User talk:Domitori

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Henrik 18:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Source for Nanoscope image
You uploaded an image for use in the nanoscope article. The source of the article is www.ils.ued.ac.jp/~dima/nanoscope.pdf, which is now a dead link. Is the original article your own work? If not, do you have permission from the author to publish it here? eaolson 15:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Surugabay1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Surugabay1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 12:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thin Disk Laser article
Hey! Just wanted to say nice job on the disk laser article! --Patrick Berry 15:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Applied physics B
A tag has been placed on Applied physics B, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on Talk:Applied physics B. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Vox Rationis 03:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have dealt with the issue by rewriting the article (& combining A & B). You are perfectly correct that scientific journal articles should never be deleted, and there are a number of editors who will support this view very strongly--and so far, very successfully. But this requires the articles to be of a uniformly consistent standard in the first place to avoid attracting attention from those who do not understand. I've made a temporary fix, and I or others will upgrade further.

I hope you will add many such articles, but please examine the existing articles first to see what content is necessary. I'd be glad to help you as needed, and so would many of the editors of the physics articles. DGG 05:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate your help, DGG. Redirection is better. Thanks. 130.153.147.57 07:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Suruga Bay
Obviously, that photo was removed because of the nude women in the picture. Suruga Bay is not a Nude beach, and so the picture was not representative of the article. If you have other photos of just the bay, then that would be great. Otherwise, the ukiyo-e print works just fine. MightyAtom 04:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

"Rock Climbing" image
Hi,

You uploaded an image to the "rock climbing" article that doesn't really seem pertinent (it's a police officer in Japan scrambling down some rocks). Can you explain why this shouldn't be deleted?

Thanks, rob Rob Cranfill 05:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rob. This figure is important illustration, why the grade of a rock should coddespond to the grade and equipment of the climber. It is typical example of grade 3 rock. The police uniform shows the lack of equipment of the climber. He faces the cliff, ahowing the lack of skill. I consider to post it also at the Yosemite Decimal System article, but I have not yet similar pics of class 2, class 4 and class 5 rocks. What do other climbers think about? dima 12:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Smile


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. I've just been working on cleaning up and copyediting some of the articles you've worked on or created. You have added lots of good content to the encyclopedia! --Srleffler 06:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

New category for optics journals
Since we now have quite a few articles on optics journals, I have created a new category for them: Category:Optics journals. Please put articles about optics journals in that category instead of in any of Category:Physics journals or Category:Engineering journals. The new category is a subcategory of both of those, as well as a subcategory of optics.--Srleffler 04:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Redirect
I have put a speedy delete tag on your redirect page to your user page as there is no need for there to be a page that does this. --Samtheboy (t/c) 12:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Samtheboy. I had pressed the wrong key. dima 05:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation?
Was the text in these articles OCRed, or typed in verbatim?

"All the scientific journals should have mirror at Wiki." - Is this the fair-use rationale for posting scientific journal articles into WP?

I'm not asserting copyvio, but I want this discussed. --Lexein 07:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Lexein!
 * You indicated the confusung sentence.
 * I just checked meanings of word "mirror", and replaced it to "short article".
 * dima 05:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Some of the errors in the text of the articles seem like optical character recognition errors, instead of human transcription errors. -Lexein 12:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Lexein, now I understand better your question. I do not use the OCR machine intentionally. Does OCR occurs each time when a scanner makes a copact PDF file from printed pages? Anyway, I almost never type in verbatim. If you see more errors, let us correct them. dima 00:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Yale
You added "In the archieves of the University, there are also important historical documents; in particular, those related to Andrei Sakharov and other human-right defensors (dissidents) in the CCCP.". But looking at the reference you provided, it seems that the Yale press is publishing the papers; it's not clear to me that they actually hold them. Are you certain? Are they held at the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library? Sterling Memorial Library? - Nunh-huh 12:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Nunh-huh, you catch me! I was sure, the library shows the digital copy of their documents. Now I see, it may be just digital (may be extended) version of the book; then, the reference should be: . While we do not know, I suppress the paragraph at Yale University. This book is very important; we should mention it in the Yale University Press. Stalinists pretend that there was no repressions of dissidents during the Brezhnev stagnation; stalinists are especially aggressive in the Russian version of Wikipedia. May be, you know Russian-speaking vikipedists, who still appreciate some democracy that you still have, they could help. Anyway, thanks; after your message I can improve articles that cite this book.dima 14:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, looking at the finding aid in the Yale library, I suspect that the papers are elsewhere. (I suspected so, as I know more or less what they hold.) Perhaps the information would best be placed in Andrei Sakharov? - Nunh-huh 02:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The originals are at Harvard University. I cite the book at Andrei Sakharov, have a look, please. Should we delete the suppressed paragraph at Yale University, or shoould we unsuppress and correct it, mentioning the Yale University Press and Harvard University there? dima 05:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --62.105.155.114 05:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear 62.105.155.114: Frankly, I do not understand, what are you talking anout. Why deletion? The discussion page is empty; neither support, nor crytics. If you want to cricicise, but cannot find a weak point at the article mentioned, use the link at the bottom of the article, at that "wiki" the same Larisa is described from non-neutral point of view. dima 11:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Не имеет смысла беседовать с анонимом ;) Судя по IP он из России и решил прикончить статью в английской Википедии. RedAndr 15:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * RedAndr: I translate your comments for en.wiki users: There is no reason to talk with anonymous. His IP indicates that he is from Russia and wants to kill the article at en.wiki.
 * RedAndr: Thank you for the comment. According to publications, at least two doctors suspected in the psychiatric abuse, are women. They could dislike the Latin transliteration of their names. Perhaps, they read also our discussion here. Let us try to communicate them:

'''Dear Doctors. If you like other transliterations of your names, please say it.''' dima 01:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Even if Larisa Arap is mentally ill, can Dmitri Tereshin (Дмитрий Терешин) get permission to withdraw Larisa from Russian Federation, in order to continie her treatment (if necessary) in another country? If the Russian authotrities indeed believe, that Larisa is mentally ill, they should be extremelly interested to deliver Larisa into the airport and say:"Here is your Larisa, take her out of country and treate her by yourself". If success, we add the last section, and nobody will have any reason to remove or vandalize the article. dima 01:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding further edits to Larisa Arap
Dear Domitori, I fully understand that you feel passionate about keeping this article, and I am doing my best to edit it to allow for readability, and to keep it from being deleted due to its current writing style. However, I would like to respectfully suggest that you refrain from editing the article further, as your English is not at the level that would help the article. Please do not take this the wrong way, as it is in no way an insult, but when an article like this is up for deletion review, it is best to keep it from being more confusing, especially as this article seems to have been translated by an artificial program, and thus, contained severe errors (which I've mostly fixed). I would suggest that you place your additional entries into the talk page, and either myself, or someone else can write them into the article using the manual of style guidelines. Again, please don't take my suggestion wrong, I know you're trying to help, and it is appreciated, but for example, your recent edit added the following:

"Dr. Reshet asked Larisa about her role in the article "Durdom". After to get the confirmation,"

And now I will need to go figure out what that means, and re-write it. I believe it is trying to say "In an attempt to confirm Larisa wrote it" but I'm not 100% sure, which is why we need a Russian/English translator on the project.

I'd appreciate it if you'd drop all the additions you have into the page's discussion page, and I'll promise that the items I can understand I will put into the article in English. Once the article's deletion review is over, and a translator can be found, it should not be such an issue. Would you be alright with this? Sincerely, Ariel ♥ Gold 23:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * ArielGold, you did well! The errors are not those of any authomatic translation, they are mine. Thank you for the correction. I like your idea about suggestions at the "talk" page. I am not sure it Larisa had wrote her last statements, she could just say them. We still have no biographical data. If someone brings them, it will be good. Thank you. dima 01:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Good to hear back from you Dima! I promise I will check the talk page at least a couple times a day, and anything you add I'll do my best to incorporate, or as you can see, ask you to help with the translation (I have one item on the talk page needing your help)! And for not having it be a program, well wow, you did very well then! And, if you see anything that I mis-translated, feel free to holler on the talk page and tell me what it should say, Between the two of us, we can work it out! [[Image:Face-grin.svg|25px]] Ariel ♥ Gold 01:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Awesome idea
Excellent that you placed the "under construction" tag on the page while you're working on it! Good thinking! Ariel ♥ Gold 01:02, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of IEEE J of QE
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on IEEE J of QE, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because IEEE J of QE is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting IEEE J of QE, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 02:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 耕造
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Chris (talk) 16:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I used your penguin image
I used it here, under the section called Things that Make Me Smile. and I certainly hope you don't mind. :) - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  10:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Generalized signum function
Hello!. I found your contribution about Generalized signum function quite interesting. Could you please expand that topic? Thanks you. Rjgodoy (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Rjgodoy. I try to improve it. dima (talk) 08:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

9/11

 * "Airplanes hit buildings; do not crush mislims yet"

Hi, could you please give me a more exact quote? I am interested by what you are saying, but I do not fully understand... &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (talk) 19:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, Xiutwel. Currently, I do not have it. Perhaps, we need to brouce the newspapers of that period. I expected the talk by President to appear at the top of the list of the references; it was first official announcement about the catastrophe. I listened it by TV, and I asked my friends and colleagues: "Why does he talk about muslims?", "What is relation between religion and the airplane accident?", and nobogy could explain me. I sent several letters to officials. The replies can be compressed to 3 sentences: "Thank you for your interest. We have a lot of such letters. We carefully investigate it, then we'll publish the results." Now I have no documents in my hands. I expected, some professionals carefully collect the references... dima (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Your request
I'm only seeing your request now, but you have to let me know what's happening so I can help. I confess I can't see anything bad going on - perhaps because I only read English? - Nunh-huh 14:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Multiple posting of offensive messages. Ok, may be Oleg will find time to deal with this. dima (talk) 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Praga1968MolotovCoctail.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Praga1968MolotovCoctail.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 09:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

wikisource
Hi, I have marked many of your contributions to Wikisource with " " because proof of publication has not been provided. Please start to address this. Also note that Wikisource can now notify you via email whenever a page on your watchlist has been modified. If you want this, it needs to be enabled in your preferences. Cheers, John Vandenberg (chat) 17:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Meanings of "Rolex"
There are indeed several meanings of "Rolex". Aside from the wristwatches and the company that makes or assembles or has its name put on them, there's this and this and more.

If you think it's a good idea to move the existing article on Rolex to Rolex (company), suggest this on its discussion page and see what responses you get. Don't move it all by yourself, and don't move it to Rolex(company) (where you moved it before, and which is bizarre). -- Hoary (talk) 06:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Hoary, I disagree with you, but I shall try to put all the staff in the same fiplace. You did not mention the most usual meaning of the word. Rolex means "spam", "trash", "junk". Due ot the junk mail, many peolpe know this meaning, but many of them never open the junk messages and do not know, that rolex may mean also "watch" and "camera". The most usual meaning shouild be first; only then I explain the ethymology and specify other meanings. Anyway, thank you for the links. Now I should delete all the rolex from my mailbox, then I consider to include your links. dima (talk) 09:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You did not mention the most usual meaning of the word. Rolex means "spam", "trash", "junk". (i) I'd be willing to believe this, if you had clear evidence for it. Do you? (ii) Yes, lots of junk email references "Rolex". I'd guess that this is because the spamming sleazeballs think that readers will think that "Rolex" is not spam, trash or junk but instead some kind of expensive watch. But this is only a guess. (For what very little it's worth, to me "Rolex" primarily means a ridiculously expensive and usually rather ugly watch that gets huge amounts of advertising. But that's just me.) -- Hoary (talk) 14:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hoary, I have evidence. Many sites use this word. As for sleazeballs, will you write such a stub, please? Then we discuss Rolex as an example. dima (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Ckatz chat spy  09:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

Further to that: I made this edit to Talk:Rolex, pointing out that you were seriously confused. Ten minutes later, you ignored what it said and moved the article for the second time. Your new title might have some merit (cf Omega SA), so you could have argued for it and waited for agreement. But your edit summary for the move makes it particularly clear that you're convinced that you know more about the meaning of "Rolex" than does any other editor.

Of course it is imaginable that other editors there are wrong and that you're right. If that's what you believe, then post a request for comment about the issue. -- Hoary (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing at Rolex. If you continue in this manner, you will be blocked once again. --Ckatz chat spy  22:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Ckatz, why do you consider my editing ar "disruptive"? Do not you see that the rolex article is unilateral?dima (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You are being disruptive because you are repeatedly attempting to change the page to reflect your personal point of view, regardless of the legitimate concerns expressed by other editors. This is not an "NPOV" issue, it is a content dispute, and you are edit-warring. In the absence of *any* evidence to support your assertions, there is no rational basis for the wholesale blanking and moving of an established article, as you have been doing. If you make any additional changes to the page regarding "spam" without first achieving consensus, you will be blocked. --Ckatz chat spy  00:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ckatz, do you think that I am the only human who consider the rolex-messages as spam? dima (talk) 02:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No, of course not - but you are to date the only person I have ever heard who has tried to make the case that "Rolex" now means "spam". Honestly, you have to dissociate the use of the name in spam from the meaning of the word. They are two very different concepts. --Ckatz chat spy  02:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Ckatz, do you think that I am the only human who had received the rolex messages? dima (talk) 02:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Reread what Ckatz wrote in the previous reply. I think you missed his point. Most people have seen spam advertising fake Rolex watches. This fact does not justify the claim that the word "Rolex" has become a generic term for spam. That is a very different issue, and none of the references you have provided appear to support that claim. --Srleffler (talk) 04:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Rolex and WP:3O
Hey. Athaenara delisted Rolex from the 3O page because there are at least four editors active on that page. Third opinions are generally reserved for pages where there are only two editors active. If you want to garner more consensus, I'd suggest WP:RFC. Thanks. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Rolex doesn't "mean" spam
You seem to be under the impression that Rolex is behind all of these spam messages. That's extremely unlikely. The email spam is sent by companies selling fake Rolex watches. They use the Rolex name in their spam adverts because it's considered a quality product/status symbol. Rolex does not "mean" spam. Fake Rolex watches are simply spammed frequently by dishonest companies. If you think that Rolex spam deserves special attention, I'd suggest bringing it up on Talk:E-mail spam to see if anyone else agrees that we need a section on that article dedicated to it. --Onorem♠Dil 04:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Dil. Do you think that the rolex watches are more numerous than the rolex messages? dima (talk) 05:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see why that would matter. The spam includes the company's name. That doesn't mean that the company's name "means" spam. --Onorem♠Dil 05:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Dill, I agree, that the company's name does not mean spam. For this reason, I suggest to move the article to rolex (company) or to Rolex S.A. or anything suitable. Now I repeat the question you did not answer:

Do you think that the rolex watches are more numerous than the rolex messages? dima (talk) 05:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's very likely that the spam outnumbers the watches, but I again don't see why that matters in any way. Millions of junk emails are sent with a single click. That doesn't make a word that they use in their subject line more notable than the product that inspired it's use. --Onorem♠Dil 05:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Millions of victims of the rolex messages have right to know the most usual meaning of the word. Even if you insist that the primary meaning is company, the byword should be mentioned in the article. dima (talk) 05:35, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * But it's not a "meaning" of the word...that's the point. Counterfeits have their own section in the article already. --Onorem♠Dil 05:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The difference between number of rays in the crown and spelling of one word does not affect the use of a product as watch, as clock, as atime-measuring device. The difference appears, if we treate rolex as a fetish, a religious symbol. Other properties are the same, and the way of distribution is also the same: spam through email. To wear a "rolex" is equal shame, whenever the "original" or the replica. Such a watch indicates, that the person is vulnerable to the aggressive adverticement. Why should we make the big difference between original and the replica in wikipedia? dima (talk) 05:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Your message about Rolex
I replied to your request on my talk page. --Srleffler (talk) 05:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint you on Rolex. I think the primary use of the term clearly belongs to the watch, and not to a slang term based on the watch. I generally feel that way about the original origin of a term, even if the subsequent use is more common - but in this case, I don't think it is. Perhaps you've just been exposed to the use of the term more than most people have. And while the opening is a bit peacocky, I don't think it's horribly so...it could use some toning down, or just move some of it to the article proper rather than the lede. - Nunh-huh 23:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nunh-huh, thank you for the quick reply. I see, neither Srleffler, nor you get rolex messages; good for you! Nevertheless, many websites (I do not count blogs) indicate, that the rolex messages are numerous and should be mentioned, even if it is not the primary meaning. I shall try to convince the participants that it is important. Once you have red the article, could you indicate any places that would allow to identify it as an encyclopedic article and distinguish it from an advertisement of the company? dima (talk) 02:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

E-mail spam
I've removed some of your unsourced original research from this article. You've yet to provide a source that says that words like Rolex and Viagra are being used as synonyms of spam. --Onorem♠Dil 22:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ckatz chat spy  01:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Ckatz, why you replace indication to the respectful newspapers to the fuzzy "popular culture"? Why do you talk about blocking instead of to support your point of view? dima (talk) 01:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Domitori, you have been warned. You are doggedly insisting on pursuing your own personal interpretation of this subject, despite having no evidence to support your claims and no support from your fellow editors. Your assertions fail WP:RS, WP:V, WP:NOR, and other policies and guidelines, and your refusal to let go of this is disruptive. Please take this opportunity to step back from the topic before you are blocked again. --Ckatz chat spy  02:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 2008 Red Square demonstration
I have nominated 2008 Red Square demonstration, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/2008 Red Square demonstration. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Russavia Dialogue Stalk me 19:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:RUSSIA roll call and your input required
Privet. You are receiving this message as you were listed on the membership list of WP:RUSSIA at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. Recent times has seen minimal activity within WikiProject Russia, and there is an attempt to re-invigorate the project and have it become more organised into a fully-fledge functioning project, with the aim of increasing the quality of Russia-related articles across English wikipedia.

As we don't know which listed members are active within the project and Russia-related article, all listed members are receiving this message, and are requested to re-affirm their active status on Russia-related article by re-adding their username to WikiProject Russia/Members by adding:

#

to the membership list. You may also like to place   on your userpage, as this will also place you in Category:WikiProject Russia members.

There is also an active proposal on the creation of a single WP:RUSSIA project. The proposal can be viewed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Russia, and your comments and suggestions are welcomed and encouraged at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal.

We all look forward to your continued support of WP:RUSSIA and any comments you may have on the proposal. --Russavia Dialogue Stalk me 04:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Optik - International Journal for Light and Electron Optics
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Optik - International Journal for Light and Electron Optics, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Nothing in news or scholar searches. Can't find any reliable sources. Not apparently notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oo7565 (talk) 17:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

CCCP
I've moved your contents from CCCP to Carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenyl hydrazone, which existed earlier. The former is now a redirect to the better-known Soviet Union. For your information. - Mailer Diablo 23:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Myouyama
Hi there, I noticed that you wrote an article Myouyama. I was trying to determine the location of this mountain and could not find it in the GSI link that you provided in the article. From what I can tell looking around the JA Wiki is that this mountain on the border between Kanagawa and Shizuoka prefectures is supposed to be 976 m in height. On the GSI topo map I belive that corresponds to this link. You can see just to the West is the Myoujin Pass. Is this the correct location? There seems to be a discrepency though between the height that I found and the height shown on the signpost in the picture. Is that 391 meters? Is that picture taken from the summit?imars (talk) 12:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Imaps; you indicated the important point. The pic is almost from the summit (perhaps, 10 meters from the summit). As for the location, it is not west from the Myoujin Pass, but almost North. Now I see, the map link was almost unusable: first, it is horribly slow, and second, it is difficult to identify the mount there. I upload the map by the Geographical Surway Institute. The mount is in vicinity of the bottom right corner. I include the part of the lake, in order to simplify the identification. (unfortunately, the parking is not shown, it is a little bit below the right hand side of the bottom. Will you check how does the article Myouyama look now? dima (talk) 04:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Georgian war
Privet, Dima! I noticed you are interested in Russia-Georgia war. I have some links here. May be they will be helpful. Best regards, Biophys (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Biophys! The article about that war is almost unusable: A lot of doubtful details... I begin to work on the sandbox User:Domitori/Russian-Georgian war(2008) but I do not have much time to advance fast. Also, there are some links at Война_в_Южной_Осетии_(2008)/ref, but mainly in Russian. dima (talk) 05:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

CCCP
You edited CCCP (subsequently moved to Carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenyl hydrazone), describing it as a "biochemical preparat." This looks wrong to me, I would have expected "preparation," but I'm not a biochemist (just a Wikignome who started with the CCCP dab page and got sucked in). A web search found one support for "preparat," but not on a native English page. Could you please either confirm the term as written or correct it? Matchups 01:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Larisa Arap
Privet colleague, what do you think about such edits? Biophys (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, Biophys. I think that this is organized vandalizm. (Sorry for late reply, I did very interesting and urgent work and did not put attention to wiki.) dima (talk) 23:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I could not answer, because I was blocked after this report by Offliner. They went through a number of articles and indiscriminately removed links. Do not ever use v. word, because they will report you to ANI for slander. It is me who they call the vandal . You are right: the less time one spends here the better for his career and nerves. Regards, Biophys (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Praga1968MolotovCoctail.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Praga1968MolotovCoctail.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the 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.  howcheng  {chat} 19:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Putin must go, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 08:08, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops..There was some confusion with the Spanish version; I did not realize that it disappeared, and copypasted the text to the English one. Sorry. Thank you for the correction. dima (talk) 08:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Image-Ridged Mirror figureB.png
Thank you for uploading File:Image-Ridged Mirror figureB.png. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:FujiSurugaIzu.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:FujiSurugaIzu.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:SelfPulsed.png
Thank you for uploading File:SelfPulsed.png. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:FiberDiskLaserA.png
Thanks for uploading File:FiberDiskLaserA.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 , 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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See 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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:OscillatorTodaFig2.png
Thank you for uploading File:OscillatorTodaFig2.png. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:OscillatorTodaFig1.png
Thank you for uploading File:OscillatorTodaFig1.png. 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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:MyouyamaMap.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MyouyamaMap.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 , 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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See 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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

File:CreeperSwing.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CreeperSwing.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. The Undead Never Die (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nanoscope figure.PNG
Thanks for uploading File:Nanoscope figure.PNG. 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 Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See 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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:08, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:QuantumReflection.png
Don't forget to mention in the information block if any image you made is your own work. Without this, other user and image patrollers won't know. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Springer Series in Surface Sciences for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Springer Series in Surface Sciences is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Springer Series in Surface Sciences until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –eggofreasontalk 19:44, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:FujiCloseView.jpg


The file File:FujiCloseView.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "orphaned image, no encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:
 * File:SnowQueen.jpg
 * File:SouthIzu.jpg
 * File:Surugabay.jpg
 * File:Surugabay1.jpg
 * File:TentSetUp.jpg

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

"Rolex (spam)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Rolex (spam). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 27 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Not a very active user (talk) 17:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:DiskLaserJPEG.jpg


The file File:DiskLaserJPEG.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-photographic data should be in .png/.svg. Redundant to File:DiskLaser.png"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 11:57, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Myōjinyama for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myōjinyama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Myōjinyama until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Boleyn (talk) 08:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)