User talk:Blair76

Image source problem with Image:Subsaharanafrica.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Subsaharanafrica.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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 Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See 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 the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

September 2007
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on sub-Saharan Africa. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. - Taharqa 05:35, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Taharaqa, I'm not engaged in an edit war. I am trying to remove opinions that are unsourced and shift the focus to Black Africa. Your tone is aggressive and not cooperative. And please before warning me about the 3RR rule, make sure you don't violate it yourself. You have already violated the rule, and if anyoen checks the article's history, you are obsessively editing it. Remember, wikipedia is a free source that anyoen can edit. It is not cooperative of you to accuse editors of starting wars or vanadalising. Take a deep breath and try to be cooperative. Blair76 05:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Black people. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. -Taharqa 06:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Stop instigating edit wars and take your own advice. If anyone checks the articles you edit, they will quickly realize just how comical these posts on my usepage are. Blair76 02:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)