, please do not use misleading edit summaries to hide your are edit warring. Thank you. — goethean ॐ 19:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on You didn't build that. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. aprock (talk) 21:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Please stop making false accusations about me. I have made numerous discussions on the talk page, and see my diffs please

The first was to add references to support the inclusion of the term liberal.

The second was a merger of duplicated content that was found later in the article.

The third was to re-add a word that was removed here.

Two of these can be seen as reversions, IMHO. I will stop editing the article until discussions have completed, I can ask others to please do the same.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:RightCowLeftCoast reported by User:Viriditas (Result: 48h). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:14, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I understand. However, I hope that you please look at other editors actions in tag teaming. Others have stated that their goal is to make this article unbalanced in what they view as making neutral POV by creating an article that is predominately anti-Romney. As I have said, I am no longer going to be editing that article space, and hope that others will take it upon themselves to attempt to keep the article neutral.

Moreover, the reporting editor may have done so, although he was not a participant in the discussion that talk page, or in editing that article, may have reported me due to past uncivil interaction with myself. Although I have explained myself here, and elsewhere, that I was attempting in good faith to support my edits, the reporting editor statement showed that he did not assume good faith regarding my edits by making the statement here. Is this a case of hounding? I do not know, perhaps others may find out.

Let it be known that I have faced personal attacks by other editors during the discussion regarding the article I am voluntarily stating and choosing no longer to edit, and that I have so far been the only one punished, and thus persecuted for my actions. If I continue down this path, I imagine that my account will be martyred.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Obama in Roanoke Virginia July 2012.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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

San Diego Comic-Con International (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mark Schultz and Ben Saunders

List of dams and reservoirs in California (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sweetwater River

San Diego (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to KPBS

Territorial disputes in the South China Sea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Western Pacific

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Criticism of Wikipedia

You commented in the RfD discussion about Criticism of Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 5#Criticism of Wikipedia. That discussion was closed as "moot" due it having been unilaterally converted to an article during the discussion. I chose to boldly implement the apparent consensus of that discussion and the previous discussions linked from it, and reverted it to a disambiguation page. That action has been reverted due to a perceived lack of discussion. I would welcome your comments at Talk:Criticism of Wikipedia to see if consensus can be reached again for an dab page, article or redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 00:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Americans, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Afro-Caribbean and Intermarriage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:29, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Balboa Park

Second Philippine Republic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Benigno Aquino

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:49, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Re your Sept. 23 edits of Cecilia Manguerra Brainard article in Wiki

I'm not good at this, so thanks for your patience. Thanks for removing Notability Tag on Cecilia Manguerra Brainard. Your concerns have been addressed: 1. Article has been edited further to neutral tone; If stripped of too much info, it could turn into a Stub.

2. All but one external link left.

Can the Sept 23 tag be removed?

Thanks again. Palhbooks (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

May I ask you a separate question. I've edited biography of Lina Espina-Moore to address the tag on her article re need for inline citations - the editor who put in that June 2010 tag doesn't seem to be with Wiki any more. How can that tag be removed? Thanks.Palhbooks (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Any editor can remove any tag, if they believe that if the concern has been met, but that isn't stopping other editors from retagging or adding new tags.

May I suggest you join WP:PINOY, and/or WP:WPAA; there maybe other editors there who share your interest who can assist you in your growth as an editor on Wikipedia.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 149th Armor Regiment (United States), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Flares and KQED (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Frederica of Hanover

Hi RightCowLeftCoast. The 3O is mainly about the earlier incivil behaviour of the other editor. I am busy now with an SPI but I refuse to participate while even under your 3O involvement this person keep personally attacking me: diff. If they do not retract these attacks I will not participate in the 3O. By the way the original dispute was about an earlier series of attacks which I removed here. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)