User talk:Moriori

No

No, you cannot revoke your contributions to Wikipedia because you are in a bad mood. It was a misuse of your admin powers to delete the images you have contributed. I suggest you reverse these actions. 1 != 2 15:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to remind you of the WP:NPA policy, don't call people arseholes, even if you are angry. 1 != 2 15:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second that - you have admin tools for actions to benefit the project, not to use them in disputes with other users. Including a personal attack in the deletion summary was completely out of line. Your images that were used in the mainspace have been reincluded in the relevant articles. I have raised this matter at the administrator's noticeboard for further input - see this thread. I encourage you to restore the rest yourself. It is expected that if you upload images that you do not own the copyright in and claim that they are PD that you will provide material for this to be verified - either by refering people to the source that makes the PD status of the image clear or by forwarding to OTRS-permissions an email from the copyright holder releasing the image under a GFDL compatible license. WjBscribe 15:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moriori's contributions are thousands-fold times this silly dispute, the indiscretion in a deletion edit summary, the deletion itself, etc. Let's give him some space. El_C 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about giving space until this user has a chance to respond. As to the other part, we don't work on a scoring system here where you can build up enough credit to do bad things. 1 != 2 17:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've started restoring the deletions. Please do not come back and continue your disruptive deletions. Friday (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC) (To be clear:) I do hope you come back, just please don't delete more things without a good reason. Friday (talk) 23:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for arbitration

A request for arbitration has been filed listing you as a party here. MastCell ^Talk 17:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that this abritration request has now been withdrawn - Alison ^❤ 15:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 13:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:HMS New Zealand (1911) superstructure.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS New Zealand (1911) superstructure.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:42 Sq RNZAF Formation.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:42 Sq RNZAF Formation.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 non-free media 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. Shell ^babelfish 05:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wael abbas DRV

I don't know if you're likely to read this, but I've put the Wael abbas article up for DRV. Andjam (talk) 03:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:42 Sq RNZAF Formation.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:42 Sq RNZAF Formation.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eli Soriano's Awards

The following is a reproduction of my message to another editor

Hi, I would like to call your attention to the Awards and Recognitions section of the Eliseo_Soriano article. I was unable to source 99.9% of the award-giving-bodies. When I Google them on quotes like "Sons and Daughter of Charity" then add "Philippines" as a qualifier the only website that comes up is the one here in WP.

According to the official website of [Gawad Amerika] "Gawad Amerika is an independent award-giving body based in the USA that recognizes the achievements of Fil-Am people in the field of acting, singing, professional carrers, businesses and the Life Time achievements since 2001." This is the real Gawad Amerika award and Soriano's group, who seem to be creating temporary award giving bodies for the purpose of giving awards to Soriano (and also to a few others so that it will not be so obvious) seem to have undermined the existence of a real Gawad Amerika, who only gives awards to Fil-Am people, and created their own temporary Gawad Amerika.

I was happy to find the Gawad Amerika website because I thought that at last I found an award-giving body that really exists, but alas! it is a different Gawad Amerika.

I also noticed that an award received by their website is listed there. How is it that an award intended for their church's website became an award of Soriano? That award is for the webmaster.

There is so much anomaly in that list. Barangay level appreciations were included, as well as awards issued by an unnotable radio program. All of them should not belong to an encyclopedia.

Thanks! - Shannon Rose (talk) 16:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jet stream

I answered your question in the talk page. I'm amazed no one answered you sooner. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Operación Masacre

Deletion review for Operación Masacre

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Operación Masacre. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. was added to the deletion review log. Neagley (talk) 17:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]