User talk:Lezek

Hi Lezek, and welcome. Sorry about me reverting your change to Musical genre like that - I must have nodded off for a while, because it was a perfectly good change that you made. Apologies - I hope this won't put you off contributing some more! If you need any help, by the way, there are a stack of help pages, and if there's a specific question you want to ask there's the Village pump. Have fun! --Camembert


 * Hehe, no way :). Came here looking for an alternative to H2G2 that actually works and I like it :). Lack of Douglas Adams references is a slight downer but has the huge advantage of not becoming a giant floating monument to the dead controlled by a mindless bureaucracy. Lezek

Hi. Articles should generally be more than external links only... at least a good neutral definition... Evercat 23:25, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I know. It's a stub. The link will come in handy when someone (me) actually writes an article. Move it to talk if you object that strongly -- Lezek 23:38, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Even stubs must contain a definition. Still, since you're going to write it, I don't object that much. Cheers, Evercat 23:59, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Bad manners
Imagine someone had a userbox like yours for the EU for other unions like the US, the UK, the United Arab Emirates. It is just bad manners. ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * (from User talk:ROGNNTUDJUU!):
 * Just look at the criteria for speedy deletion of templates - in this case user boxes: divisive and and inflammatory. Crossing out an official symbol representing several hundred million people is respectless and does not help in any way to improve an encyclopedia. ROGNNTUDJUU! 14:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I am a citizen of the UK, which is in the EU. I have that userbox on my page. The flag of the EU certainly does not represent me; while I would happily support a democratic union, democracy in the EU is a complete and utter farce. Because I live in a part of the EU, around 80% of the laws that affect me daily are indirectly dictated by unelected commisioners, and the userbox expresses these concerns. Some of the laws dictated by unelected officials, particularly the EUCD, will directly affect the viability of Wikipedia in Europe. Expressing distrust of the EU in no way expresses distrust of Europeans in general. If you find a cross through the EU flag offensive, then you should prepare to be offended a second time when I clearly inform you how totally ridiculous I find your position to be. I also find your contempt for Wikipedian etiquette and blatant nationalism (unionism?) far more divisive than any expression of one's own opinion on one's own user page. ---Lezek 17:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You have all the my respect for criricizing a lack of democracy in the EU. The flag of the EU however does represent you and hundreds of millions of others at the WTO for example, and I see no reason why you should disrespect what others find offensive while there are so many civil ways to express your legitimate concerns. ROGNNTUDJUU! 17:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I choose not to be represented by that flag. I do not consider myself to be an extension of the country or region in which I live, and I am not represented by unelected officials, or images selected by unelected officials as flags. I find your assertion that I am represented by those things and your attempts to curtail my free speech offensive. Since you are offending me, but are not harming me in any other way, I can end the harm simply and efficiently by henceforth ignoring you. I advise you to use the same strategy. --Lezek 17:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I am just asking you not to offend others you feel represented by the flag. I am sure you would agree if there was this flag: [[Image:No-UK.PNG|40px]] ROGNNTUDJUU! (who thinks that flags should not be crossed) 18:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not represented by that flag either, and even if I were would not be in the least bit concerned by any alteration you might choose to make to it. --Lezek 18:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Lezek - just to let you know that I back everything you have said whole-heartedly and am behind you all the way! DJR (Talk) 19:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your support; it is much appreciated. This whole controversy took me so by surprise that I had to read ROGNNTUDJUU's initial message on my talk page several times to understand what he was talking about. I am actually rather pleased by his increasingly childish responses, because it lends credibility to the notion that he has been behaving childishly all along. --Lezek 20:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I created this template: Template:user respect ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank-you for illustrating my point. You will be delighted to hear that I have not the least interest in you or your template. --Lezek 20:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Your double standards for image deletion do not speak highly of you. I use mine in a helpful way. ROGNNTUDJUU! 01:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Quote: "My feeling on the matter is therefore that I would rather allow the uploader to express his opinion". What double standards? --Lezek 11:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Please allow me to suggest that the above conversation is hilarious and should be appreciated by as many people as possible. --64.142.82.28 09:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Seconded :) -Lezek 14:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Heitham Al-Sayed
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Heitham Al-Sayed, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Has been unsourced for 3 months, fails the sourcing requirement at WP:BLP

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. Kevin (talk) 11:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

ns8
hi, ns8 is a trident shell. better you read the whole article first before reverting some data. mabdul 18:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Lodestar (band)
I have nominated Lodestar (band), an article that 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/Lodestar (band). 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.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cnilep (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:International Symbol of Access.svg
File:International Symbol of Access.svg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:International Symbol of Access.svg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mijk van Dijk


A tag has been placed on Mijk van Dijk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Compassionate727 (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Aluminium poisoning listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Aluminium poisoning. Since you had some involvement with the Aluminium poisoning redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)