User talk:Plarem/Archive 3

File permission problem with File:2 euro coin from 2007 reverse.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:2 euro coin from 2007 reverse.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Euro banknotes

The article Euro banknotes you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Euro banknotes for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Retrolord -- Retrolord (talk) 02:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Euro banknotes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oberthur (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) 10:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Maria Perceval

i made changes to the page of maria cristina perceval without letting you know that i made them, because the page was outdated. can you restore what i put up this morning, including the picture_ i will make sure next time i let you know why i made those changes. kindly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mision argentina (talk • contribs) 15:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Justice at Stake Page

Plarem, I am in the midst of editing the Justice at Stake page. I am familiar with this organization and a great deal of the information on the page is either outdated or not backed by references. I am not vandalizing the page, but rather ensuring that the information on the page is only that which is substantiated by valid research sources. I stated as much in my summary section. This is the second time that I have gotten flagged for vandalizing this page when I have simply been trying to clarify the language and delete content that has no citations. Is there anything that I can do differently to show that my intentions are good? Thank you, Laurabeth hooper (talk) 19:06, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, so, you could:

• Do it one bit at a time, so that your edits don't delete too much content in one go. The reason I thought your edit was vandalism is because you're a new editor, and you're on the Contributions page for newly registered editors, and I thought that that was section blanking.
• You can delete content and add new content in the same edit.
• Or block capitals in the edit summary 'DO NOT REVERT THIS'.

If you have any more problems, feel free to let me know. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 21:32, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Manish 8726

hi my self manish. i request to you that please remove immediately your post about criticism of swaminarayan page.it is a totally fake information given by you.i have all the proof about swaminarayn.he do not make any injustice. your postleads to hurt feelings of all Indians and bhakta.

Manish 8726 (talk) 04:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

No, because that would be against Wikipedia's Neutral point of view policy. Thanks. – Plarem ^{(User talk)} 09:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Solardome page

Hi Plarem,

Could you help in editing the page about Solardome? I don't want it to be promotional although I want to talk about the company that does domes now. I would like to say something about the history of the dome, about the engineers in UK who started manufacturing dome greenhouses- building and also about the company that recently carries on their work. How shall I overcome this?

Thank you Anna Gorzkowska (talk) 12:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I will just say that you could:

• Describe what is on the website in your own words,
• Don't advertise your company.
• Write mostly about the company.
• Like the deleter stated: "How many employees? Turnover? Profits? Has the company ever received negative publicity? Who are its competitors?"
• Back it up with independent sources.
• Remember, Wikipedia is not a means of promotion
• Have a look at the links I posted on your talk page.
  

– Plarem ^{(User talk)} 14:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Smoking in Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bar (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) 12:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epiphany (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) 09:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Year in country articles

Hey, I've noticed you created, among others, 2010 in Poland and 2011 in Poland. I wonder if you would be interested in helping to create other similar missing articles? Most articles from List of years in Poland are still missing. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

LGBT rights in Croatia

Although it is nice you try to improve this article, your references about Catholic Church and conservatism should not be part of this article. Croatia is a secular country where Church is not creating laws. So this is based on your views and hearsay. I will delete that. Government is the one who creates the laws, and that is the only thing we care about here as we talk about facts. Secondly, access to IVF and what lesbian couples along with doctors would do should not be part of an article. That is pure speculation.

IVF law in Croatia is dealing with infertility, and everyone who has a problem with that has an access to it. That law does not deal with lesbian couples what so ever. You haven't read the law and are not familiar to it. Thirdly, you are also not familiar with the Life Partnership Act. LGBT adoption is NOT legal ok? Constitution does not BAN same-sex marriage. It defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. There are people who worked hard on this article, and you change it to speculation and personal interpretation of the laws, and we cannot and won't have it. Why did you delete LGBT from LGBT adoption? Article deals with LGBT adoption, not adoption as itself.

Public opinion comes last after we deal with legal issues, but you put it before other things that are far more important. That chart is also unnecessary. That poll was not a big poll and it does not need a chart. Are we going to have charts for every minor research? Also, in English language there is no dot after the year. For example, you wrote (2012.,). That is incorrect. Attitude of politicians? Really? What is that all about? Why do you have to change grammatically correct headlines and paragraphs that are perfectly acceptable? There are some people working hard on this article, and everything that has happened in Croatia so far has been noted, so what were you trying to do?

I am sorry if I'm being rude, it is not my intention, but if you are going to change bits regarding laws would you mind discussing it with people who work on this constantly? And why change it? What was the main drive behind it? You change accurate description of the law into personal interpretation, and then write things that are not true. Public promotions??? What? Gay pride is a pride! It is a march.

Have you read any of these laws, do you speak Croatian?

If you do something like that again unfortunately I will have to start a dispute. You cannot just change the whole article and put personal interpretations in it. Do you know how much research has gone into it?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 11raccoon1 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm CombatWombat42. I noticed that you made a comment on the page LGBT rights in Croatia that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. "That's what the lead is for, dumbass." Is not an appropriate edit summary, please, discuss the content not the contributor. CombatWombat42 (talk) 22:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Though I understand the sentiment, it's not the right way to go about it, Plarem. Drmies (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I noticed the comment and came by to mention that myself.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Mark Miller brought something moderately interesting to my attention on my talk page, and it prompted me to have another look at some of your edits. Why this? The paragraph is about Coming Out Day, and the section is called "Coming Out Day". That's not POV-y and was correctly reverted by Ron 1987. Then, there's a slew of edits like this one, where you seem to go to great lengths to remove the word "pride" from the visual part of the article, by piping (which is funny given that that's the Dutch word for "giving a blow job", but that's by the by). In this case (and perhaps all the other ones) you were again duking it out with Ron, and why? To replace "pride" with "public promotion of LGBT issues", a phrase which is a bit ugly and doesn't really cover what these events are. What the hell do you care if we call these things "Pride parades" or whatever? You don't have to stand on the sidewalk and watch pretty gay men and women parade by; you can stay inside.

  Here's the thing. You may find the term "pride" objectionable, but that's what these things are called. Personally, I find the word "music" in "Music Video Awards" objectionable, since that modern pop shit is just shit, but hey, that's what they call it so I can't go around changing it. Same in this case. I can look at this and go "well, edit war between you and Ron, both sides are wrong"--except that in this case, on the matter of content, you are clearly wrong (as was raccoon, ironically) and I have no doubt that this is the consensus among Wikipedia editors. In addition, I have little doubt that such behavior can easily lead to you being topic-banned from editing such articles.

  Let me reiterate. This must stop, or I (or perhaps Mark, or Ron) will seek a broader forum to address this, and my guess is that you will not like this. If you think my tone is a bit stern, you're right: I have no patience for this kind of POV editing in a sensitive area where Wikipedians ought to be fair and balanced, and anything that even remotely smells of a politically or sexually motivated agenda, I have no patience for it. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 13:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

• I second everything Drmies has said. Being a less patient person, I would have blocked you for disruption except for the above warning. --Randykitty (talk) 16:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#LGBT_topic_ban_requested, where your edits are being brought up for broader attention. Drmies (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

• Pursuant to consensus reached by community discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, you are hereby banned from editing any and all articles, or participating in discussions, related to LGBT topics anywhere on Wikipedia, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed after 6 months after sufficient demonstration that you are capable of editing Wikipedia in accordance with community norms. --Jayron32 06:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

European Central Bank's GAR

European Central Bank, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GamerPro64 03:06, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

December 2020

Pertaining to your edit back on 14th of June 2011, (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2021&diff=prev&oldid=434284150), what do you mean by 2nd year of the 2020s decade? Don't you think this detail is depressing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dicmoehtet2400 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)