User talk:Rama

Archives : 1 - 50 | 51 - 100 | 101 - 150 | 151 - 200 | 201 - 250

---

hi rama

what up how are you

Rock the casbar!

Ayn Rand cult article censored

03:27, 25 April 2006 Tawker deleted "Ayn Rand cult". No reason was given as to why the article was censored. [1] Any idea why? Content can be found here. -Dna4salE 05:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know. I think that "g1" is probably an abreviations, but of what ? Beats me. Rama 07:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:EPFL pince 2.jpg - What is this?

Can you add a bit more description to this image you uploaded to Commons in 2004? I don't know what EPFL is; it looks like a building, but is it a school, a theater, or what? Where is it? When did you take it? I'm trying to categorize it, and this would greatly help. Thanks for all your great work. JesseW, the juggling janitor 02:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Now that's a good question ! :)

The EPFL is, well the EPFL. As to what this 20-metre-ish red cloth-pin-look-alike thing is, it is left to conjecture. I sort of assume that it is meant to be artistic, in a way.

Beside, the photo was taken with a cell phone, I should have better ones in store (and some processing right now, taken from below with a 17mm lense).

Thanks and cheers ! Rama 17:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Your inapropriate comment on my talk page.

I have never on Talk:Charlemagne called anyone stupid.I merely carefully questioned the historical knowledge of my fellow debater when he/she continued to deny rock hard facts.

I take a strong stand against nationalism.The thing is that I strive towards an honest wikipedia, to often I come along articles in which the history, importancy of the people of little countries is pushed aways as unimportant and I fight for that voice, and with succes.

An example is for example the Holy Roman Empire-article.Not so long ago there were 2 history infoboxes present.The Austrian and the German one.I added the Dutch one (after looking for the Historyboxes/templates of many other countries who had a right to be there too) as the Netherlands were a vital part of the HRE as well. It was removed.Why?Editers, ironicly from Germany, thought it didn't have enough "right" or importance.After a long and in the bitter discussion, the box was added. (all 3 Infoboxes were removed in the end because they messed up the article, but that's not the point)

This behaviour, can be interpreted as nationalism, but it isn't.

The so-called "flag waving", as you call it, on my userpage is inexistant.I found 2 images which could be interpreted as nationalistic, while both were meant as humour.Don't lie and say you didn't see that.

Please in the future refrain from posting comments like these on my talkpage as they are not apropriate. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 18:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

You did that by producing most occurences of the word "stupid" on the talk page. I do not need you to apologise, I just need you to stop. Rama 20:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Look I'm not going to argue with you alright, and I was certainly not planning on apologizing to you ,I mean who do you think you are my mother? I wanted to make clear that I do not need comments like yours on my talkpage when they contain false accusations. Good day to you sir. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 21:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

To make things perfectly clear, I am a Wikipedia sysop. I do not mean to protect you from something, I mean to protect Wikipedia from you. So please be civil in the future, or you will face sanctions. Rama 23:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I know what you are and what you are/were trying to do, I just want to make clear that in this case it was inappropriate, so "protecting wikipedia from me" is not neccesairy, as was the comment on my talkpage.I'm not some troll and I certainly do not wish to be treated as such, I am here to enhance and improve wikipedia, and if my boldness dominates my civility a little bit then so be it, it's like I'm here to fight or seek conflict,no, I'm here to help. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 08:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are not a troll, you will kindly behave yourself and interact politely and reasonably with your fellow users. This includes not insulting them, and not trying to enforce your personal ides against general consensus.

I regret to say that the contrary will just get you blocked, and nobody has anything to gain by this. So please be more conciliating. Rama 17:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

All I have left for you, as you seem closed to other opinions is the following qoutation:

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

• John Adams

Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 18:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no "opinion", I just happen to frown at stubborn users who insult other users and engage in revert wars, like most admins will do. Rama 18:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry Rama, you can have the last line in this conversation. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 18:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Love your drawings

as you've done one on tribadism do you think you could do a nice one for frot too? pretty please with a cherry on top? :) Sweetie Petie 10:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Gladly. Rama 12:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Aww that's so kind of you :) I look forward to seeing your creation. Sweetie Petie 13:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey thanks for doing that... you're the greatest. Not the position I'd be doing it in but a brilliant illustration none the less. Sweetie Petie 08:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I've been scratching my forehead for a while before I deciding which position to use. Ideally, I would have used a photograph... if you happen to have one, I might be able to do something more convincing. Cheers ! Rama 10:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Charles_enderlin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Charles_enderlin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 12:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio, deleted. Rama 12:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:2001-discovery-pod-bay.jpg)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:2001-discovery-pod-bay.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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. cholmes75 20:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

deleted. Rama 21:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hal brain room2.jpg)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hal brain room2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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. cholmes75 (chit chat) 14:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

deleted. Rama 11:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hans Blix???

Greetings - not sure what the right protocol is here, but I would appreciate your attention to the article on Hans Blix, which you have previously edited. A user insists on inserting a section on False Statements that I think is clearly appropriate. Rather than just removing it (again), I hope to bring a few more cool heads into the discussion.

thanks much,

Steve/ User:67.172.157.77 (Unsigned)

He did this to my page too. Very strange, and I don't know if asking others to defend you is allowed under Wikipedia policy. And the page itself is in total disarray.

Meh. Whatever. Logical2u 19:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I DONT KNOW HOW TO DO THE TITLE THING SO THIS WILL HAVE TO DO

Rama you should do some flipbook type stuff with your rough sketches for your iaido and for sex positions and post it on a page so we can print it out and make into a flipbook of our own. That would be pretty sweet. It would help with knowing what to do with my wife, we do not always get it right with the descriptions, and would a lot better if we had a flip book to go through. : !

I will not be accountable if you try iaido tricks in bed with your wife, lover, pet or anything. Rama 07:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

lol I'l be gentle with my wife. Wow my title looks pretty dorky... feel free to change it if you like.

copyright question

Hi, I want to use an image of a chemical compound for the article Arbitol (I am still writing it) from the following website: http://ctd.mdibl.org/voc.go?voc=chem&termUI=arbidol There is a link on the bottom of the page titled "Legal Notices", so when you go there,it takes you to copyright permissions, etc. It says: "The Comparative Toxicogenomics DatabaseTM (CTDTM) is provided to enhance knowledge and encourage progress in the scientific community. It is to be used only for research and educational purposes. Any reproduction or use for commercial purpose is prohibited without the prior express written permission of The Mount Desert Island Biological Laboratory." So, would Wikipedia be considered commercial enterprise or educational one? Can I use the picture of the compound (it is just a structural formula) or not??

thanks!

p.s. I am getting better at this copyright thing!! :)

Svetlana Miljkovic 15:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It is tricky, but it would be safer not to, because of the "only for research and educational", and "Any reproduction or use for commercial purpose is prohibited..." ; actually, Wikipedia does have commercial aspects.

I think that the best thing would be

1) to write an email to this site and ask them whether they would consider releasing this image under the GFLD or CC-by-sa ;

2) alternatively, request a schema of this molecule to be made by our graphics team. This is better, because the image will be "free enough" to go on Commons, for where it can be used on all wikipedias.

Cheers ! Rama 16:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:International Brigades monument berlin.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:International Brigades monument berlin.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|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, consider checking 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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 07:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

One person is now in a better Realm

Greetings. I am HRE's cousin. I have a sad news to announce (as per his brother's wish) - my dear brother-by-aunt is no more in the world of the living... It pains me enough to write this - so I'm just going to point you to HRE's talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor#As_per_Your_.28Our.29_brother.27s_request. His brother says that HRE was very said that he didn't get to know such a great person as yourself. --Sad News 21:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Charlemagne

I suggest you try to get a better understanding of the situation before you draw your conclusions. That way you 'll surely get my understanding in advance. (no offence) I replied to you on my talk page, your comment was moved to the history section. Rex 11:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

My understanding of the situation is based on the history of the article [2], where I see you reverting no less than 5 other users in the last week. I am not the only one who would appreciate if you could adopt another mode of discussion. Rama 11:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You know what Rama, we'll do the following. As from this moment I'll adopt another method of discussing and resolving resputes, and if it ends in better results I'll keep it, but this doesn't mean I accept the page on charlemagne as it is now. Rex 17:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Now, that's the spirit ! Rama 22:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia awards committee

Check out my comments here, Wikipedia awards committee. Thanks! --evrik 17:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

fr. LaRouche

Good work on the LaRouche topics at fr.wikipedia. Thanks for attending to them. We've found that enthusiasts can skew the articles not only about LaRouche, but also about a wide variety of historical, political, and economic topics. User:Will Beback/LaRouche topics is a listing of many topics of interest to those in the group.

We have a small amount of information on .en about Jacques Cheminade, also in LaRouche Movement. If there's anything you can add or correct, it'd be appreciated. Cheers, -Will Beback 09:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Peacekeeping

Rama, I noticed that you contributed to the peacekeeping article in December. You seemed concerned about the poor quality of the article. I have significantly overhauled the article (as a draft on a subpage) and would like to know what you think. You can find it at Talk:Peacekeeping/Sandbox. If you know anyone else who is concerned about the article, please let them know too. Thanks. --Tjss(Talk) 21:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Front National (France)

Hi, you reverted my changes on the Front National article. The claims made there do not follow from the text in the sources provided... Intangible 15:25, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't they ? Rama 15:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• [3] talks only about "en marge d’une manifestation du Front national." Guilty by association. Where does it say these people were FN activists? Intangible 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• [4] only the lawyer of the victim is talking here, not a good source.
• [5] does not talk about the Front National.
• [6] does not bring Beaune in connection with the Front National.

Intangible 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• So what ?

If they are not FN activists they should not be included in the FN article. This would constitute a guilty by association POV.

• No it does not.

Huh? So whatever lawyers are saying is necessarily true?

• So what ?

Indeed, it only talks about Beaune.

• So what ? Rama 16:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

See (1). Intangible 16:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The references allow to confirm other elements which are mentionned in the article, and I do not undertand why you focus on these ones particularly.

The article in which you say "only the lawyer of the victim is talking here" was in fact not written by him ; it contains a grat deal of other information, and the quotation of the lawyer is only a small part of it. Rama 17:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Because a claim is made that these people have a relationship with the FN in the Front National (France) article. I have not seen the evidence for that in these above articles, have you? If they have not, it should be removed from the FN article. Intangible 18:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The articles very plainly say that the incident occurred in connection with a FN event. Rama 18:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

It does not say that. It only says those people were present at a public manifestion of the FN. Where does it say these people where FN activists? Intangible 18:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but several of these articles say very plainly that the incident occurred in connection with a FN event. Rama 19:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Where does it say these people where FN activists? These were public manifestations, you know. Maybe they criminals were sightseeing. Intangible 19:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

You keep changing the subject.

1. several of these articles say very plainly that the incident occurred in connection with a FN event
2. none of the above links explicitely say that the skinheads were militants of the FN (though it is heavily suggested).

To confirm that the criminal skinheads were linked to the FN, we have the Rapport de la Commission d’enquête parlementaire sur le DPS, which is available at [7]. Rama 19:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

And where does it say that Beaune or the others were members? Intangible 19:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Here [8]. Now please stop being ridiculous : we will not remove all mentionnings of these killings because the murders did not wear their member cards. If you contest that they were members, suggest another wording, I am quite open to it ; but removing the whole story, though it is blatant and unavoidable that the FN is linked to it, is unnacceptable. Especially in the light of your one-man crusade against the word "far-right" (if the FN is not, I don't know what is). Rama 20:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Still inconclusive... Intangible 20:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I am devastated at the though that the entirety of Wikipedia will have to live by without your blessing. Rama 21:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Going blatantly about—claiming things that are not—does not make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia. Sigh. Intangible 02:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rama! You might be interested in User:Cberlet's proposal to register Intangible's edits here in order to block him from trolling around... Tazmaniacs 19:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Tes images de iai

Salut,

je viens de voir tes dessins de iai sur commons. Super !

Donc tu t'intéresse aussi aux budo ?

cdang|write me 09:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Pas assez activement, hélas, il faudrait que je m'y remette... Mais si je faisais sérieusement tout ce que j'ai plus ou moins envie de faire, il me faudrait trois vies :p Rama 09:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

On a un peu le même problème… Un seul espoir : je vais bientôt, je pense, ateindre les limites de mes connaissances pointues, ça va sacrément diminuer ma bande passante ^_^

cdang|write me 08:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Cannon

Hi there Rama. I noticed you deleted Image:Polish artillery.jpg under some strange rationale, thus making the Canon de 75 modele 1897 Schneider lacking a picture. May I ask where are the free pictures of the Polish-adapted and modified guns of that type then? I saw no such pics on wiki, but perhaps I did not know where to look... //Halibutt 09:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no point in saturating our articles with unfree images when free ones are available. Rama 08:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Rama is hero

Rama is hero. 69.161.4.46 23:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:BD-mariage-en.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BD-mariage-en.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigDT 12:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal cartoon for use on my user page.As author, I am entitled to give it the licence I want. Image restored. Rama 08:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:BD-mariage.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BD-mariage.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigDT 12:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal cartoon for use on my user page.As author, I am entitled to give it the licence I want. Image restored. Rama 08:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Mysterious image deletion

I cannot figure out why you deleted a cropped image that I upload back in 2005. Here is a link to what I'm referencing. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The image lacked proper licencing status for some time. Rama 08:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

It was a crop of an existing photo. I see that THAT photo has since been deleted, but replaced with a functionally identical photo. What gives? Do you actually recall the circumstances or is this just a "best guess" based on your edit summaries? Also, isn't it customary to notify the uploader when there's an issue like this? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not the one who reported the image as having an invalid licence, so I do not know whether you were notified or not. For the rest, please read Wikipedia:Image_use_policy. Rama 12:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's the problem, I've looked through the archives for the Image Removal process (boy are THOSE a mess), and am unable to find any reference to the image. All I can find is you removing it. I believe that you did so in good faith and that it was tagged (I'm not making you the bad guy here), but I cannot find any real record of who did so or why. Anything you can do to help? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The image was carrying labeled with Template:No source, which was put by yourself at 19:46 on the 11th February 2005, two minutes after uploading the photograph. Rama 15:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Eric Brill

I noticed that you created the page Eric Brill on April 13th, 2005. As you haven't made any subsequent edits to it (unless when not signed in), I wondered if you were aware of the drastic changes the page has undergone.

I reverted vandalism done to the page yesterday (August 13th) and thought I might bring the page to your attention, as it seems more like a humorous article now rather than the functional one it seemed to have started out as.

--Editor at Large 23:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

miss you

I miss you! xox --Sonjaaa 14:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not dead yet... Rama 09:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

L'Affaire Bogdanoff

Hello. Apropos your past interest in the matter, I was wondering if you'd care to check Bogdanov Affair. I have been trying to improve this article over the past couple months in my odd snatches of free time, and I think it is currently a useful and informative piece of expository writing. (A dreary rain of sockpuppet edits has continued to drizzle upon it, alas, leading to episodes of semi-protection and an awful lot of blocks.) Zippedmartin mentioned a few issues on the Talk page, which I tried to address; at the moment, I can't think of any other major things to do with the article, and I'd like any additional opinions you have to offer.

Like the saying says, "Criticism is the only known antidote to error." Your comments are welcome. Best wishes to you and yours. Anville 17:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for you

Here is the Graphic designer's Barnstar for all the hard work you do in making more pictures for Wikipedia. Continue comme ça Rama. Mes Félicitations. Booksworm Sprechen-sie Koala?

Saeb Erekat

Hi Rama, I received a message on my talk page here about a mass revert that you did on the Saeb Erekat article. Having read the author's edit, I find them slightly WP:POV but they still contained some very pertinant information. I was wondering if you would be willing to enter into a discussion with the author, on the talk page and find some concensus on this issue. I would be loathed to see such a large edit be reverted out of hand without a discussion previously. Also the fact that these edits had stood for a couple of weeks without any real modification says to me that at least some form of peer approval had been met.

Best regards

Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 20:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup!

J'ai demandé que Jaakobou réponde sur le page talk

Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 10:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

French Army

Shouldn't the List of French Army Regiments article be named Structure of the French Army, because it really deals with the structure of the army and is not just a list over the regiments in the army.

It does not describe the structures of command, for instance.Anyway, can still be renamed. Rama 12:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Ship category changes

It would be appreciated if you would discuss ship category changes at WP:SHIPS. I've reverted a number of categorization changes you've made recently. "Cruisers of France" is not redundant to "World War II cruisers of France"; one is a Ships by country category and the other is a Ships by era category. TomTheHand 16:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

No, but it is redundant with "Ships by class". Rama 16:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I disagree; if both class categories and ship articles carry "Ships by country" cats then Category:Cruisers of France can list both every class and every individual cruiser that has served France. Someone looking at the cat doesn't need to know which class French cruiser Foch was in order to find the article. We'd appreciate your input over at WP:SHIPS if you'd like the categorization scheme changed. TomTheHand 17:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not have an opinion either way. I did what I did because some cruisers were listed in both "Cruisers of France" and "Cruiser class XXX", while other were only listed in "Cruiser class XXX", which seemed to be inconsistent, but I do not have any preference. Rama 19:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes :-) The discussion to include a "by country" cat occurred while I was in the middle of cruisers, and so the end of the alphabet in cruisers has them but the beginning doesn't. I'll loop back through cruisers sometime in coming weeks and add them. TomTheHand 19:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, category management, naming conventions... neverending fun ! :D Rama 20:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Rama, just noticed that you're removing "Battleships of France" categories now. Please don't. I'm actually working my way through the battleship articles as we speak, adding "(ship type) of (country)" categories; I just finished up aircraft carriers and I had previously done amphibious warfare vessels and the end of the alphabet of cruisers. When I finish battleships, I'll go back through cruisers, then do destroyers, then frigates, then submarines... I've been putting the latter categories off for months because they look like a pain. TomTheHand 10:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm not touching these categories, you obviously know what you're doing and I do not.

By the way, there are two questions that popped in my mind regarding "Victorian era ships of France" :

• Isn't it a little strange to speak about a "Victorian era" in France ? I mean, you do not say "Louis XIV era ships of England", right ? :) Maybe "Second Empire" and "Third Republic"... ?
• Lots of the ironclad ships that are listed as "battleships" are officially known in French naval jargon as "armoured frigate" (this is notably the case of La Gloire) ; do we do anything about it ?

Cheers ! Rama 10:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the late response! I went out of town from Friday until today. I agree that "Victorian era" is a really odd thing to say for non-British ships, and I proposed a rename for them a few months ago but it didn't go through. I think people mostly wanted to see a viable replacement before they were willing to dump "Victorian era," and since my interests are in 20th century ships I sort of dropped the issue.

I'm also not quite sure how to categorize early armored ships, and I think we need to discuss the topic over at WP:SHIPS. There are a number of British ships that I'm also unhappy categorizing as "battleships," but it's something I haven't paid much attention to in the past. TomTheHand 15:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Antisemitism

Why are u talking like as u did in WikiCommons about Israel, & its basic privilege to exist on the Land Of Israel. Have you ever heard about territories purchasing?

Jews from all over the world bought very large territories in Palestina from rich Arabs in Saudi. Most of the territories which were bought were swamps. Jews dried the swamps & built a big settlement.

All of the conflicts between the Jewish settlements to Jordan/Egyptian Arabs (later they called them self "Palestinians") started because of the arabs. you can read on it: Israel-arab conflict).

Stop saying stuff like "occupied Palestine". Israel has never done war crimes, & never killed intentionally innocent civilians like Hizbolla & Hitler have done.

GOER 16:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

1. This is the English Wikipedia, not the SMS Wikipedia
2. I say whatever I want within the limits of laws.
3. I cannot stop saying things which I have not started saying.
4. Believe it or not, but some people just do not care about this. Israel is not the centre of the world. Rama 17:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I just despise your hatred, it is so premitive. I have no other place to live in, did u know it? palestinian can live in any arab-muslims country he wants. but hey! i have only one little country. so? they have to talk the only place i have & cast me into the sea? GOER 19:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not care about you, your life, the way you spend it and anything else. And this has nothing to do with antisemitism. Go pester someone else. Rama 15:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed al-Durrah

I understand why you corrected Jaakobou's citation seconddraft.org website, and your version is certainly a more accurate characterization of what Leconte has said, but I thought it more appropriate to revert Jaakabou's edit altogether. We shouldn't use a website such as seconddraft.org as a source, period, certainly not in the lead of an article. By the way, good work cleaning up the POV mess on the Saeb Erekat article. Sanguinalis 02:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

My edit was only concerned about faithfullness to what Leconte said ; it should not be interpreted as condonning that it is not tendentious to go at lengths about children playing war in the opening paragraph of an article about a child who was actually killed. Rama 10:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Understood. I never thought you condoned it. Just thought I owed you a note since I reverted your edited along with Jaakobou's. Sanguinalis 01:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

New portal

Hey, there's a new French military history portal that I just created. I've seen you make a lot edits with French military and history related articles so I thought I should let you know, just so we can work on updating it and keeping it free from vandalism. Hope you like it!UberCryxic 00:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Millimetres v. inches

First: an apology. I set up many of the French cruiser articles, so the use of inches is down to me. No offence meant - that was the information I had to hand and I was keen to set up the articles so that at least something was there. It's interesting: most authoritative sources (eg, Jane's and Whitley) use inches for the main and sometimes secondary weapons and millimetres for the rest (eg anti-aircraft). Also the metric units for main armament can be quite odd - 203mm, not 200 nor 205. I've assumed that it's because the various Naval Treaties set up criteria based on inches and tons (not tonnes) and naval designers built up to them. BTW, when you amended, you deleted the calibre details on at least some. So, when I get a chance, I'll restore them and add the inch equivalents (since most English language readers will be more familiar with them). I'll do one or two and pause, to give you a chance to comment. Folks at 137 19:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

No offence taken ; my the point is that the guns are actually different and incompatible -- for instance, the 380 mm of the Richelieu, even though it is comparable in diametre to a 15 inch gun, used quite different ammunition.

My appology, in return, if I have set some things wrong in the turmoil.

And my thanks for setting up these articles in the first place : I was shy on the work and was quite delighted when I realised it was actually done.

Cheers ! Rama 08:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Aster_launching.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aster_launching.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 21:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

You drew this?

Image:Autofellatio.jpg

You drew this? Anomo 05:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes I did. Rama 09:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Question sur le maniement d'armes

J'ai répondu à ta question il y a déjà un moment sur ma page de discussion. J'attends ta réponse. ;-) breversa 13:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

"SIG 550"

Rama, I made some changes to the article "SIG 550," namely changing its title to the correct version, "SG 550." I'm not trying to sound stuck-up, but I'm fairly confident that my title is correct. I know that "SIG" is the name of the developer, but ACCORDING TO THE COMPANY'S WEBSITE, the actual name of the rifle itself if "SG 550." Here's the link: http://www.sigarms.ch/ I have changed it back to its correct title.

Beware, this is probably what they call their export version. Rama 19:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

FN Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier

Please help me with a WIKI article related conflict in the India-Pakistan section of FN Charles de Gaulle. There is a user (UberCryxic) who keep on reverting unilaterally to sections that involve unverified claims (in my opinion). What are the WIKI rules? If you can help and/or express your opinions on the points made in the discussion page please do. It will help us. I do not know how to call for an arbitration. Thanks.

Yes Rama can you please take a look at this dispute we are having and offer your opinion? We are in need of help. Thank you.UberCryxic 20:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Grand Port/ General intrests

Hey Rama:

I've ran into your name on numerous occasions, especially as regards naval history, especially the Napolenic wars and the French Navy.In particular, I am interested in British and French combatant ships and commanders. Would you like to help me expand or create the following...

(1) Samuel Pym, who commanded the British line-of-battle at Grand Porte. My main knowledge of Pym is his defeat and his fictional (and unflattering!) portrait given in The Mauritius Command

(2) Guy-Victor Duperré whose wikipedia article is the merest stub. My French isn't up to translating naval terms, and O'Brian doesn't mention him, instead placing Linois in command of the French squadron...

(3) I'm also trying to get a complete list of ships named HMS Worcester ... Cheers V. Joe 16:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Borodino

Hey Rama, there are some users in the Battle of Borodino article who I feel are being uncooperative and highly disruptive. They are tampering with a result on whose conclusion we agreed months ago. Can you take a look at the situation and offer your opinions? Thank you.UberCryxic 16:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Leftist

Hi !

Are you sure that "leftist" translate as "gauchiste" and not "de gauche" ? I'm still in doubt about this. Ericd 10:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, now I am uncertain. Anyway, I a quite positive that "left-wing" is accurate and neutral. Rama 11:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:BD-mariage.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BD-mariage.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —BigDT 05:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

first aid ugly drawing

Hi, I recently used your Recovery position ugly drawing on the medic mini wiki, in the Lifesaving skills article. I also used some text from your First aid wikibook.

I really like the drawing, and would like to request a drawing. I used to have it in my brother's 10th Edition of the Boy Scout Handbook (1990-1998) in the First Aid chapter, although I'm sure a similar picture shows up in other sources.

It is an illustration for the action of the head tilt- chin lift maneuver on the location of the tongue (and maybe the epiglottis) in an unconscious person resting on their back. This is shown through a head cross-section in 2 picture sequential art. The first picture is of the airway obstructed by the back of the tongue. Recognizable structures are the outline of the head, nasal sinus cavity, mouth, tongue, epiglottis and trachea. The second picture is a cross-section of the adjusted head, with head tilted and chin lifted, depicting the same structures.

The drawing in the BSA Handbook photocopied very well, due to halftone shading. I know you do not use halftones, but I am sure that crosshatching could create a similar effect. The picture is very useful if it is clear when very small (~1 inch tall when printed out).

It would be useful in the first-aid wikibook, in first-aid related article on Wikipedia, and at the Medic mini wiki. Street medics would use the picture in handouts for upcoming trainings, including one in Colorado or on Indian land in South Dakota in Dec, one in southern Mexico very soon, and potentially ones in Toledo for the Great Lakes Anarchist Gathering next year, and Atlanta for the US Social Forum.

Gobblehook 20:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

...not to mention a real treat to my ego ;)

All right, I'll see what I can do, I'll keep you informed. Cheers ! Rama 20:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Note to self : [9] [10] Rama 20:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:LiberationVoiesAeriennes.jpg Rama 21:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Casabianca (S 603)

In this edit you migrated Casabianca (S 603) from a table-based infobox to Infobox Ship, but in doing so left the latter part of the table unmerged. I've reverted for now, as I can't really see where to plug in the values in the trailing table fragment into the new infobox. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, thank you. I forgot to remove part of the code after migrating the thing.

The new template gives the same information than the old one used to.

Thanks and cheers ! Rama 12:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:US marines in trench.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:US marines in trench.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 08:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Didier Julia.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Didier Julia.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. Chowbok ☠ 04:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

do you have any ideas of the original names of these cartoons..?

hei there.. I'm Barak from Israel.. I'm trying to figure out the original name of the following cartoons (I am almost sure the originated from France)..

1. Ofel Bofel??
2. Manu??
3. Pashosh??

Please do confirm if these shows were originally french and what were their original names..

Thanks :)

Acidburn24m 20:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Holidays, Rama!!!!

File:010105 fireworks2.jpg

Merry Christmas and happy New Year Rama!!!!!! Have a nice time - You deserved some! --PaxEquilibrium 21:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Gal_Hoar.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gal_Hoar.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 10:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Responds?

Instead of accusing me of making up my own licences, I'd like it if you'd explain what was wrong with the permission.Rex 16:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The permission makes no mention of the GFDL. What autorises you to bring the GFDL, then ? Why the GFDL rather than any other licence ? I advice you to read our copyright policies. Rama 16:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

If the owners make clear that they do not care what is done with the image, then that doesn't mean they make it freely available?!Rex 16:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

No. And certainly not under the GFDL. Rama 19:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Explain that. If I give you an image of my cat, I made myself and tell you "Rama, you and everyone else can do with this picture whatever you want" then how come it isn't in the public domain? Rex 21:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your question is evidence of very serious misconceptions or copyright laws. In the precise case, your image would still be copyrighted, hence not public domain. Furthermore, the example you have given is different from your helmet image, which was not your own and which you claimed was under the GFDL ; the GFDL implies a set of precise obligations which do not fit in "whatever you want". I strongly suggest that you read relevant material and acertain that you have understood it before trying to further upload images which are not your own. Rama 21:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly what does "do whatever you and others want with it" not cover?!Rex 21:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Start by reading the GFDL. I can't read it for you. Rama 21:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You deleted a Public domain image because the uploader had the wrong tagg?! Was the effort of fixing the license really that much harder than deleting it?Rex 22:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

It was not Public Domain. Rama 23:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Then please enlighten me about the status of this image, whose "owners" allow it to be used by everyone.Rex 23:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I have not made myself clear : I do not know. Noone can know from what you provided. You must provide proper licencing when you upload images, something which states clearly which image is given under which licence. Rama 23:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You do not know, but you delete nevertheless. I provide an Email sent to me by the "owners" how on earth does that not suffice?! Rex 23:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to know for the image to remain. Rama 23:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What kind of answer is that?Rex 10:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Read the bleeding documentation on copyrights ! Rama 11:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This is bloody ridiculous.Rex 12:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Desert-Eagle-compensation-phallique-p1030142.jpg

I'd have to say that this isn't exactly an NPOV file name. tisk tisk tisk. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 00:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you aware?

Are you aware of what's going on at your userpage and subpage? Is that you? -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 15:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I was not aware of this, and this is not my deed. Thank you or pointing me, I think I will semi-protect these pages to save some silly burden to fellow admins. Cheers ! Rama 16:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject France

Hello! We are a group of editors working to improve the quality of France related articles. You look like someone who might be interested in joining us in the France WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you in our project :-) STTW (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion please...

Greetings,

I'd like to ask for your opinion. A bunch of opinions actually, if you don't mind.

1. You have been an administrator for some time. In your opinion how long should an administrator wait between the application of a speedy deletion tag and the consummation of the deletion nomination?
2. If they see that the creator placed a hangon tag, but they don't see the accompanying justification in the talk page, how long should they allow.
3. WP:CSD and WP:CFD recommend that those placing tags should allow a kind of grace period, to allow for people, like myself, who start articles in stages, to bring the article to some kind of meaningful state before they apply the tag. I know there are a lot of experienced wikipedians who routinely ignore these recommendations. I assumed that there was a similar recommendation for a grace period for {{prod}} -- but it turns out there isn't. You don't happen to know whether this was an oversight, or a conscious design decision?
4. I know there are certain kinds of material, like scurrilious slander, that anyone is encouraged to delete on sight. Similarly, I am ready to believe there are certain kinds of article where an administrator is authorized to use their judgement and skip the step of applying a speedy, adf or prod tag. But, normally, shouldn't they go through the step of applying a speedy or prod tag, and, in the interests of openness and accountability, let a second administrator consummate the deletion?
   • I came across a reference to a Guantanamo captive who reported working for 6 months for an American intelligence officer named "Mr. Mark". I thought I remembered another Guantamao captive describing being captured when they were asked to translate between two militia leaders and an important American named Mark. So I started an article, which was promptly deleted: Talk:Codename "Mark" - a CIA agent in Afghanistan in 2001. When I found I couldn't save my second draft I save it in my user space User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/codename Mark.
   • So, do you think this deserved a very speedy deletion?

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 00:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

1. If the SD tag is valid, there is no need to wait ; else, the tag should be suppressed and a AfD page should be set up.
2. I assume it would be nice to ask something on the user's talk page ; I'd assume that someone who can deal with templates like a hangon tag is not a naive newcomer who has no idea of the project.
3. I think that suppression of an article has little to do with the content, but more with the subject. A very torough article about me, well written and sourced, is Speedy-deletion meat, while a crappy article about a minister of Queen Elisabeth I is just a featured article in gestation.
4. Perhaps ; on the other hand, if they have a doubt, maybe the AfD would be in order ; with this theory, admins would basically never put SD tags.
   • I don't know whether this Mark person deserve his own article ; as you say it, it strikes me as belonging to a larger article, but I could me wrong.

Sorry for not providing an ultimate answer. Cheers ! Rama 15:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

The admin who consummated the speedy deletion, in spite of the {{hangon}} has apologized.

I am more disturbed by the actions of the admin who deleted the "Mark" article, within minutes of its creation -- without going through the steps of placing a speedy tag.

• In general, I think that in order for openness. transparency and accountability, administrators should only skip the step of having two sets of eyes look at an article in serious cases. This administrator's suspicion of speculation and original research, within minutes of the article's creation, was, not only in violation of the guidelines at WP:CSD, but seriously degrades the trust we all need to be feeling for one another here on the wikipedia.
• This particular administrator left an ugly comment on my talk page, which could be interpreted as a threat.
• You and I met when User:Paradigmbuf (who has, since then, been permanently blocked, with all her sockpuppets.) accused us of being sockpuppets of one another, when we had problems with her attempts to turn the Paul Bremer article into a hagiography. I am afraid that, since then, I have come across other patriotic Americans, who are so patriotic that their patriotism has crossed the line into POV pushing.
• Some of them seem unaware of their lapse. Others seem aware, and calculating. A half-dozen of my most persistent critics resort to abusing wikipedia tags, and making out-of-policy {{afd}} nominations. All of the half dozen of the most persistent critics of my work, who were prepared to abuse the wikipedia's maintenance tags, for pushing their POV, were later exposed to be individuals hiding behinds sockpuppets -- with the exception of my most persistent critic. I suspect him of being a sockpuppet, but the only evidence I have of this is that he burst, full-blown, onto the wikipedia, and immediately started engaging in deceitful POV pushing, and quoting (and misquoting) the wikipedia's policies and procedures. The particular identity he used to harass my work has piped down over the last few months. This could mean he has grown tired of the wikipedia, or it could mean he is focussing his attention on other sockpuppets of his. I can't exaggerate his malice. I wish I had known then how to submit an RfC, when he was in the middle of his abuse.
• Well, this particular administrator, too, expressed views that, it seemed to me, suggested she shared the idea with Paradigmbuf, and these other deceitful sockpuppet users, that patriotic Americans could and should prevent the wikipedia from carrying articles, which, in their opinion, showed the USA in a bad light. I first encountered her during the first four {{afd}} discussions I participated in, when four of the articles I had started about Guantanamo detainees, one day, were all nominated for deletion shortly after their creation. During one of those discussions she wrote something that shocked me. Frankly, it STILL shocks me. Paraphrasing from memory, she said the wikipedia shouldn't have ANY articles about Guantanamo detainees, because those articles would just present opportunities for "America-bashing". I asked her what I thought were civil questions, to get her to clarify whether she meant what she wrote the way it appeared its surface meaning appeared to me.
• I replied that I wasn't aware of any topic that couldn't be written about, from a neutral point of view, provided the authors were careful, and cited verifiable, reliable sources. I think my reply was civil and reasonable, and that she should have felt an obligation to clarify her position and reply to my point.
  • She didn't write: "You have mis-understood me, or mischaracterized me, that is not what I meant at all."
  • She didn't write: "Sorry, I was rushing, and wrote something I didn't mean."
  • She didn't write: "You have got that half-right, I will be vigilant that articles that I think reflect badly on the USA, are rigously written, and I won't allow them to contain controversial quotations or paraphrasing that can't be backed up by an authoritative, verifiable source."
  • She didn't reply at all.
• What she did do was nominate ANOTHER Guantanamo related article for deletion, with a nomination that, in retrospect, I believe sailed far too close to violating WP:NPA: "A list of nn people with a bunch of red links just begging to be created. POV anti-Americanism, WP:POINT created because individual people whose articles already created have been listed for AfD."
• As recently as four months ago this particular administrator placed a delete opinion in an {{afd}} discussion, with the justification not notable on his own. Since they previously went on record with the opinion that none of the Guantanamo captives was notable enough to merit an article of their own I have a bit of a problem with this opinion. It strikes me as disingeneous. I have had wikipedia contributors address notes to the closing administrators of {{afd}}s, explaining why they think the closing administrator should discount opinions placed in the fora. What do you think of this practice? If she states this opinion again, in another {{afd}}, do you think it would be appropriate for me to reply to their afd comment asking if they still felt no Guantanamo detainee merited any coverage on the wikipedia? Do you think it would be appropriate for me to address a comment to the closing administrator?
• I was going to ask you about requesting an Administrator review. But, that process seems to have lapsed. I recently re-read the section in the wiki guidelines about "forgive and forget". I considered drafting a note offering an olive branch. But, then I came across her September 28th comment, and I re-read her December 2005 threat.
• I have created hundreds of articles related to the Guantanamo detainees, and I don't believe there is a single one that could fairly be described as "America-bashing". I have met a number of administrators who are thoughtful, and tactful. But there are others who are rude, inconsiderate, show bad judgement and won't acknowledge making mistakes, and a few who, it seems, will bend the wikipedia's rules in order to push their POV. I really think it is important for all wikipedia contributors to be able to be humble enough to admit when they made a mistake. And I think it is particularly important for those who have been trusted with administrator powers. Maybe it is too much to expect her to own up, and acknowledge that the articles I started weren't simply "POV America-bashing". But, if our situations were reversed, I'd own up and admit I made a mistake.

I hope you don't mind me going on at such length.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 23:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Vendyl_jones_200x600.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Vendyl_jones_200x600.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 13:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Image for Lateral coital position

I notice you've been doing diagrams for sexual positions. I just created an article for Masters and Johnson's lateral coital position. I did a quick diagram in OmniGraffle, but it would likely benefit from something a bit more along the lines of the others you've done. Feel free to replace it should you so desire. -- cmh^TC 20:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a batch of overdue drawings that I plan to do, I'll add this one to the list. I have already bought new sketchbooks. Cheers ! Rama 08:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thankies!!

Just a quick note to say cheers for obliging the rather embarrasing request. A couple of previous art-studenty friends needed pose diagrams for their sketches but were too queasy to sift through the porn - so I thought to ask you instead!! Thanks again, I hope they prove useful diagrams. Lady BlahDeBlah 00:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC) (couldn't find original query...)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Logo-armee-fracaise.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo-armee-fracaise.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 04:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Logo marine.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo marine.gif. 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 06:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Komšiluk

I've nominated Komšiluk, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Komšiluk satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Komšiluk and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Komšiluk during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Duja► 10:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 22:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Image tagging for Image:Chretien2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chretien2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 07:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject France

Hi Rama! I have announced your artcile created French frigate Muiron on the Wikipedia:WikiProject France/New article announcements, so that other users interested in France-related topics can help expanding the article. Happy editing, STTW (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Mechanical Pencil

Nice job cleaning up the page. :)
--Knulclunk 17:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Name

Well you say its none of those but is it reffering to... this? -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 03:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Indirectly, yes. Rama 11:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

De Gaulle's pictures

I see you deleted de Gaulle's portrait standing on top of the de Gaulle article because (I quote) it is "uninteresting". I'm afraid you are abusing your admin powers here. It is not yours to decide which picture is interesting, and which is not. It should be decided by consensus of the community. I have restored this picture and I will file a formal complaint if you abuse your powers again. They were given to you to enforce Wikipedia policies, not to act as you please.

I see you also deleted the Casablanca Conference picture on the ground that (I quote again) this is excessive fair use, there are other free pictures that can be used. Well, actually no, after checking there is no other picture that show de Gaulle, Churchill, and Roosevelt on the same picture. So you deleted an important picture which showed the three allied western nations. I cannot restore this picture because I wasn't the person who uploaded it originally, so I don't have the references of this picture. Please undo your delete or I will have to contact other admins which I hope won't come to this. Godefroy 17:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The point is that such a trivial image cannot fulfil the requirements for fair use.

Similar images to the Casablanca are available from public domain sources like Why We Fight. As you would know if you had cared to give a trivial glance at the image that I have provided as a Free alternative. Rama 17:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Did you know

On 16 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article French destroyer La Combattante, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 00:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! there's quite a lot of work to do on these subjects, and instead of trying to understand what happen, people have too much of a tendency of exclusively engaging in political debates (not that's it's not important, but it's difficult to make oneself a clear idea without a full picture of the story - and yet, nobody can claim to have such a full picture...) Cheers! Tazmaniacs

Having created the Category:Italian left-wing extra-parliamentary groups, I removed however "Terrorism" cat for the PAC, as they claimed responsibility for four assassinations, but have not engaged in bombings AFAIK. Terrorism was defined by Raymond Aron as follow: "Une action violente est dénommée terroriste lorsque ses effets psychologiques sont hors de proportion avec ses résultats purement physiques." On pourrait discuter de cette définition, mais globalement elle semble rester à peu près correcte. Ciao! Tazmaniacs

You would probably be sad to see that. But then, clearly Wikipedia is useful (and obnoxious) for people on all... sides. Tazmaniacs

Image:Caducea.png

Greetings Rama. Would you mind taking a look at image:Caducea.png and adding a little information about its source? Happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 12:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Strasbourg

Jette un coup d'oeil à l'historique de cette page. Il y a de quoi devenir fou avec cet utilisateur Rt...chose qui, depuis des mois, ne fait que reverter aveuglément à des versions antérieures (effaçant notamment ta contribution), en toute impunité (aucun admin n'a jamais voulu enregistrer ma plainte). RCS 08:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Antoine Béthouart

Hello Rama,

I would like to ask you to reconsider your move of the Émile Béthouart article to the name Antoine Béthouart.

I realize that both given names are part of his entire name. However, you should consider the following -

1. There are already articles titled Émile Béthouart in three other languages on Wikipedia. As it is, the English language article is the newest and now bears a different name.

2. The bridge named for Béthouart in Innsbruck is the Émile-Béthouart-Steg, an indication that he was officially, at least, known as "Émile Béthouart".

3. Googling the two names (not scientific, I know) produces over 100 hits for "Émile-Béthouart" and about 50 for "Antoine Béthouart".

Your consideration of this request would be appreciated.

Cheers

W. B. Wilson 14:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I am uncertain on this issue: you have numerous hits of both "Émile Béthouart" and "Antoine Béthouart", but you'll notice that the the first hits on"Émile Béthouart" are Wikipedia articles and USyan sites, while "Antoine Béthouart" returns the official site of the Ordre de la Libération. On the site of the Sénat, he is known as Antoine as well [11]. Rama 14:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Granted. It is odd however that a bridge named for him, with French officials present at the ceremony, uses Émile vice Antoine in the name. As well, the hits on the other Wikipedia sites are hardly American usages. It -is- unfortunate that we now have a different article name than three other Wikis for a biographical entry. It would probably be best if all four Wikis used his full name, but getting the others to change as well would likely not be easy. W. B. Wilson 19:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Changing to the full name is a good idea: it allows us to escape the problem even if we can't solve it :) Rama 19:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Salut Rama

J'ai bloqué indéfiniment le compte "Www.inquisition.ca" sur fr, et le type vient réclamer en me disant qu'il contribue sans problème ici. Effectivement!! Il est passé à travers les mailles du filet ou quoi? Moi, j'ai vu un nom qui contenait un lien vers site, j'ai bloqué à vue, mais bon. Dis moi quoi :-) Bradipus 22:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah flûte, ne voyant pas de réaction je te croyais en congé et j'étais en train de faire un message à un autre admin, mais je vois que tu l'as bloqué en fait. Bonne continuation. Bradipus 08:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Désolé, j'étais un peu à la bourre, d'où mon laconisme. Par ailleurs, le canal IRC des admins de en: a été mis en mode privé, je me suis fait faire les autorisations pour y aller. J'ai pu alors m'y connecter, taper un brin de conversation amicale avec des gens aimables, leur donner un petit coup de main pour des questions qu'ils avaient à propos de Commons, avoir un avis sur ton loustic et le bloquer avec la conscience tranquille que donne l'assurance de la collégialité, et la satisfaction de ne pas avoir perdu mon temps de bénévolat à des conneries.

Bon retour sur fr: ! :> Rama 17:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Erreur

File:Saint-Pierre-Le-Vieux-IMG 4136.jpg

C'est Saint-Thomas, pas Saint-Pierre-le-Vieux !

RCS 06:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Il est prévenu

[12]. RCS 17:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am rama on freenode and I would like the cloak wikimedia/rama. Thanks. --Rama 16:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Images

I'm just using what I was told to use. So please stop deleting my images, it is just annoying (or just explain me what I should use instead of deleting pigheadedly).Max Thayer 13:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)