This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article United Airlines Flight 955, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. APK coffee talk 08:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
For your enjoyment:
-- Brangifer ( talk) 16:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for your message. As you will have seen, I've working from a translation of the Dutch accident report. Am ploughing my way through it, abouts two-third's done. If you would like to assist, the history of the aircraft needs researching. I know that it started with the USAAF, and the previous operator before it was purchased by the DDA was in Finland. Mjroots ( talk) 05:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Rather than paste the same information here on your talk page, will you please respond to my comments and question posted here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sarahjjohnson123/Archive. Thank you for your time and attention. Otto Placik ( talk) 01:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
No, but I'll paste it here, as that SPI is closed and archived. LeadSongDog come howl 06:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC) --- I am a little confused here. If you have two individuals working part time in the same office sharing the same computer, how do I avoid charges of sockpuppetry? Is there simpler ways of discussing this without having to learn a whole new language? There is no easy tutorial on how to respond appropriately?
I have read this and appealed the block. I subsequently discussed this with Fred Bauder who then suggested that I create a new user name. He, in fact, created myu user name here for your reference. User talk:Fred Bauder. So there are no new editors created by me to sway the discussion. For that matter there has been no discussion other than posting images with no links. I have posted my name as source and my user name has author on the image information page. How else would you suggest that I proceed? I would like to quote WP:MEAT here: "While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users... The term meatpuppet is derogatory and should be used only with care." So I must ask you, why are you assuming bad faith when steps have been followed and requests complied with in an orderly fashion? And why do you choose to be derogatory? What else should I do? Do you want me to fade off and disappear? Why don't you extend your hand, provide some instruction to a neophyte and make this a more nurturing and pleasant environment rather than levy accusations? Do you find the images that distrubing or distasteful? Pleae respond. Otto Placik ( talk) 01:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
---
it is still possible to achieve the same end with a fresh upload.
Thanks! I noticed that new names were being used, so now I am using the new template names. WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I have reviewed Peak oil for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 01:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
No, no jatlas imposters... Thats me, I thought I had to set up a new account for wiki commons, since I wanted to upload those pictures. Thanks for looking out... Feel free to tweak the agaricus or medicinal mushroom pages, I wasn't trying to bully you out of changing them earlier. Jatlas ( talk) 23:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there a way to get any of the data from this deleted article? Please let me know, I am just interested in the references used in the article. I would like to rewrite the basics of it. Thanks Jatlas2 ( talk) 20:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC) And where is the copyright problems?! The website I saw listed (which I assume is the source of the conflict) was a fraction of the original article. So the deletion doesn't make any sense. Hopefully I am missing something... Please get back to me when you get a chance this was a great article previously. Thanks Jatlas2 ( talk) 20:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Not sure whats going on... The page that was listed as the source of the "copyright" problems was a skimpy webpage. The former PSK article was huge. Jatlas ( talk) 20:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the information about the bot! I was unaware of the proper procedure. Jatlas ( talk) 19:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The
June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
23:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I just want to clarify regarding deletion of one's content. Discussions at [3]. Someone made a deletion of my entries with my consent, but changes were not granted given that it's under Wikipedia and public domain. If I were the author, given the contributions with cited sources, yet take back those changes myself, then is it therefore allowed and not deemed as vandalism? Please respond. Thank you.-- Roannevista ( talk) 18:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the IP's insertion of the blog. It seems like he or she also added in Sweden, but there is something odd happening with the diffs and I'm not 100% sure. Regards -- Alexandr Dmitri (Александр Дмитрий) ( talk) 17:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article United Airlines Flight 955, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. APK coffee talk 08:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
For your enjoyment:
-- Brangifer ( talk) 16:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for your message. As you will have seen, I've working from a translation of the Dutch accident report. Am ploughing my way through it, abouts two-third's done. If you would like to assist, the history of the aircraft needs researching. I know that it started with the USAAF, and the previous operator before it was purchased by the DDA was in Finland. Mjroots ( talk) 05:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Rather than paste the same information here on your talk page, will you please respond to my comments and question posted here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sarahjjohnson123/Archive. Thank you for your time and attention. Otto Placik ( talk) 01:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
No, but I'll paste it here, as that SPI is closed and archived. LeadSongDog come howl 06:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC) --- I am a little confused here. If you have two individuals working part time in the same office sharing the same computer, how do I avoid charges of sockpuppetry? Is there simpler ways of discussing this without having to learn a whole new language? There is no easy tutorial on how to respond appropriately?
I have read this and appealed the block. I subsequently discussed this with Fred Bauder who then suggested that I create a new user name. He, in fact, created myu user name here for your reference. User talk:Fred Bauder. So there are no new editors created by me to sway the discussion. For that matter there has been no discussion other than posting images with no links. I have posted my name as source and my user name has author on the image information page. How else would you suggest that I proceed? I would like to quote WP:MEAT here: "While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users... The term meatpuppet is derogatory and should be used only with care." So I must ask you, why are you assuming bad faith when steps have been followed and requests complied with in an orderly fashion? And why do you choose to be derogatory? What else should I do? Do you want me to fade off and disappear? Why don't you extend your hand, provide some instruction to a neophyte and make this a more nurturing and pleasant environment rather than levy accusations? Do you find the images that distrubing or distasteful? Pleae respond. Otto Placik ( talk) 01:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
---
it is still possible to achieve the same end with a fresh upload.
Thanks! I noticed that new names were being used, so now I am using the new template names. WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I have reviewed Peak oil for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 01:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
No, no jatlas imposters... Thats me, I thought I had to set up a new account for wiki commons, since I wanted to upload those pictures. Thanks for looking out... Feel free to tweak the agaricus or medicinal mushroom pages, I wasn't trying to bully you out of changing them earlier. Jatlas ( talk) 23:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there a way to get any of the data from this deleted article? Please let me know, I am just interested in the references used in the article. I would like to rewrite the basics of it. Thanks Jatlas2 ( talk) 20:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC) And where is the copyright problems?! The website I saw listed (which I assume is the source of the conflict) was a fraction of the original article. So the deletion doesn't make any sense. Hopefully I am missing something... Please get back to me when you get a chance this was a great article previously. Thanks Jatlas2 ( talk) 20:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Not sure whats going on... The page that was listed as the source of the "copyright" problems was a skimpy webpage. The former PSK article was huge. Jatlas ( talk) 20:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the information about the bot! I was unaware of the proper procedure. Jatlas ( talk) 19:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The
June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
23:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I just want to clarify regarding deletion of one's content. Discussions at [3]. Someone made a deletion of my entries with my consent, but changes were not granted given that it's under Wikipedia and public domain. If I were the author, given the contributions with cited sources, yet take back those changes myself, then is it therefore allowed and not deemed as vandalism? Please respond. Thank you.-- Roannevista ( talk) 18:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the IP's insertion of the blog. It seems like he or she also added in Sweden, but there is something odd happening with the diffs and I'm not 100% sure. Regards -- Alexandr Dmitri (Александр Дмитрий) ( talk) 17:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)