User talk:Technophant

Welcome to my talk page! Please remember to remain civil. Users who wish to insult, harass or battleground may be asked not to edit on my talk page as per wp:userspace guidelines. Due to personal issues, there may unanticipated periods of little or no editing or monitoring. If there's an urgent issue you can email me or Thank one of my edits to trigger an alert.

I'm also working on a laptop with a broken screen on an low-resolution external monitor and sub-broadband internet. If it seems like I'm not willing to read things properly it is more likely an issue of inability to do so. I also often misread statements, especially emotionally-laden ones and it may take several re-readings and time to reflect to comprehend the true meaning.

If you want to know more (out of concern only) I'm willing to talk about it off-wiki. - Technophant (talk) 02:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Melek Taus

Hello. Why the name "Melek Taus" written in Arabic in brackets? The Yazidisdo not write in Arabic. NightShadow23 (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

NightShadow23 - My limited knowledge is that while some Yazidis do read and write mostly the common language is Kurdish. However, since the Iraqi Kurds live in a Arabic language state there's common mention of them in both languages. I recommend posting the Kurdish (or Indo-Iranian) script along side the Arabic. If you still strongly feel that it should be removed please post this question to Talk:Melek Taus. ~Technophant (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Banned users

Due to disruptive edits, insults to myself or others, personal attacks, harassment or other incivility, users QuackGuru, Atlan, BullRangifer, and MrBill3 are indefinitely banned from editing on my talk pages. I had tried to make a "free speech" zone where editing would be allowed, however I no longer wish to do this. I'm done being bullied. I am asking for a mutual WP:IBAN to allow Wikipedia to once again be a safe place from personal attacks and harassment. - ~Technophant (talk) 03:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I have decided to unban all banned editors (User:QuackGuru, User:Atlan, User:BullRangifer, and User:MrBill3) from my talk page. If there's any further problems with inappropriate actions they will be dealt with or ignored. ~Technophant (talk) 20:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	This is a token of appreciation for your work on the ISIS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi pages, where your many contributions have been unfailingly helpful and your vigilance and attention to detail much appreciated. P123ct1 (talk) 20:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't know how much this means to me. I feel like I want to cry. - Technophant (talk) 20:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

P123ct1 What happened to my farewell message on the ISIS talk page? Was it removed? - Technophant (talk) 21:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Why do you ask that question, when the diff you provide shows you obviously know the answer? Article talk pages are for discussing the article, not melodramatic retirement messages.--Atlan (talk) 22:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I never even saw it on the page, but Atlan removed it on 24 July at 2.54 UTC saying, "This page is not for goodbye messages". Please reconsider resigning - after all, the block decision has not been settled yet, has it? It would be a pity to let one bad experience on one Wikipedia page stop you editing altogether. As you said, you had such a good experience on our pages, so why not on possibly countless others in the future? I can understand exactly why you feel as you do (...) but as I said before I really think the trouble stems from the subject. I still can't find my long post, but someone on the Help Desk has told me how I might track it down. Does this ban mean you can't even go to the ISIS/al-Baghdadi pages? (Gone midnight here in the UK.) --P123ct1 (talk) 23:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

user:P123ct1 My topic ban only pertains to the area of alternative medicine, specifically acupuncture, so areas pertaining to ISIS, Iraq, and middle-eastern studies are perfectly ok as far as I know. Atlan Your reason for removal of my talk page entry mentioned re my farewell notice is not sustained by PAG. There is no such thing as wp:nofarewells but there are WP:PRINCIPLES. I recommend you restore the edit and the help desk. I am the most experienced contributor on the ISIS page and part of most every discussion regarding sources, PAG etc. Notifying the ISIS team about my block/ban/resignation is appropriate and relevant to the growth of the article. Congratulating fellow contributors is appropriate as well. Please don't try to "make me disappear". No good can come from this. - Technophant (talk) 01:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

It's not an appropriate place for a farewell message, plain and simple. There is no such thing as an "ISIS team" that needs to know what you are doing at all times. You are not the "most experienced contributor" on the ISIS page, at least not by any way I can measure that (not that it matters). The way you're putting it, it would seem the ISIS page should fall into chaos once the great Technophant stops editing there. While I certainly think you are a positive force on the ISIS pages, you are greatly exaggerating your influence there. And why would you want a farewell message anyway? It seems to me that once unblocked, you would gladly go back to editing there.--Atlan (talk) 10:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

There's no WP:Nofarewells but there is WP:DFTD which may be a reason some people don't look kindly on publicized farewell messages. I don't like that essay myself, and my favorite essay on the subject isn't on Wikipedia at all: meatball:GoodBye. ~Adjwilley (talk) 03:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

user:P123ct1, I know this whole block/ban thing seems confusing. It is to me as well. Editors have just as much right as admins to make add your opinions regarding policies, blocks, bans, and noticeboard discussions. You can also try to bring this issue to the awareness of other editors or the community at large as long as you follow the wp:canvassing guidelines. I'm very proud of you P, you've shown a lot of heart and determination. My ability to edit is confined to my talk page for as long as the block lasts, however I'm free to edit any other Wikimedia project including Commons. Keep up the good work, I hope to be back soon. - Technophant (talk) 01:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I am horrified at Atlan's unkind words. I some time ago came to the conclusion (from looking at other user pages and talk pages) that Wikipedia can be a snakepit. It almost put me off editing once. I cannot imagine what it must be like being at the receiving end of such unpleasantness. --P123ct1 (talk) 15:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I said he is a positive force on the ISIS page, but that he is exaggerating this fact. First as leverage for an unblock, then as a reason for special treatment on the article talk page. Oh my how unkind. I'm quite the snake.--Atlan (talk) 07:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipe>゜Ͻ～～～～～～ - Technophant (talk) 14:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Atlan I was referring to your hostile tone. --P123ct1 (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I am predisposed to sarcasm and I am also not one to mince words, but don't mistake that for hostility please.--Atlan (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Not mincing words is fine - I agree with that - though sarcasm can be hurtful! But I take your point - P123ct1 (talk) 21:14, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

@User:P123ct1 Due to politics that are beyond my understanding and control I will not be coming back to edit ISIS or any other pages anytime in the near future. My farewell was NOT insincere, was NOT directing anger at other editors and I would like you to restore the banned user Atlan's bad faith removal. If you don't feel comfortable with that please restate my farewell and thanks in your own words. Thx. - - Technophant (talk) 04:48, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

@User:Technophant I am sorry to hear the trouble continues; I was hoping you would be back soon. I have written a message on the ISIS Talk page, saying more or less what you said - are you able to read it? I am a little nervous about getting you into even deeper water here. I have been having trouble of my own, arising from a disagreement I had with an editor over a very contentious edit in ISIS; you can read about it on the Talk page. It had massive fall-out for the editor concerned! Look forward to hearing from you. --P123ct1 (talk) 07:13, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

@P123ct1 mmmkay, lots to consider here. Yes I can read any page I wish, however I can only edit this one. First your edit: "Technophant has been away from this page for some time now and perhaps other editors have noticed his absence. He has decided to reitre from editing on Wikipedia owing to a topic ban he has had from editing on alternative medicine. He passes on his congratulations to the editors who have been working on the ISIS article for their efforts in improving it and says that working on this page with others been one of the best experiences he has had editing in Wikipedia. I shall miss him on the ISIS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi pages, as he was a tireless contributor, always helpful to others and found many ways to improve the article." Actually I'm only considering retiring and I've been informed that I could get unblocked in a few weeks. If that's the case, and the weird gawkers and morbid onlookers take the sage advice of User:BoboMeowCat and User:Dennis Brown for "all involved removed each other's talk pages from their watchlists as a proactive step toward ending all this ongoing drama." then I do want to come back. and btw, I only announced that I was considering retirement, it's obvious that I enjoy contributing and having positive experiences with editors like you on Iraq related pages have somewhat restored my faith that WP CAN be what it it's founders intended it to be (and so much more).

Next take a look at the the list of top contributors on ISIS. There's a problem here - nobody is an admin. On the talk page count, admin User:Dougweller (at #7), seems to have stepped into the role of moderator. It would be best if another experienced editor with a decent reputation, sizable number of contribs, has a good grasp on wp:PAG, etc. is nominated and confirmed to be an admin. It is always best to have an admin(s) on board to block/ban, correct errant contributors and help keep the peace and stability of the article. Things had been flowing along quite well, however due to the number of page views, the subject matter, importance and strong emotions tied to Iraq's history/future problems can/will arise. I think it's acceptable to exceed 1 revert if the editor you are reverting is going against a consensus decision made on the talk page or fails to use the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle system and is disruptive. You can always use the appropriate notice board, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard, WP:AN/3RR WP:COIBOARD, and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard are all good ones for this article. - Technophant (talk) 01:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

P123ct1 Please email me so we can continue our conversation. There's been discussion of putting full page protection on my talk page, something I would support as long as I can continue to work with a small number of productive editors who come here to discuss issues regarding the WikiProjects I'm involved in. - Technophant (talk) 04:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Life Update - 2 weeks post surgery

Animated gif of my lumbar MRI images

I'm in my second week of recovery from a dual-level TLIF lumbar fusion. It's great to the nerves decompressed (and I'm a half-inch taller), however I greatly underestimated how painful and difficult the recovery from this can be. I'm very limited right now as to how long I can stand at the computer. Until I get a replacement laptop screen I'll just need to ration my time and energy. Wikipedia comes second to replying to emails and taking care of myself. I'm inflamed, sore, and hurting not just physically but mentally too. Until the bones actually start to fuse and painful motions are restricted I can expect more pain. I'm working with physical therapists to help stretch and strengthen my hip/core muscles and relearn posture etc. ~Technophant (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back, Technophant, and I hope your recovery is speedy. --P123ct1 (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

My best wishes. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I made an animated gif out my last pre-surgical MRI images. Once I get the disc for my post-surgical CT scans I can make one for that too. ~Technophant (talk) 19:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Quick question & Get Well Soon!

Hello Technophant, thank you for all your contributions to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant! I came by to ask a question about the 2014 American intervention in Iraq; I noticed that the added content expands the conflict and American intervention part of it beyond Iraq and into Syria so I am thinking of a rename perhaps? I'm not much of an expert on this topic but you are, so any thoughts? On second hand I noticed you are going through health issues, hope all is well, recovery can be a tough phase following a major surgery! Be strong, don't let it take the most of you and I hope you get well soon and back to frequent wiki-editing! (: --Acetotyce (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Acetotyce Thanks for the support. How suggesting a move to 2014 American intervention in Iraq and Syria or 2014 United States intervention in Iraq and Syria? ~Technophant (talk) 20:42, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, sounds good! thanks for the advise, there was a discussion to rename the article from 2014 American intervention in Iraq to 2014 United States intervention in Iraq but there was no consensus... Your choice of 2014 American intervention in Iraq and Syria is perfect! --Acetotyce (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Acetotyce Since Russia and other countries are, or soon will be, involved how does 2014 international intervention in Iraq and Syria sound? On second thought that's too broad, considering of the neighboring countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia plus UN countries. In WWII there was a clear label of Axis and Allieds. No such titles here yet. ~Technophant (talk) 11:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

It already seems that most if not all NATO countries support military action against ISIL, and now Russia showing support too... But from the way I see it America appears to be leading the brunt of the support with Airstrikes supporting Peshmerga and PKK forces, if Russia or the UK which will later prove to play an important role in this war were to step in with more force then a rename to that is appropriate. On the otherhand the article is now under a rename with Syria added to the title, so if another party were to step in, they must do so in Syria aswell for the rename to take place. That is if it does get renamed! Thanks. --Acetotyce (talk) 00:42, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Non-discrimination Policy

I started a post at Wikipedia talk:Civility#Disability and other legally protected characteristics not protected here to help make sure that the Foundation's Non-discrimination Policy protects persons with disabilities. I'm very passionate about this. It needs to be clarified and enforced. ~Technophant (talk) 17:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Worldedixor

Technophant, I sympathise. Worldedixor's blanking of your comments on their talkpage without reply is certainly rude and uncollaborative. But they're "allowed" to do that per policy, so you're still not supposed to restore posts that they have removed. Bishonen | talk 20:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC).

@Bishonen How in the world can a civil group of editors deal with such an uncivil one if there's no way to communicate? ~Technophant (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I personally think there should be some limit to the "right" to remove/ignore comments on one's talkpage, but I guess I'm in the minority. I'm sorry, there's nothing I can do about it. Bishonen | talk 21:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC).

@Bishonen - If WE's edits were bullet-proof and this was the only problem I wouldn't be having this conversation with you right now. Since I've been gone there seems to loss of civility of a very functional working group. And I'm not talking about "way back when" I'm talking just 30 days ago. I think a WP:CBAN is in order. ~Technophant (talk) 21:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I know it's not the only problem. If you look at their talkpage history, you'll find me there — so much so that I'd rather not take the initiative here. If you're sure you have a convincing case, take it to ANI. If you're not, wait until you have, and in the meantime make sure you yourself behave well in your dealings with them — so don't restore stuff that they have deleted from their page. In fact, you might want to revert your edit there. That's my best advice. I understand it's a frustrating situation. Bishonen | talk 21:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC).

It's kind of crazy what you can and can't get away with on here. ~Technophant (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes. And now it's too late to revert yourself. Pity you didn't do it when I first wrote to you. Bishonen | talk 21:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC).

It reminds me of high school chemistry where we were told several times not to touch the 30% hydrogen peroxide w.o gloves. I of course did. Got instant superficial white chemical burns on my fingers, however it would have been worse if I hadn't had any warning. ~Technophant (talk) 00:20, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I've commented on his PAs at the article talk page. Sorry I didn't respond yesterday, kept meaning to but postponing it. I agree with Bish. Dougweller (talk) 10:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hostage Steven Sotloff held by executioner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hostage Steven Sotloff held by executioner.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Your filing at deletion review

I wanted to let you know that I've removed your request for a deletion review, due to the reasoning that I've given at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=624108205. Simply put, this is potentially a significant threat to the subject of the article, and our normal deletion process just isn't meant for the situation. If you disagree, feel free to contact me offline, and I'll be happy to talk far more freely that way. Nyttend (talk) 03:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

As I already told you, this is a real-life sensitive situation — mentioning the name on-wiki can potentially have real-life consequences for the subject of the article. This is one of those rare situations in which we need to ignore all rules and delete things that normally would be kept online. If you contact Arbcom and they advise me to self-revert, or if the oversight people disagree with my actions, I'll happily undelete everything, but unless that happens, this name absolutely must be kept quiet. Nyttend (talk) 04:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok. I didn't see your talk page post when I wrote this. I'm not aware of the discussions behind the scenes that lead to this decision, however you weren't trusted with oversight flag for no reason. It's a very unusual situation, but I don't think that removing the name here with make any real difference.~Technophant (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; I'm sorry I was short with you, but it seemed like a potential emergency, and I was afraid that you were intentionally spreading the name around. As I said at Jimbo's talk page, I wasn't completely sure that I was doing the right thing, and that's why I was actively looking for a response from the oversight people (I don't have that ability myself). Someone has since responded from Oversight, granting my request; only oversighters can now see these revisions. Nyttend (talk) 05:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Nyttend I see that you were trusted with Wikipedia:Edit filter manager flag, not Oversight. I was just trying to further coverage on in the area. I disagree with the media blackout. See The Media Blackout on Hostages Helps ISIS. ~Technophant (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I think the point is it's not up to anyone at Wikipedia - yourself or anyone at Oversight - to decide if it will "make a difference". Rather we operate according to an "abundance of caution" when someone's life is in question. Technophant, you've been making some questionable edits that have been reverted by the community. Uploads like this image as a means of primary identification. The transcript of the beheading video ISIS propaganda. As Jimbo says, we are not "the media", we are a non-profit community run encyclopedia, the standards are not the same as the media. -- GreenC 13:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Green Cardamom This conversation has largely been moved to User talk:Jimbo Wales. Yes I see the point of abundance of caution, however this isn't WP:NOTNEWS Wikinews style reporting on event, the report on reporting of event - something that WP does all the time.~Technophant (talk) 14:19, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, there's a difference between a user who likes to insert controversial material just because they like to watch the reaction and a user with proven history of trying to improve the coverage of articles like on this topic.~Technophant (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Adding IS propaganda material (pictures, transcripts) into biography articles is clearly going to be controversial. Related policy on this at WP:MUG. At least get consensus before adding it. The position of just "expanding coverage" is blind to the other issues that arise. Even if you disagree at least recognize how controversial it is and deal appropriately through consensus before adding raw ISIL propaganda into someone's biography. -- GreenC 16:11, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Successor or name change?

See my comment to Ghazkthul on his TP re this here! --P123ct1 (talk) 11:08, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Files for deletion

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 September 5#Steven Sotloff. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

accident?

Did you mean to revert my change to the lede in [1] or was that just edit-conflict? Wnt (talk) 06:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Wnt: edit conflict. Sorry. ~Technophant (talk) 06:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hostage Steven Sotloff held by executioner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hostage Steven Sotloff held by executioner.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Jamāʻat al-Tawḥīd wa-al-Jihād

You said on Ghazkthul's Talk page under this heading that the question of how ISIS relates to Jamat and Tanzim should go to the Talk page. I have added a comment to the first thread on this on the Talk page, and I hope people respond, as I think this is an important point. The Lead contradicts the names section as it stands at the moment. --P123ct1 (talk) 18:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Role of Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_David_Rohde

Read this and especially the section regarding the Role of WIkipedia. I think it helps explain their current actions. However in this case, it specifically states it was workable because there were no reliable news sources to cite, unlike this case, which has a multitude of reliable news sources. My request has simply been for them to have guidelines that reflect their actions, because as everything reads now all their guidelines permit it. An nothing on the page regarding Oversight referencing suppressing a name in public domain due to a life threatening situation. If they have a policy to not allow it, which apparently they do, it should be clarified so people can edit in good faith. Suppressing to this extreme is bizarre considering the amount of information in the public domain by reputable news sources. Their current policy on victimization is about how notable the vicitimization is, and whether or not it warrants its own article, or should be referenced in related articles. If wikipedia believes inclusion causes victimization and therefore should not be included, there should be some kind of obvious cite-able guideline. And then lots of article should be removed because they victimize. If its due to a life threatening situation, the oversight team should clarify rule #4 to include suppression of information that may trigger life endangerment or victimization or re-victimization. Because right now it doesn't say that, when it appears this is how they have been operating since at least 2008MeropeRiddle (talk) 06:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@MeropeRiddle: Did you read http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/technology/internet/29wiki.html ? Seems like deja vu. The idea behind the blockade was to not elevate the value of the prisoner through publicity. I'm not sure what keeping the name off this one would do. Could do article like 2014 Islamic State kidnapping of British aid worker. 07:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Footnotes

I have put a template at the beginning of the "References" section in perhaps the vain hope that editors will take notice. Do you think this is a good place for it, or would somewhere else be better? I ask because I believe you have put in several templates similar to this and seem experienced in how to use them. If you can think of a better place, can you move it there, please? --P123ct1 (talk) 19:40, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

RfD discussion of Islamic State

• Because you have participated in the move discussion at Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, you are being notified of the RfD discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 September 7#Islamic State. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Relevant article

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/08/wikipedia-censorship-seth-finkelstein#start-of-comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by MeropeRiddle (talk • contribs) 12:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

MeropeRiddle I'm finding myself of tired of fighting this issue on principle. Unlike most issues which are resolved by consensus, this one was decided by a WP:CABAL of admins without room for public discussion. I'm sorry you got blocked for this, apparently without warning. Seem like a WP:BITE. ~Technophant (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Post surgery - 1 month update

It's now been 3650 days since my back surgery. Unfortunately this last week has involved increasing pain and new numbness and tingling in my foot. I really hope this isn't failed back syndrome. I very much believe in the power of prayer and ask for your prayers and support in the coming months.~Technophant (talk) 06:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Foley (journalist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. 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) 09:17, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Disruptive editor

Time for another "Tangential discussion" template on the ISIS Talk page? More than half of the latest long thread had nothing to do with the discussion in hand. I believe you added one before. --P123ct1 (talk) 09:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

P123ct1 I've started a draft RFC/U here. Anybody (except Worldedixor) can edit it. Once I have two or more editors comment on it I'll move it WP space so it can be verified. Then the problem user will have a chance to respond.~Technophant (talk) 12:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Logos in ISIS

What a good idea to put in those al-Furqan and al Hayat logos! Will explain to thousands who have puzzled over what those strange markings are in the corner of YouTube videos to do with ISIS and other rebel groups! --P123ct1 (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.~Technophant (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)