User talk:Gzuckier

Hi, I saw your edits to Whalley. You need to put double brackets around the article that you're trying to redirect to. You can learn more about editing by trying Wikipedia:Tutorial, or ask questions at Wikipedia:Help desk. Best wishes, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:39, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If you toss names around like that, I will notch-down my respect for your comments. Also, did you read this link?

Rex071404 23:37, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What is your source for this article? KeithTyler 17:01, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Kudos for writing that article single-handedly. It's fascinating and well-written. ~ FriedMilk 16:58, 2004 Sep 2 (UTC)

Actually, not a typo but an artifact. When "internal memo" was still at the beginning of that description it really did need "an". But thanks, I tend to forget things like that. Aliter 20:51, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It could just be me, but recent edits to this article seem to me to say way too much about how great MIT is, and seem to be moving it in the direction of being a bland PR puff job. I'd appreciate it if previous contributors would keep an eye on this article and make sure it reflects a reasonable consensus about what "neutrality" means. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 19:43, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Gzuckier - any chance you could spread the new pics at maple out a bit more, so they don't overlap and clog up the page layout? Also I'd understood that conditional use copyrighted images were no longer considered desirable (being contrary to the free use ethic of wikipedia), I may be wrong there but it would be worth checking. Thanks - MPF 22:12, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello. There is no need for the underscores in the link to Mark V Shaney, i.e., you don't have to write Mark_V_Shaney, and it looks better without those things. Michael Hardy 21:15, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi Gzuckier. Any reason why single brackets need a nowiki tag (eg as on methotrexate)? JFW | T@lk 17:37, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

...dunno, seems to me that your addition is inherantly POV, in that it proffers an explanation for the lack of one particular usage that isn't really born out by anything other than speculation -- I think the article stands better without your addition: it just states the fact that the inclusion of Arabs in the term "anti-semitism" has not caught on. --jpgordon{gab} 18:26, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have deleted several of your stub articles on museums. You can't create articles without content. Feel free to re-create these articles with actual text when you have more time. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:48, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your additions to enzyme clarifying and expanding points, the article is improving! One small request, though, please don't forget to fill out the edit summary. Thanks. --Lexor|Talk 17:07, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Please be a bit more careful when dealing with Holocaust denial.. especially when chatting with anonymous/unsigned users.. (As user Jayig suggested -its probably troll-bait >of the nazi kind< put to catch people out and get them to provide a legit looking platform for their deliberate disinformation. I was going to reply to them - but u did so first.. Its probaby not the place to wax lyrical e.g:
"So that sort of leaves the significance of the Jews vis a vis the Holocaust as kind of the canary in the coal mine of sociological pathology, I guess."
Canaries in the coal mine IS NOT FUNNY max rspct 19:30, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

RROma rromanes rhomi tigane: Please see the link rroma

---

---

Hi. I noticed you have edited some Hong Kong-related articles. You might be interested to take a look at HK wikipedians' notice board, HK Collaboration of the Week and Current events in Hong Kong and Macao. Happy editing! — Instantnood 18:05, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Gzuckier, I now realise that you have arguments which you at least feel strongly about, and you aren't adding the section to Yale about deaths on campus purely to start some argument, so I am willing to let you add this section if you wish and will leave it alone. I added you to the 3RR section because at the time I was dealing with a few other similar disputes on the Bill Clinton page and the Franklin D. Roosevelt page, where users were continually undoing changes agreed upon, and the anon. user you were most at war with seemed to have a strong case.

Anyway, I can see you have a serious belief that your edits belong on the Yale page, so I will step aside and let you go ahead with these changes. And if anyone else has objections, let them argue their own cases. That's all I want to say. I'd welcome a response from you. Harro5 (talk · contribs) 10:23, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not proud, but sometimes people can be so annoying.... - Nunh-huh 17:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I wonder at the judgement of those who would rather try to precipitate a "war of escalating quotes" than simply admit the word prestigious is not in dispute in this instance. The quotation hunt, at least, is a game I'll decline to play <g>. - Nunh-huh 18:05, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just wanted to give you this as a token of my appreciation for your great work on Deadwood and various related articles. You've greatly expanded the article in a short time. And the articles on the figures in Deadwood history/characters on the programme are realyl great to have! Try to do E. B. Farnum next maybe :-P... Anyhow, seriously, really, really awesome work! BLANKFAZE | (что??) 01:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh, hey, by the way — check out the collection of images of historic Deadwood I've uploaded to Commons: Deadwood, South Dakota. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 02:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please sign all posts (with ~~~~) so we know who made them, and when, without consulting the history. Thanks. Noel (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for your vote in [1]. Some people humilated your vote and others. i added them in vandalism in progress. please share your idea about it. Many thanks Hamidifar

Hi,

I was about to ask the same question on Wikipedia talk:Image use policy/copyright. Did you ever find out? CTOAGN 15:28, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You voted in an earlier poll about the George W. Bush article. There's now a more elaborate poll on the same subject. If you want to comment and/or express a preference for any of the listed alternatives, you'll find it here. JamesMLane 05:43, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nice add to the Fairlane article. Thanks! --SFoskett 15:22, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Thought you might be interested. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:41, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This idea sounds good. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 29 June 2005 18:57 (UTC)

And exists - check out http://www.wikiporn.org

I took the freedom to revert some vandalism on your user page, hope it was ok. -- Elisson | Talk 2 July 2005 14:19 (UTC)

Though I'm sure some people will take it as serious evidence of such a cabal. Jayjg ^(talk) 5 July 2005 03:35 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out my revert mistake. I was trying to remove the reference to "semen" where it used to be "treaty" but ended up reverting to an even worse vandalism. I think we have it now, though. - Tεxτurε 5 July 2005 19:11 (UTC)

I really am poor ($0/year income, $650+/mo. in bills). What would it require to at least receive the dubious honor of a wikicabal barnstar? I'm feeling particularly barnstarved right now...  :-p Tomer ^TALK July 6, 2005 09:33 (UTC)

Gzuckier, would you consider moving the main body of your Anti-Semitism Numerus clausus additions to Numerus clausus article and leaving its summary? IMHO, unnecessary redundancy is wiki's plague. --Ttyre 17:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out: Oh! Dat Watermelon lyrics, listed at libraries & worldcat as the actual song in the film about racism that you mentioned. I suspect Foster and Schoolcraft were sometimes confused with each other because Foster was better known. I plan to view the interesting-sounding film sometime, thanks (will have to drive to do it; few copies are to be found around the U.S. at libraries, but i have located the one nearest me that has a copy). (Scroll down on this page for the song you had mentioned, no ref. in it to watermelons, do a text search on the page for "massa's in de" to find lyrics.) Thanks for introducing me to the film. Bebop 15:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have a few more things to say that I've learned about this song and film, but will do so by email. I am mostly sure though that I have found the right song though. And for just now it's probably just as well not to reply to my userpage for something till I archive what's there in a few days and have a blank page again. P.S. both "Massa's in de Cold Cold Ground" by Foster and Schoolcraft's "Oh! Dat Watermelon" are in the film (the first of the two songs is not where the film got its name though). Bebop 17:55, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A user by the name of Hipocrite removed your most recent edit. I put it back, but if you feel it should be removed, that is your decision. I saw nothing wrong with it, Hipocrite apparently thinks there's nothing ground breaking in Lott's work. I happen to disagree. Al Lowe 21:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mind having a look at Wikipedia:Votes_for_undeletion#Reading_spark_plugs_for_racing? Thanks. Samw 14:15, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please give your vote on the talk page.[2]Voice of All(MTG) 02:58, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

There is a link to 'false document' here, but the meaning of the false document article appears to relate to artistic creations, rather than to forgeries of this sort.

Are we top posting here or bottom posting? Anyway, are the Protocols an 'It' or a 'They'? I'd be inclined to consider them a they, but most of the editing seems to think otherwise. ?? PS Sam Spade, nice edit, kept the point I was trying to make, in a NPOV type of way. Gzuckier 19:19, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It's definitely "they" and it is "authors" not an author, as the research of Cesare de Michelis shows [Italian professor, Russian literature if I am correct. His study is now translated in English: http://www.nebraskapress.unl.edu/bookinfo/4546.html

The Non-Existent Manuscript A Study of the Protocols of the Sages of Zion By Cesare G. De Michelis Translated by Richard Newhouse

Basically he reconstructs the original manuscript based on the still existent variants. Even in its earliest states of creation one can see that many different authors had their fingers in the creations adding or if you like contributing rather freely. So sorry, no author but some kind of teamwork or forging process. [Paradox: a conspiracy that creates the ultimate myth of a conspiracy] Not much time now, just wanted to add this LeaNder 16:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you have s strange combination of interests it seems. LeaNder 18:30, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've voted. Meanwhile, I have run into what I consider disruptive behaviour and WP:POINT at List of political epithets. In my view, User:Liftarn has been removing material and asking for citations for material which has already been cited, and has been insisting on citations exclusively for, and inserting NPOV notices in, Jewish-related epithets, when no citations have been provided for any of the other epithets on the page, and when he has raised no specific objections in Talk:. Could you possibly take a look? Jayjg ^(talk) 15:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have actually not removed anything, it's just commented away awaiting citations (real ones, not invented). As Jayjg is pushing his POV in those areas it's ofcourse those areas that get attention for NPOVing. It should be noted that who first started requiering sources for everything was Jayjg. // Liftarn

On the topic of the Barnstar of the Elders of Wikipedia, I would like to know how I can help in that "spirited defense" that the award speaks of... Shalom. --jonasaurus 05:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[3] I'm nominating one of my photos for 'featured picture'. Voting isn't for two days, but I'd appreciate your comments if you feel to add them. -- RyanFreisling @ 15:55, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How would you reccomend dealing with him? I'm losing my patience. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking past editors of the Karl Rove page to weigh in on a survey. If you can spare a couple of minutes, please visit this page: Talk:Karl Rove/September Survey, read the introduction, and answer the three questions that have been posed. Thank you. paul klenk 09:25, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I noted your input in the Jewish lists so hopefully this will interest you. I started making a few new categories: Category:Jews in music, Category:Jews in science, and Category:Jews in the visual arts, however User:Lulu_of_the_Lotus-Eaters has nominated all these for renaming due to his aversion to the phrase "Jews in". The reason I created the Jews in music category was because I knew Category:Jewish musicians and Category:Jewish music existed but mainly covered yiddish/religious music. I have persuaded Lulu to change the name of the current category to Jewish classical musicians (as this basically covers the people I had added to it) but I still feel a category such as Category:Jews in western music needs to be the parent category of all classical, pop, jazz, rock, musical sub categories to avoid confusion with yiddish music, Klezmer etc. I would appreciate your views on this here Talk:List_of_Jews#Jewish_categories Arnie587 23:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - there's a vote going on at Talk:Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda that you may be interested in.--csloat 06:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your last page of contributions is almost all cycling-related articles. Thanks for these. Have you joined the Cycling WikiProject? One thing I noticed: : bike-stub is a redirect to cycling-stub, so please use that instead. WP is a little slow right now, so I haven't been able to look at your other contribs. --Christopherlin 23:53, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your question at Wikipedia_talk:Image_use_policy/copyright#Editing_free_use_covers.2C_etc.. In case you don't watch that page, I'll reply here too. I think your friend is right, although there are many editors who don't bother to make the distinction (and I am usually one of them). See Template:albumcover, which I assume the covers are being uploaded under, namely solely to illustrate the album or single in question. Just go to Jow Blow's official website, find a picture that looks vaguely press-release-style, and upload it under Template:Promotional or Template:promophoto. Also, it's fair use, not free use - there's a bit of a difference. :) HTH --pfctdayelise 14:39, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You added a controversial tag to John Lott but it sez its only for talk pages. Was this deliberate? William M. Connolley 22:09, 20 November 2005 (UTC).[reply]

please vote here Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Sub-Categories_of_Jewish_people. Arniep 13:32, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just take it easy, I know you're frustrated. Rkevins82 20:02, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK? Rkevins82 21:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what you're getting at - this really isn't a big deal. Rkevins82 23:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the spirit of reciprocity, I hereby award you one of the ugliest awards I've seen in a long time. Though we shouldn't think of editing conflicts as "wars", the Lott matter has not been a conventional editing dispute. Let's remain vigilant, but work towards peace. (Yes, I know, some dreams are elusive). Cheers, -Willmcw 09:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kmf164 and I are looking for some feedback on a particular external link at hybrid vehicle. We'd appreciate your feedback. (See the second "External Links" heading.) uriah923^(talk) 23:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention is requested at John Lott, again. Sockpuppetry reigns. Hipocrite - «Talk» 00:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:CHAIN TOOL ANNOTATED.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. bluemask 12:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd appreciate your feedback at this discussion. Thanks! Shawnc 06:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!!!!! Jayjg ^(talk) 19:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can read about the nonexistent "DDT ban" in Wikipedia's DDT ban article. --Uncle Ed 19:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's more:

FOLLOWING RUCKELSHAUS'S BAN, the USAID, prodded by a lawsuit by the Audubon Society and the Natural Resources Defense Council, undertook to discourage other countries from using DDT by threatening to stop foreign aid to any country using it. Its threat spread Ruckelshaus's ban worldwide. [4]

Is this simply incorrect, or what? --Uncle Ed 20:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the trivia section I started on Al Gore's entry? I'm going to revert your deletion and put it on the talk page for discussion, since you didn't give a reason for your deletion. --No Dodo 04:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the original designation, which is what is cited in the footnote as well, but I expect trouble... Jayjg ^(talk) 20:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the election-related controversies to Diebold Election Systems, where they may need to be edited. The Diebold article is just about the parent company, of which DES is only a very tiny part, albeit the more interesting. Cheers, -Will Beback 22:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good solution. Thanks, -Will Beback 19:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your informations. Effectively, working on side is not equivalent. The link you gave me on eBay is very similar to "perruque". Perruque is works made for the employee, for his home, for a guift, made during official working hours, and not something to be sold. The worker uses boss's machines, because he dont have the equivalent at home. It is not an on side job, to make more money. It was a well known activity (but secrete) in machining workshops, on milling, grinding, drilling machines, on which workers use to make parts for themselves out of materials that will be scrapped anyway. In fact, in french, equivalent words to "perruque" are a lot, depending of the town, of the activity of the company. And the origin of "perruque" seams to be the same as "wig": something hidden, not clear. We also say in french "travail masqué" = hidden job, which is different of "travail clandestin" or "travail au noir", which are illegal for a national tax point of view. All words in french are in popular linguage. "We" began to use these words at the beginning of industry, even just before. (years 1850) Thank for your advices. I think I will find something clear for understanding. --Barbetorte 16:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Contrary to the traditional diamond bicycle frame, for which the forces can be very accurately modeled mathematically, the more complex shape of the fork does not allow such precise calculations. Perhaps as a result, forks tend to fail more often than frames."

Is there any reference for this? Given the shapes of current all-carbon frames, and the state of Finite element analysis, I'd be very surprised to learn that forks are just too complex to model properly. Heck, they can model an entire car to analyze crumple zones. Besides, I've just seen a new Trek Madone involved in a crash with a car. The fork blades where fine, but the head tube of the frame was broken in half. AndrewDressel 13:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bicycle_fork"

It seems that some people never learn or change. Thanks for the heads up. Alyeska 23:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The images that you pointed out were deleted because they fell under the criteria for speedy deletion, in which case there's no necessity to inform the uploader. Specifically, they were deleted because they were tagged as "fair use" and were not used in any article (see CSD I5). Sorry for the inconvenience. Coffee 04:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the catch in Internal combustion engine. It appears that an article does not exist for the charge the article is talking about. Do you think there needs to be one, or would it be little else than a dictionary definition? Maybe we should just take the link off that word? Aguerriero (talk) 18:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm contacting you to ask that you take a look at the conduct RfC brought against me by TDC (talk · contribs). I'm contacting you because the RfC involves some pages that you have edited on in the past. I value whatever contribution you may make to the RfC page, if you are so inclined. Thanks.--csloat 07:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a good idea to insert speculations into articles, like "Ken Miles would have ..." --Matthead 17:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I took the liberty of relocating your sentence and link to the US State Department commemoration of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution from the first paragraph to the "10 November onwards" section, since it fits into the timeline better in that place. I also coverted the link from an embedded HTML to a footnote, to match the citation system already in place in the article. Hope it meets with your approval. Regards, Ryanjo 22:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found a copy of the April 1958 Mechanics Illustrated and added some info to the article. I found your input interesting. What were your scources? randazzo56 00:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help!, other useres are trying to delete my article but I objected saying that the plane crash is notable. Please vote keep on the vote page in order to save this article.Storm05 13:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the article re: Michel Thomas: it is largely written by, and is constantly edited by, an LA Times reporter named Roy Rivenburg, who was sued by Mr. Thomas for defamation in 2001, after Rivenburg's profile of Thomas was published in the L.A. Times. The article portrayed Thomas, then 87 years old, as a fraud who had fabricated or exaggerated important aspects of his WWII service.

Mr. Thomas's friends subsequently put up a web site in 2002, rebutting the profile, (see http://www.michelthomas.org). In 2004, as a result of the research efforts undertaken to gather evidence for the lawsuit, which were forwarded to the U.S. Army by Senator John McCain and New York Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, Thomas was awarded the Silver Star for his bravery fighting the Nazis in France. He had originally been nominated for the medal in 1944, and several of his surviving comrades, who had not seen him in nearly sixty years, recommended him for the medal after learning his war record had been questioned by Mr. Rivenburg. Senators Bob Dole and John Warner presented the medal to Thomas, in the shadow of the Atlantic Wall of the WWII Memorial, days before the Memorial's official dedication. The Ambassador of France also attended, and saluted Thomas for his bravery fighting with U.S. troops, as well as with the French Resistance.

After Thomas died at age 90, in 2005, Rivenburg undertook a systematic effort to discredit Thomas, including posting an article on his personal web site at http://www.offkilter.org. This includes links to other bloggers with headers like, "That Lying Old Fraud Michel Thomas Has Died."

Even the most casual perusal of the background facts should persuade an objective outsider that Mr. Rivenburg is anything but neutral.

The article has recently been flagged as NPOV, but I believe a case can be made that Mr. Rivenburg is inherently biased, and should be barred from editing the article. Can you advise?

DO NOT ALLOW ANYONE WHO INTENTIALLY DISRESPECTED A UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN FROM EVER DOING AN ARTICLE OF THE PERSON HE DISRESPECTED. Carajou 02:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--[email protected]

I think this deserves its own article, as opposed to being in the centrifugal one. Do you have any good sources that describe how it works? Maury 19:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just went to add the newer columns abandoning the the sinking TitAnnic and saw you'd already done so - and written much better than I ever could, well done :) - Glen 16:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciated your joke, but it seems someone else didn't. Ah well. --Guinnog 02:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your helpful additions to the coaster brake section of bicycle brake systems. --Adamrush 14:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know that you have worked on Bose related pages before and I was hoping that I could get you involved with the discussion here! Thanks -- UKPhoenix79 07:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Due to your involvement in some Wiki pages that regard sports car racing of some sort, I would like to ask for you to look into the proposed WikiProject for Sports Car Racing. Any help you may have to offer to the project will be greatly appreciated. The359 03:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gzuckier, would you mind e-mailing me? Jayjg ^(talk) 16:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can use the little "E-mail this user" link on the side of my user page to e-mail me. :-) Jayjg ^(talk) 18:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:94_1_b.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Rntbrm3litergp.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see someone is attemping once again to "Claean Up" the article on our boy. What is wrong with telling the truth about this despot? -user Kaltenborn

Jblongley 18:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)jblongley Thanks for the addition of "heat". A hundred percent correct of course.[reply]

can you expalain this revert [5] Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 23:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In order for this to escape the purge I've moved it to User:Gzuckier/Information Builders where if you want you can add some evidence of notability, or some sources. I've left all the incoming red links in anticipation of a shiny article, so if you don't want to fix it up tell me so that I can remove them. Cheers. - brenneman ^{L} 05:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have noticed that you are a great contributor to the fight against vandalism, thanks!

However, I have a small request. Please would you sign your posts on the user's talk page?

Thanks

LittleOldMe 12:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Just a quick question, you gave the above IP a level 1 warning then a 4 and then went backwards a gave two level 1 afterwards. Was this intentional and did you report them to WP:AIV. I'm only asking as it's a vandal IP on my watchlist. Cheers Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 22:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the popups tool does that sometimes. I think it's a timing thing. One person fixes the vandalism on one server but the popup processes the transaction on a different server. When the timestamps don't exactly match, the wrong transaction can get changed. I've seen it a few times before. That's why I just fixed it and didn't bother you about it.

That's also part of the reason why I still prefer to do my work manually rather than through the popups tool. It's a little slower but I don't see as many problems. Thanks for helping with the vandalism patrol. Rossami (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although it may be have been cited in the New York Times (which probably was just a brief bit or two), it really is not a notable company in its own respect. If you Google the company, you get <1000 hits, and the only links in the article are to the company website. There is no other way to verify any factual content besides going to the actual website. Nishkid64 18:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article restored and now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Equix. Feel free to add your comments. ~ trialsanderrors 23:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is some general gratuitous mud slinging going on at the article right now which I'm not about to take part in, but I did respond to you here: [6]. --Deodar 00:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for an electromagnetic expert for discussion. My e-mail is [email protected], colmarksman being my MSN IM name. If you are this person, I will look forward to speaking with you. If you are not, could you please direct me to someone else? (By expert, I specifically mean someone who graduated from a university and works on electromagnetism for a living. Colonel Marksman 01:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you intend to post multiple warnings at once? --Geniac 20:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I liked your reference to the above in the Protocols of Zion article so that I was inspired to make a link to it, as well as to Fortune-telling & Astrology.

It's unfair for you to revert comments made by other users; otherwise I would have deleted your response to me to begin with. Please leave the talk page alone. (In case, this is how you view it, I'm not interested in a conflict.) --Iriseyes 21:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, alright then. Thanks for clearing that up. --Iriseyes 18:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you explain what you meant?

'"The article deteriorates largely because of the attempt by certain elemnts ( non-goyim ) to attack it before they have even written the article - worse while they are writing it. Any article in wiki that touches on any such subject gets gutted before the first period."'

'"The Protocols of the Elders of the Non-Goyim suggests just such a strategy!! Gzuckier 15:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)"'

• Yours truly, --Ludvikus 02:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i need your help on the Safiyya bint Huyayy article in wikipedia. She was a Jewish girl from the Banu Nadir tribe. Banu naddir where killed by mohammad and the women where taken as concubines. An editor there is making war about me including the word concubine in. Plz read the talk page, karl neatral, and wants more editors to be involved. Thanks.

FrummerThanThou 14:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Rickenbackerfryingpan.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. —Angr 20:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it might be so that some molecule in the complex mix of molecules in coffee is to some extent a carcinogen. However, I would think it is a very bad idea to give coffee as an example of a carcinogen on Wikipedia when there are much more evident examples (for instance, why not astbestos, dioxines, gamma radiation, etc which are true inducers of cancer). I mean, if coffee should be denoted as a carcinogen, then barbequed meat is also a very potent carcinogen. Please, respond on my talk page. /80.217.232.217 11:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support in my RfA. I've felt it best to withdraw on this occasion and think about the good advice I received. Thanks again, Jakew 19:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, but why did you revert the Buoyancy article again, just after I reverted a vandalism? --Freiddy 20:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, but I think there's a vandalist working around again: 204.108.230.2. If you can, please tell what I should do about this vandalist. Should I request for a block? (He/She has done this many times in different pages). --Freiddy 20:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this vandal User_talk:204.108.230.2 it seems that he's been given the "last warning" too many times. He vandalizes, he gets a tag; he comes back, vandalizes again, he gets a tag. There's two options as I see it: 1), call up the school district, let them know the exact times each was happening; they can trace it to their individual computers and talk to the individual responsible. Or 2), you can place a permanent block on the IP addy that would last a lot longer than what has been given before...say, twenty years? Carajou 03:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Electricflag.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 04:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you add warnings about one edit, which I had warned about an hour before, and another, which took place 10 days ago? (assuming you meant Michael Anthony?) See the dates on Special:Contributions/207.10.170.13 -- AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you did something similar on User talk:72.144.156.114. IP addresses are often not used by a single specific person, but can belong to internet cafes, public libraries, schools, and so forth. If an IP hasn't edited in days between edits, odds are reasonable that the next edit won't come from the same person who made the last one, so warning about edits a long time ago may not be as useful as they may seem. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 21:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also OPnly add one warning at a time and only add blantent vandal warnings to obvious vandalism rather than what may well be test edits as you did to User:207.216.142.65 Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 19:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Despite your last warning on vandalism, the user went ahead and vandalized the article Ibrahim Bin Adham

Hassanfarooqi 17:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I received a message that seemed like it might have come  

from you that I might be blocked for vandalism on the Methamphatamine entry. I made changes to remove old vandalism of love messages and some profanity within the text of the entry that were entered before I ever read it. I did not do

any damage to the article that I am aware of.  I might have been 

red flagged since the URL for my entry is from the State of New

Mexico, however. Sorry for any confusion.  Thanks, B. Villanueva 

I have marked the article Elron Awards with a proposed deletion template. There's nothing noteworthy here. Avt tor 15:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shared IP used at a high school, so I just thought i'd let you know there's generally many people acting under one adress.

I noticed that you reverted a good faith edit that I made to John Lott (econometricist), without any attempt at discussion and without answering my concerns on the talk page. Like me, you've been around a long time, and must know that this is treating me like I am a vandal, not someone trying to improve an article. I recognize that the article is a breeding ground for sockpuppets and vandals, but I am neither; please contribute and discuss rather than haphazardly revert other people's edits. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 23:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I'll try to be more careful about making significant changes without explicitly mentioning them on the talk page. I'll do my best to succinctly post my opinions on what the article needs so that discussion can be as painless as possible—I looked through the talk archives and wow, tempers really flared. Hopefully all that can be avoided this time. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 20:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Generally recent means the same day, and usually within the last couple of hours. Bubba hotep 15:03, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on APCO, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Boricuaeddie 18:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/David Irving, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/David Irving. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

A long-simmering editorial dispute between Klezmer (talk · contribs) and ChosidFrumBirth (talk · contribs) over how to deal with information about certain Hasidic topics has reached the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal. Please see and provide any helpful input at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-04-29 Mezhbizh (Hasidic dynasty). Thank you, IZAK 16:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Janisjoplinsuperhitscover.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I indented your former neutral comment on the RfA, because it showed up as a double vote. —AldeBaer 16:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I, too, had to try over and over. The automagical secret is that there must always be the pound key "#" at the start and no empty line between the comments so that autonumbering isn't broken (whence the "restart" at 1 you mentioned). When indented with one or multiple colons, the comment will be left out of the count and will be indented as usual. Regards, —AldeBaer 19:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See that you didn't get this warning at the right time...

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Automobile Industries Limited, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from {{{url}}}, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Automobile Industries Limited and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Automobile Industries Limited with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Automobile Industries Limited.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Automobile Industries Limited/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Automobile Industries Limited saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Alvestrand 18:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bloomfield.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Crosbystillsandnash.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 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. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 03:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

in response to your talk page, i'm leaving a reply for you here: "OK, thanks for the headsup. How's this? Gzuckier"

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Crosbystillsandnash.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 after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 18:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been named in the evidence talk page and in a proposed decision. I don't see any evidence that you are aware of the ArbComm case, so am notifying you.

Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Allegations of apartheid/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Allegations of apartheid/Workshop. GRBerry 19:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:94_1_b.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ~ Wikihermit 01:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:Autounionv16.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ~ Wikihermit 01:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:77_1_b.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also conside