User talk:Palamabron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Hello, Palamabron, 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:

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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!  - Ahunt (talk) 19:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Italian Colonial Empire[edit]

Thanks for correcting the errors I made :) Mallerd (talk) 10:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

January 2016[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Windows 10, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC) Palamabron (talk) 05:42, 20 January 2016 (UTC)PALAMABRONPalamabron (talk) 05:42, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Disagree with your edit. 20 million users have complained about this issue.

No, you just can't put words in 20 million mouths. You must provide a reliable source for any statement made in an article. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harvard Medical School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radcliffe (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) 09:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


I'm sorry, but I had to list the two photos you uploaded to Commons ("HMS women", and "Final club") for deletion. They appear to be copyright. EEng 03:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

You deleted "HMS women" in error. I will re-post the "HMS Women" image from its open source because it is in the public domain. I posted the public domain image data info in the talk page for this image, but apparently you failed to read that info on the image page, due to your carelessness or unknown bias, before you deleted this public domain image whgich carries an open source creative commons license, as I shall document when I re-post it. I will re-post the image with the public domain open source license info attached. ACTION REQUEST: Please do not delete this important "HMS women" image again, since it is in the public domain, as I shall document one more time for your better enlightenment, and it is one of the most important historic images of Harvard currently in existence -- indeed it is much more significant than the static and uninformative building images that exist on the Harvard site. Thank you for your time and attention. Please do not delete open source creative commons licensed images posted by legitimate users in future. Yours, Palamabron.
I didn't delete it -- an administrator did, because the license isn't one of the ones acceptable for use on Commons (or Wikipedia, for that matter), as discussed at [1]. Please reread that discussion to understand why, if you upload the image again, it will just have to be deleted again, so please spare everyone the wasted time. And please cut out the bias bullshit. EEng 02:05, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Palamabron. All or some of your addition(s) to Wabash Bridge has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 23:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, Diannaa. There is no need to accuse me of "bullshit," to use your own hurtful word in your message to me (above) because I am simply working in good faith to promote freedom of expression and accurate information on Wikipedia. I will consult with our professional colleagues at Harvard University Library to see if the public domain creative commons licensed image "HMS Women" can be released with an appropriate creative commons license for publication on Wikipedia. I do understand that only certain types of creative commons licenses are acceptable and I am working to promote the best and most informative possible content on Wikipedia. Please do not block my contributions, which are always made in good faith and in full accordance with Wikipedia policy. They are not "bullshit" to use your own hurtful term, which I find personally and professionally offensive. However, I do accept your previous apology conveyed in your message headed "Sorry" and so no response is needed to this statement. I am just trying to correct the record and to convey my sincere editorial intentions, which are consistent with the Wikipedia core values. My posting of this beautiful and historically significant image was made in good faith and in the (mistaken) belief that a creative commons license is generally valid on Wikipedia. My bad! I do not recommend that you block me as a Wikipedia contributor because I have much to contribute. Thank you again -- Palamabron.