User talk:Liftarn/Archive 7

Thanks
For history of jerusalem. Please watch this page closely. I am getting pretty sick of the POV-vandalism committed there by this bunch of extreme Zionists. --Eidah 15:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Radiator surround
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Radiator surround, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Radiator surround is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Radiator surround, 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

house demolition
Is it just me, or is this whole thing crazy? do these people udnerstand what they're getting themselves into? Do they realize that the people mentioning Israeli demolitions of Israeli houses will continualy want to draw equivalencies between the two? I guess there's not much we can do now. --Steve, Sm8900 18:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What do you suggest then? // Liftarn

comment removal
hi Liftarn, apologies for having removed your article extract, i was thinking it might have been done in error as i didn't see the direct link. your expanation clarifies things however, thank you.  ITAQALLAH  11:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No harm done. // Liftarn

Making false accusations
You have made false accusations about me. . FYI, I have never edited that jihadi leaflet other than adding an AFD note. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Mea culpa. Sorry about that. I'll remove it. // Liftarn

Your edit in Kart racing
Liftarn, you have reposted your picture taken in a Swedish museum in Kart racing without any argumentation. As I said before when I reverted it, I believe your note has its place on the Swedish Karting article, or maybe you want to create a new page on the history of karting in Sweden. If we start to explain how karting started in France, Germany, India or Japan, this article is going to be extremely boring and out of place. It is already made mention of the 50th anniversary - with FIA reference - as well as the introduction of karting (which started in the US) in Europe with reference also. This is enough of history for this topic as it is more interesting to know what the sport is about today IMO. I will revert your edit again and suggest that you open a discussion here if you feel that your point is greatly improving this article anyway. - Wikigi | talk to me | 19:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Why did yo blank it with such an obviously invalid reason? // Liftarn

Vagn Bennike
Dear LiftarnIs there any Swedish, German or other source you know of for Vagn Bennike that might help us to make a wiki page in his memory? Regards Nishidani 14:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I found one short bio and some articles . fr:Vagn Bennike and he:ואגן בניקה already exists. // Liftarn


 * I'm in your debt Liftarn. I was just reading, slowly (it's been 37 years since I studied the sister language Swedish), the Norwegian (?) section when I noted you'd already got the article up. My computer for some strange reason, seizes up and closes down when I access the Time article, but I'll try to get over the jinx, read up and flesh the stub out. Thanks againNishidani 15:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit
Could you please explain this edit. Last I checked this was not free software and its shareware. I'm not even the original author of the screenshot. I don't believe this was a valid move to commons.--Crossmr 03:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * "we have released the source code (along with all necessary support files, graphics files, sound effects, etc.) for the Windows and Macintosh versions of Blades of Exile to the world. Do what you want with it (within the sensible legal guidelines described in the license), and have fun." // Liftarn
 * Thanks. I had a brief look at their product page when I found that, and still saw it listed as a "demo" for download.--Crossmr 13:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2cat3d_3.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:2cat3d_3.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. ~  Wi ki  her mit  18:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Z06-Blk-7.jpg
You need to assume good faith here my friend. These are pictures of my car fix ed up with Adobe photoshop and after effects. FrankWilliams 18:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Great! // Liftarn

Image:Mad-sci.jpg.
Truth is, I frankly don't know where this image came from anymore. It was more than five years ago since I found it, and all I remember is that it was from some serial or another that was being freely distributed by a number of sources. No one fussed about that sort of thing in 2003.

I would note, though, that the image has been adopted by dozens of users, and apparently made it into a popular userbox. Its deletion would break all of those. Collateral damage is not a consideration, I guess. I suspect that a link to the made-for-Wikipedia image that now resides (and replaced this old one) on the mad scientist page might be an adequate substitute for most of these uses, but it would require that each user page that has it be edited. Is there a bot for this? - Smerdis of Tlön 18:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Image:Mad-sci.jpg is used at Boffin where it says it's Dr Alexander Thorkel (Albert Dekker) from Dr. Cyclops (1940) so we have a source. Is there a way to check if the copyright has been renewed? // Liftarn


 * Good - someone recognized it. If I had known that, I would have mentioned it at least.  There must be some way of telling if it has been renewed, but I do not know what that might be. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, you go to http://cocatalog.loc.gov/ and check it there. It is listed but the problem is that I don't know how to interpret the results. // Liftarn


 * Nothing in there seems to indicate that a renewal is on file. The first item involves a lunchbox apparently made from reusing the movie art; this suggests a lack of renewal, rather than otherwise.  The other listings would appear to be for compilations of various kinds that include it.  - Smerdis of Tlön 16:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll move it to Commons then. // Liftarn

Image:1913, March 9, Man wearing bowler hat, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.jpg
While you're technically right to dispute the copyright status of the photograph, why bother? Wily D 17:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Because if I transfer it to Commons with all the paperwork I get shit for it. // Liftarn

re: yeah, it's my own site
If it is indeed your own site, please take note of the following message:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:AZX-Monstrum and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:AZX-Monstrum with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:AZX-Monstrum.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Cheers, &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't mind, I'll just send an e-mail to you using your Mail Me page. When you reply, confirming that you agree to license your site content under the GFDL, the copyright violation tags will be removed.  &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do. I have sent a message to permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org as well. // Liftarn


 * ✅ &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * All taken care of. Thank you.  :) &mdash; madman bum and angel 21:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Whitelist
Hey Liftarn, I think I've just succeeded in whitelisting your site, so you'll have no problem with our bot. He's a good worker, but a bit of a linear thinker. ;) If that didn't work, I'm in contact with the operator, so he should sort me out.

Cheers! &mdash; madman bum and angel 22:23, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems to work now. Cheers! &mdash; madman bum and angel 22:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Great! // Liftarn

Regarding edits to MG Midget
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Liftarn! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule groups\.msn\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot 13:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Batman
A free image with Batman and Robin in the Batmobile. You've got to be joking? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      "Talk"? 17:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No, just the car. That should be less of a problem. See Commons:Category:Batmobile. //

Note I already uploaded an image to the commons from flickr and replaced the copywrighted one. The 60s car is actually my uploaded image there. We now have a free replacement. Thanks  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 12:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think we have at least the movie and TV series cars covered now. The animated are probably more difficult to find free replacements for. // Liftarn

Ah I only love the 60s tv series anyway - I can't really confess to liking comics anyway. All the best  ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦       "Talk"? 12:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the images...
Sorry about that; the images are classified as parody, but you are free to get rid of them if you find this inappropriate. I deeply apologize for the trouble I made... Blake Gripling 08:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. I quite enjoyed some of them, but on Wikipedia you need to keep a paper trail so you don't run into problems. If you used free images as a base it would be another issue. // Liftarn

moving my images to commons
I wish you would NOT do that. I cannot update my images when they are moved to commons. Moreover, I did not ask you to do that. Motorrad-67 14:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes you can. All you have to do is to get an acoount there as well (or is that tranpsarent nowdays, I don't remember). Oh, and by the way you shouldn't watermark your images. // Liftarn

PLEASE MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS AND STOP MESSING WITH MY IMAGES! GET A LIFE!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Motorrad-67 (talk • contribs)


 * I do mind my own business and my business is transfering images to Commons. Please read Image use policy where it clearly says "user-created images may not be watermarked, distorted, have any credits in the image itself or anything else that would hamper their free use". // Liftarn

'''IF YOU KEEP THIS HARRASSMENT UP I WILL NEVER CONTRIBUTE ANOTHER IMAGE TO WIKIPEDIA. IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT, YOU ARE ON THE THRESHOLD OF BEING SUCCESSFUL. AGAIN, PLEASE MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS AND STOP MESSING WITH MY IMAGES! GET A LIFE!! Motorrad-67 15:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)'''


 * How can it be harrassement to transfer a few pictures to Commons? // Liftarn


 * I did not ask you to do that and you persist in saying you will. That's harassment in my book. You were uninvited.  However, if you prove to be deaf to my requests, I will cease all participation in Wikipedia. If you leave my images alone, I will continue to supply images and participate. The choice is entirely yours. Motorrad-67 16:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, this is a wiki anybody can contribute. You don't own the content. Feel free to keep participating, but please don't launch personal attacks and also plase make sure your images follow Image use policy. Thank you. // Liftarn


 * I contribute by providing text and images. Others apparently do not but choose rather to harass those who do contribute. When my images are taken to commons, I can no longer update or improve them. They are locked to me. Therefore, I will stop contributing to Wikipedia if my images are not left alone.  Motorrad-67 16:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I contribute by providing text, images and by moving free images to Commons. If you feel it is necessary to harass and threaten me because of that you should perhaps take a break and consider your motives for working on Wikipedia. Images on Commons are not locked. All you have to do is to go there and edit just as here. // Liftarn

"Asatru is not a neopagan religion as such"
could you avoid using Wikipedia as a soapbox for your private idiosyncratic opinions? If you want to make a case that Polytheistic reconstructionism is "not neopagan as such", present your case at Talk:Polytheistic reconstructionism, presenting your sources, but please stop your tactics of petty edit-warring. --dab (𒁳) 11:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I could say the same about you. While Asatru technically is a form of polytheistic reconstructionism it doesn't really belong in the neopagan sphere as it has a different hsitory. // Liftarn

I urge you again to behave. You have been given ample time to establish encyclopedicity. You have not delivered. The merger has found support from  and. no information was removed in the merge. Your idiosyncratic position has consistently failed to get any support from other editors. You have to recognize that as it stands, you have no case. If you can present an encyclopedic discussion, or find support from editors in good standing the case would lie different. As long as you cannot do that, please avoid wasting any more of my time. dab (𒁳) 08:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please stop wasting my time by constantly trying to remove valid articles. Is this som kind of personal vendetta or do you actually have a valid reason for your actions? // Liftarn

you are sadly confirming my expectations by acting as immaturely as ever. I haven't the least personal stake in this, and I am utterly un-interested in you as a person. this is about WP:ENC. Stop your trolling, and I will likely forget your existence after 20 minutes. dab (𒁳) 11:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Columbia University
Hi, just two comments. (1) The source you re-added doesn't seem to have anything to do with the incident it is listed with. The article you sourced is about Ahmadinejad's recent visit to the university, whereas the section you added it in is about the 1933 visit of the German ambassador. (2) I added the tag after the quote Luther's speech stressed Hitler's "peaceful intentions" because you did not cite the source of the quote "peaceful intentions". Thanks! Yavoh 18:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) The article is also about Luther's visit. Read the full article. 2) It's in the reference you deleted. // Liftarn

Religious discrimination against Neopagans
I'm posting this note both on your page and dab's. Please stop the revert war straight away. I suspect each of you is using this article to get at the other, and the article and the encyclopaedia are suffering because of it. Personally I support the merger, but would prefer it to stand as it is untilm a gebnuine consensus involving other editors can emerge. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk to me)  10:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm OK with that. Actually I'm the one that is open for suggstions and debate. // Liftarn
 * Having just reviewd the discussions at Talk:Religious discrimination against Neopagans, which I had not previously seen, I feel that a consensus for merger has been achieved, with only yourself opposing. Please allow the article to be merged there. If you revert it again you will definitely be in breach of 3RR. Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk to me)  11:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kim Dent-Brown (talk • contribs)


 * No consensus have been acheived (or even attempted), it just mob rule. An earlier merge suggestion was rejected at Talk:Religious discrimination against Asatru. // Liftarn

Electronic stalking
My goodness, Mr. Liftarn, haven't you got anything better to do with your valuable time that stalk me electronically?


 * I try to stay out of controversial topics since I simply don't have the time and energy ...

You appear to have the time and energy to stalk me. I think I once suggested that you consider getting a life. Clearly, I was very prescient at the time! Motorrad-67 15:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Consider yourself to be listed on my list of Wikiepedia vandals. I'm keeping my eye on you. // Liftarn


 * Fine. Sorry you don't have anything more constructive to do with your life, such as it is. Motorrad-67 15:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Since vandals can destroy easier than it is to build it is time well spent to watch them so they can be stopped as soon as possible. // Liftarn


 * Well said. Try "building: yourself some day. You might enjoy it. Would love to see the high quality photos you have contributed.  Can you give me Wiki links?  Motorrad-67 15:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Feel free to have a look at Commons:Category:Files by Liftarn. // Liftarn


 * Thank you. Alas, most of those are snapshots with cluttered backgrounds. Good photos? Afraid not. I would hope you could do better. Motorrad-67 15:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Whatever. // Liftarn

F.Y.I. Any new photos I post to Wikipedia will be 200 px maximum, which works for thumbnails. No more large photos. Go ahead any move them to Commons because I don't care. You don't need to notify me. Have fun. Motorrad-67 16:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Fine, be a jerk. // Liftarn


 * If that is what I have been forced to become, I have only you to thank. (By the way, I think that may have been a personal attack.) Motorrad-67 12:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No, you choosed to be like that. // Liftarn


 * I "choosed" to be like that? Interesting choice of "words." Motorrad-67 12:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, you could have just said "Great, someone liked my picture enought to make it available to a wider audience. Now I don't have to transfer it to Commons myself.". // Liftarn

Nobel Prize in Economics
Please stop with edits like this one. As you are aware of, your suggestion to use Nobel Memorial Prize instead of Nobel Prize has been rejected. If you want to reopen that debate, please do, but until that refrain from unilateral changes. -- Vision Thing -- 11:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Let's don't compare apples with cement trucks here. The article name is one thing, that it's called within articles is another thing. By the way, please stop introducing lies to Wikipedia. That may be considered vandalism. // Liftarn


 * I would advice you to stop misrepresenting the edits of other editors. To use the most commonly used name in the English language is not a 'lie' but an acknoledgement of fact. Wikipedia is descriptive not prescriptive, and if you don't like the way English speakers use their language, I'm sorry. --Uriel 23:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No, using slang terms while presenting them as actual terms is a deception and yes, also a lie. If you don't like what the award is called I suggest you write to the Nobel Foundation and ask them to rename the prize. // Liftarn

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent violation of WP:3RR. 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. Ronnotel 14:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm willing to unblock if this is true but I didn't see vandalism, just an ongoing dispute over the title of a template. Can you explain? Ronnotel 15:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm nott 100% sure about it, but to knowingly insert false information in an article may be a form of vandalism. // Liftarn
 * I don't think your edits were really vandalism reverts. It seems to be a content dispute over the title of the prize (to my knowledge, I thought it was Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics). I think the other users' edits are under the category of "unintentional misinformation", which does not fall into the realm of vandalism. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Vision Thing's edits are intentional misinformation. He also reverted (all recent edits) Liftarn's edit of "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics"  and changed it to "Nobel Prize in Economics" in the Milton Freedman article, as well as my edit from the official and cited name of "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" to "Nobel Prize in Economics" .  Despite being asked to stop removing the official name on his talk page, he continues to do it anyway.  He is intentionally not allowing any other name, including the official name, to be used in lieu of a common name for the prize (which many have already pointed out is a misleading name in a few discussions).  What is WP's policy about this? –panda 18:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That may be vandalism, but only "simple vandalism" reversion are exempt from 3RR. Either way, a 3RR block was appropriate. Nishkid64 (talk) 19:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, but what is WP's policy about this issue? It's spilling over into all of the articles associated with the econ prize and it would be nice to know how to handle this.  VT has been very adamant in his insistence that the prize be called "Nobel Prize in Economics" despite protests from others. –panda 19:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it seems like a dispute, so the pages can be protected (judging on a case-by-case basis) or you can raise the issue at WP:AN/I and seek the input of a larger group of people. Nishkid64 (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Is there any other forum to ask for input from a larger group of people? WP:AN/I doesn't look like the right place but I can post something there if you believe it is.  According to the related page's history, it is unfair to only block Liftarn since User:Vision Thing and User:Lost.goblin ganged up on him to avoid violating WP:3RR. –panda 23:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A tag team reverts. Aren't that covered by 3RR as well? // Liftarn


 * Unfortunately no, tag team reverts are not covered by 3RR for reasons that can be found in Wikipedia talk:Three-revert rule. That being said, I do think that only blocking Liftarn in this case is unfair as he was only trying to put more correct information in the template, versus less correct text.  In the future, could you please ask for an outside opinion instead of edit warring?  There are many editors who hold the same opinion as you about this issue and it doesn't help when one gets blocked. –panda 16:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I personally would love an outside opinion, as the current situation is ridiculous, already many months ago I pointed out in Talk:Nobel_Prize_in_Economics that we probably will have to ask for arbitration because consensus seems impossible. --Uriel 23:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Some interesting developments here. Rebecca unblocked me with the comment "I don't see this as being justified. He's a very long-term user in an edit dispute where the warring parties have behaved just as badly, if not worse.". Not really needed as the block would have expired anyway, but then Ronnotel slapped a new 48 hour block for the same 3RR. Now that was uncalled for. User:Ugen64 slapped on a one week block. It looks like I'm in the focus of a block war. // Liftarn


 * I think you're looking at old block comments. You shouldn't be blocked anymore. –panda 16:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)Please review the block log again. The block that Rebecca lifted was in July and unrelated to the 3RR violation for which I imposed the block. I took no action other than what I described in that 3RR report. Ronnotel 16:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, it seems to work now. Looks like I ran into some autoblock side effects. // Liftarn

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions
Thanks so much for starting this thread! Excellent idea! I was wondering, though, why is it not located at the bottom of the page? (Your sig isn't time stamped so I don't know when you started it and I haven't looked at the history.) –panda 17:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:CHECKUSER
FYI. Vision Thing has filed a WP:CHECKUSER suspecting that User:Liftarn and User:Lensor are the same user. –panda 06:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe... That is so obviously false a checkuser shouldn't be necessary. // Liftarn

Vision Thing
In case you didn't notice, the only thing Vision Thing did on 11 October 2007 was comment in Talk:Nobel Prize or follow you around and revert your edits. I believe that would be considered wikistalking. A warning on his talk page may be called for. –panda 16:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That's difficult to prove. It may be just a coincidence. // Liftarn

Assuming good faith
WP:AGF is policy, not just a polite note. I don't think getting yourself blocked for incivility is a particularly good way of winning this argument. For what it's worth, I'm in broad agreement about your version of the title, but it's evident that a lot of people still disagree, and they're not going to be persuaded by allegations of personal malice. Please try to establish current consensus rather than turning this into an edit war. Chris Cunningham 10:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * ...actually, looking at your history, I see you actually have been blocked for this before. Seriously, do you think the outcome will be any different this time? Please change your tactics. Chris Cunningham 10:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, that was a slip-up. That won't happen again. And as far as I know facts don't require a consensus. // Liftarn


 * Actually, they do. On Wikipedia, being right about something doesn't give you carte blanche to attack others or have your way. You'd be much better served by avoiding personal attacks, not least because it reduces the chances of you being blocked. I'm not sure what you mean by "slup-up", but it seems like you're indicating that the block was a result of others' actions rather than yours. This definitely doesn't seem to be the case.
 * Again, the title you've picked sounds like the correct one to use to me, but it's unlikely that you're going to get your way just by continually reverting to it. Chris Cunningham 11:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I never attacked anyone. It was a slip-up (and I slipped-up then typing it as well). Reverting people who knowingly inserts false information fullfills several goals, a) the information is corrected, b) it makes it possible to bring it to discussion (if you just leave the errors they will ignore the talk pages). // Liftarn


 * That's a perfectly valid argument for reverting something once or twice. It is not a valid argument for reverting something until one is blocked for 3RR, and then returning to do so again afterwards. Misbehaviour by other editors is not a license to do the same yourself. Taking the topic in question to WP:RFPP until it had been discussed would be much more effective. Chris Cunningham 11:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That would mean a whole lot of pages would have to be protected. I have tried to bring it up at WP:ANI, but that didn't do much good. I was also reccomended WP:RFC/USER so I did that at Requests for comment/Camptown. // Liftarn
 * I did bring it up at WP:RFPP, but it was rejected. // Liftarn


 * I can't see how it is helpful to call 'liars' and 'vandals' people who are just doing what they think is right. --Uriel 21:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If they are knowingly inserting false information (i.e. lies) they I don't see why they could be called what they are. // Liftarn


 * SO you decided to template a regular? // Liftarn

Michael Nobel Energy Award
FYI, there's a comment for you on Talk:Nobel Prize in Economics. –panda 21:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Templates for econ prize
If you plan to change the name of the econ prize in one of the templates, could you please be consistent and change it for all of them? Thanks!


 * Template:Nobel Prize in Economics
 * Template:Nobel Prize in Economics Laureates 1969-1975
 * Template:Nobel Prize in Economics Laureates 1976-2000
 * Template:Nobel Prize in Economics Laureates 2001-2025

–panda 16:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You could have done it yourself you know. Btw, should the template names be changed as well? Perhaps a later issue. // Liftarn


 * I was just repeating the edit summary left by Lost.goblin and as explained on his talk page. Let's leave the name of the template for later.  –panda 16:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

2 sentences in Nobel Prize in Economics
The two sentences that you added back to the "Awards process" section are already in the introduction. IMHO it should be in one or the other of the two locations, but not both. I'll let you decide where it may be most appropriate for them. –panda 14:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Template for Econ Prize
Please see Template talk:Nobel Prize in Economics. –panda 21:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:tinfoillinux.jpg copy to Commons?
Just curous, what is the meaning of the template you've put on this image today? It seems to imply that you think the image is inappropriate for some reason, i.e. being indiscriminately included. Do you think that Tinfoil Hat Linux does not deserve an image of its logo on its page? Or is it simply that you think that the image itself belongs to be hosted on the Commons site rather than on Wikipedia itself? I am not experienced in these political matters, so I don't know what the rule is with where images of various licensing belong. Ryan Reich 16:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * As it is the image can only be used on the English Wikipepia, but since it's a free image it can be copied to commons. Then it will become available on all Wikimedia projects. It's certainly not tagged because it's inappropriate, but rather the opposite. // Liftarn


 * Okay, cool. I'm just being vigilant about my pet articles; from time to time, people do things which are perhaps well-meaning, but still quite wrong, on the "advice" of some guideline or other. Ryan Reich 17:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's OK to have your pet articles, just remember that you don't own them. // Liftarn

Redirect of NSMPD
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on NSMPD, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because NSMPD is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting NSMPD, 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 09:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Friday the 13th.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Friday the 13th.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but right now there isn't enough commentary for that game, or any game in that section to justify the use of a non-free image.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  20:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That's because an entire article was suddenly (with no prior discussion) merged into Friday the 13th (franchise) deleting lots of content in the process. I'll se what I can do. // Liftarn


 * I've removed the infobox because it was a bit of an eyesore, to be frank. There's no need to give so much attention to a minor aspect of the page.  There was a prior discussion before the merge, but it didn't attract very much attention and there were no opposes.  Paul730 20:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)  Sorry, I was thinking of the comics.  But Bignole's right about being bold.  Paul730 21:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please know that being bold means you act first, and then discuss if there is opposition. There is no requirement that says any legitimate move must be discussed first. But you reverted, so I put in a proposal. BTW, the only thing that got deleted from the article was that walkthrough of the game. Wikipedia is not a substition for playing a game, nor a strategy guide.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Clocklogo.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Clocklogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CharlieAndTheChocolateFactory.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CharlieAndTheChocolateFactory.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Friday the 13th.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Friday the 13th.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I get you are sentimental about this image for some reason, but it does not meet fair use criteria.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  14:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If you wasn't constantly removed from the article it would fall uner fair use. // Liftarn


 * I've started a discussion at Talk:Friday the 13th (franchise) about whether to include the image or not. Do you want to make an argument for it?  What are your reasons for including it?  Paul730 15:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ArrowPhoto0Half.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ArrowPhoto0Half.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you calling me a liar?
I strongly object to the edit you made. You asked how it became PD, I referred to the file which said the image was supplied on request and released PD, and you then said "Yeah, but where's the proof of that?" You didn't assume good faith and inferred I was being dishonest. I approached Pacific Aerospace Corporation in the middle of 2005 seeking a Creso pic. They obliged and released the image PD. That's basically what the image file has said since then. If you continue to doubt what I say, in essence call me a liar, then expect a visit to RfC. Moriori 23:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Coyright are tricky and can potentially cause great costs so the permission has to be on file. Sorry if I unintentionally insulted you, but as far as I know Wikipedia really need to have the paperwork in order. // Liftarn

Ulf Ekberg
I have removed material from that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Docg 16:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

It may well be that the guy was in a white supremacist band, but you can't make that accusation without impeccable sourcing.--Docg 16:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Source added. I thoght it was sourced. I must either have missed it or it have been removed. Is the record company considered a reliable source? // Liftarn


 * See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sweden. –panda 17:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Where is the source, I have removed it until there is a source in ref tags immediately following the claim. See . I request that you do not undo this edit until and unless a suitable source can be found. If you have any questions please respond on my talk page. Thanks. ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 10:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The source is in the text, the newspaper Expressen. Several other sources have also been given. // Liftarn
 * Thats better. ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 13:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The article Commit Suiside has been deleted. Punkmorten 11:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I know, by User:WilyD. I have asked for an undeletion (at User talk:WilyD), but so far I have seen no action and gotten no reply. // Liftarn

Request for arbitration
A request for arbitration in which you are named as a party has been filed here. MastCell Talk 17:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:PUI
Hey Liftarn, I hope I'm not missing some backstory, but regarding : CC-BY-NC-SA is a nonfree license, as it prohibits commercial use, and it is therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia. That's a particularly common issue -- many people are often happy to let others use their image, but are then uncomfortable with letting go of commercial rights. Is the copyright holder willing to release those rights as well? CC-BY-SA is a free-enough license. -- RG2 23:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Clocklogo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Clocklogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Fixed. // Liftarn

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:UnderSiege-cover01.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:UnderSiege-cover01.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Indian Removal Act
Does not contain any language supporting the inference that it was the first usage of The Final Solution. I'm not saying it is or isn't but when you claim the first usage of any term on Wikipedia it needs to be heavily sourced. Alatari (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've added the article by Mattias Gardell I found it in. I think that should be quite enough consedering he's not just any jounalist hack, but a scolar. // Liftarn (talk)
 * I can't find a translator link or an English version of that article. It is notable but most editors will want to read it in English and some will require 3 scholarly sources for that type of superlative/comparative statement. Alatari (talk) 23:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If you want I can translate the central part (or if you wish you can ask for an independent translator). What "most" and "some" editors want and what policy says may be very different. // Liftarn (talk)
 * Did Andrew Jackson use the words "Final Solution"? Did anyone in congress at the time use those exact words?  If you find a document quoting Jackson directly stating final solution from his pen hand or mouth then we can word it differently.  Alatari (talk) 11:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The source says those was his exact words. Considering the strenght of the source I don't think another source is really necessary. Googling will probably be very difficult due to the large number of false positives. // Liftarn (talk)
 * That source is a tertiary source when primary sources are in Andrew Jacksons own writing and secondary sources are from newspapers of the time period. Mattias Gardell is a bit of an anarchist and since I can't find an English source for his words I will have stress the importance of finding better sources.  Alatari (talk) 16:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No, that's a secondary source. And ad hominem attacks are no good argument. I would also reccomend you to use the talk page of the article instead. // Liftarn (talk)
 * I've spent hours on your claim when WP:PROVEIT is how I should have handled it. The first usage of the term by Andrew Jackson is unusual and a WP:REDFLAG is up so exceptional and reliable sources are required so WP:RSUE is required and since it says right in his article Mattias Gardell he is an anarchist WP:RELY Extremist Sources applies when citing him.  I'm done doing your work.  I'm removing the reference until you can fulfill the previous requirements. Alatari (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but Mattias Gardell is a respected scolar so "extermist sources" clearly doesn't apply. Using that logic no source is reliable. // Liftarn (talk)
 * If his statement is that important then it should be found in English quotes by other scholars, authors, magazines, newspapers or even Indian activist or other websites and I can not find attribution of "final solution of Indian problem" to Andrew Jackson anywhere. Your translation must be faulty.  I can find the term referenced to the Great Peace Commission of 1866, William Tecumseh Sherman and even Thomas Jefferson using it in 1804 referring to intermarriage but not Andrew Jackson.  A disambiguation page is not a place to list every instance of the use Final Solution. Alatari (talk) 14:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

tocommons
Hi, you added a tocommons tag to Image:Bahro-Cave-1.jpg. Please note that non-free images cannot be copied to wikimedia commons. I have removed the tag. Cheers! --Storkk (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Please note the Ubisoft license that "grants anyone the right to use such images for any purpose, including redistribution, derivative works and commercial use, provided the image is attributed to Ubisoft." so it's a standard attribution license and thus free. // Liftarn (talk)
 * My mistake. Sorry for the confusion. Cheers! --Storkk (talk) 11:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. It's a bit confusing it uses two tags, one free and one fair use. I saw you took care of that. // Liftarn (talk)

Image:Cc etrusca.gif
Baed upon the discussion at, I have changed the license on the image page. As no suitable license currently exists on wikipedia, I crafted a new license statement and have asked for discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Image_copyright_tags. As you originally raised this issue, your input would be appreciated.&mdash;RJH (talk) 18:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * P.S. In response to your question about:
 * "What if I take the image and cut out the icons from it? Then you would have "the source image files".
 * The icons are vector images. A low-resolution pixmap does not provide an equivalent. Clearly the distribution of the maps for commercial gain is intended to be allowed by the license, so I understand their concern to be with the vector images.&mdash;RJH (talk) 18:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks.&mdash;RJH (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion warning - links to Commons
I've corrected some links to Commons in your message in user MykReeve's talk. Please check those links in the template you used. --CiaPan (talk) 10:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Temple garments
Are you aware of any less inflammatory references for the article? I spend enough of my time reverting image removals and censorship of that article that I would prefer not to have things in it that bring the LDS irritation level up unnecessarily.Kww (talk) 12:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Not that I am aware of, I could try a googling later. Anyway, I don't reccomend removing it since it is a source for a statement needing a source. // Liftarn (talk)

Anti-Arabism
Please explain your rv on the Talk page. - CheshireKatz (talk) 23:05, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It already is on the talk page. // Liftarn (talk)

Speedy deletion of Baltica (computer)
A tag has been placed on Baltica (computer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. &mdash; Coasterge ekperson 04 ' s talk@ 00:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Baltica (computer)
A tag has been placed on Baltica (computer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 19:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Again? The text if from my own site and permission has been given so I don't see the problem. // Liftarn (talk)
 * The second time you created it it as empty (except for the tag), so it's been deleted a second time.  You might consider simply creating it as a subpage to your User space (e.g., in User:Liftarn/Sandbox if you would like to work on it.  -- slakr  \ talk / 20:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Why work on it again? Why not simply undelete it? // Liftarn (talk)

Aquatic ape hypothesis
Please note the discussion here. WLU (talk) 17:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

CommonsHelper
Since you've been tagging my images as transferable to Commons, I just have a question: Should the Image: namespace be added to the Image name text box? Thanks. -- Howard  the   Duck  12:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think it should. Or use the CommonsHelper Helper instead. // Liftarn (talk)

Volvo Page Edit
Liftarn, I am new to wikipedia edits so please excuse me if I have erred. I recently make a change to Volvo_cars to remove a statement regarding the C-pillar that I believe to be incorrect. You replaced it with "The Volvo 745 had some severe problems that could cause sever injuries in a frontal colission.[14]" Apart from the spelling mistakes, that too is an unsupportable conclusion from ref 14 (the Vanagon - Volvo 745 crash test). Please refer to the discussion page for my justification for the edit. Why did you undo my change? User:garlandw72.39.151.5 (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You may fix the spelling if you want, but the facts are correct. Both about the C pillar and the rename from 740 to 940. The full ref is not avaoilable online as far as I have found. // Liftarn (talk)


 * Please clarify. Please explain how there is a problem with the Volvo 745 C-pillar based on the video images of the reference.  In the images, the C-pillar is not damaged.  The A-pillar is squashed right up to the B-pillar but that is NOT because of a faulty design; it is squashed because the Vanagon is high.  Any vehicle will undergo an A-pillar deformation if the impact comes in at that height.  I repeat, it is not a fault of the 745; it is merely a consequence of this particular accident.  Since the images were posted on a Vanagon site, it appears that the point of the test is to show that the Vanagon is not quite the death trap that it first appears to be because the front structure is quite rigid and higher than a typical car.  To prove the point, they crashed it into what was widely achnowledged to be one of the safest cars on the road at the time - the 745.  They could have used a big Mersedes and have gotten the same result.  This of course points to an important safety issue, the mismatch of vehicle heights, that deserves a full discussion given the number of SUVs and large trucks on the road these days and the push to smaller, greener passenger cars.  But again, to finger the 745 as the issue is wrong.  I am not disputing the fact that the 740 series became the 940 series; that is well known.  Nor am I disputing that the 940 has some safety improvements over the 740 (SIPS for instance).  I am quite familiar with the 745 and I have never heard of the C-pillar weakness that you claim.  I also checked with the large collection of experienced people in the Volvo owners community at www.brickboard.com.  They never heard of a C-pillar weakness.  So please back up your claim that there are severe problems in a 745 that could cause severe injuries in a frontal collision.  If you can't do that, then please remove that statement as per the spirit of Wikipedia. User:garlandw72.39.151.5 (talk) 11:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The original source is a Folksam study that showed a weakness in the Volvo 745 design. // Liftarn (talk)


 * I repeat, please back up your claim or remove the statement. http://www.folksam.se/english/reports shows a 2005 report that puts the 740/940 (from 1982 on) in the 15% better than average category, the second from the top category.  Maybe you are right but maybe you are not.  I have pointed to evidence that does not support your statement.  So please, prove it or remove it. User:garlandwGarlandw-wiki (talk) 14:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Folkrace vs Bangers rodeo
Have you got Bangers rodeos or so-called demolition derbys in Sweden? It is not the intention of Folkrace that the last man driving is the winner, after he has crashed all other competitors out of the race. Although Folkrace is driven with mostly terrible looking cars it is IMO some kind of "Rallycross for the poor" and has nothing to do with deliberately forcing other drivers to retire. Otherwise it would definetely not be regognised by the SBF. AFAIK Banger races are in no European country recognised by any ASN. RX-Guru (talk) 15:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Banger racing does not necessarily mean you have to crash all the orher cars. As it says at banger racing "drivers of old vehicles race against one another around a race track and the race is won in terms of the first car to the chequered flag". See Talk:Folkrace. // Liftarn (talk)


 * You should have cited the text just a little further. The article also reads: "…all the while (in Europe primarily) attempting to deliberately wreck the opposing vehicles." Fact is, that Banger racing is not recognised as motorsport nor even credited to be serious by the FIA and/or its recognised ASNs as it is in Europe mostly performed as demolition derbys. And that is absolutely not the case with Folkrace (recognised by the SBF) nor Bilcross (recognised by the NBF) nor Jokamiehenluokka (recognised by the AKK). You compare kalabalik (hullabaloo) to motorsport, if you compare a Bangers race with a Folkrace. RX-Guru (talk) 01:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever, I can't be bothered with that now anyway. Do whatever you want. // Liftarn (talk)

Resolution at Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles
In case you didn't know why things have calmed down lately at Carlos Latuff. I specifically mentioned the page as problematic. It's a great resolution and there should be a lot fewer problems with this and other relevant pages in the future. Carol Moore 05:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)CarolMooreDC talk

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Valhalla.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Valhalla.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Pallywood de-coatracked
I made some edits to Pallywood and removed your coatrack tag - hopefully the issue(s) that you flagged have now been resolved. Please feel free to comment at Talk:Pallywood. -- ChrisO (talk) 01:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

M.A.C. Black Cola
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article M.A.C. Black Cola, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of M.A.C. Black Cola. Rockfang (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of M.A.C. Black Cola
An editor has nominated M.A.C. Black Cola, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

sig
Can I ask you to start using ~ instead of to sign? The lack of a timestamp on your posts makes the flow of conversation difficult to discern sometimes when there's undenting involved. Thanks.

Cheers! - Revolving Bugbear  18:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Lunokhod programme lubricant and engine enclosures
Thanks very much for your recent addition to the Lunokhod programme article! Do you by any chance have a citable source for the information about lubricants and engine enclosures? Thanks! (sdsds - talk) 19:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, it was mentioned on a one hour special (today) on SVT2 called "Den ryska månbilen" as a aprt of "Vetenskapens värld". It was probably a documentary bought from somewhere, but I missed the credits so it's hard to tell. I'd guess it was originally made by Discovery. There is some info on the web, but little compared to the entire documentary. // Liftarn (talk)

Bosozoku article
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Do not vandalise the article, it will not be tolerated. You also appear to have previous editing patterns with other articles, and as such, which will be duly noted in a report. 220.253.158.41 (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Zenith.png
I have tagged Image:Zenith.png as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Use rationale examples. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 02:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Spamware
Another editor has added the  template to the article Spamware, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 10:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Volvo T6
I noticed that you reverted my edit on the Volvo T6 page, if the T6 is capable of 205mph, then of course I have no problem with the article stating that, however it seems unlikely for an open wheeled car with 300bhp to be able of hitting 205mph, I did look around for some confirmation of the T6's top speed, but couldnt find anything. Where did you get that figure from? A reliable source would be nice? Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * As you may find if you look there is a source for the figure. // Liftarn (talk)


 * I do not want this to descend into an argument, as we both seem to be editors who have a shared interest in cars. however the first thing that made me sceptical about the claimed top speed is that I don't know of any road car that can get to 185mph, let alone 205mph with 300bhp - A porsche GT3 has a coefficent drag factor of .29 - very low for a road car, and only hits 193 mph with 415bhp. I have no issue with the volvo T6, its a brave design, and I wish they had built it - however one quote from Edmunds, who make no claim for testing it to that speed, seems to be a mistake..205kmh might be more accurate. Give me your opinion on this, I am interested in your reasoning behind this. Are there some special aerodynamics on the car that I am not aware of? I will wait for a while, for you to respond, before I consider re-editing that article. thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I realise that it is sourced, however it is not a reliable source, they merely give a figure without any mention of them having roadtested the car. What is more is that the figure is highly unrealistic. To show how unrealistic it is, please try to find another road legal car, that can achieve 205mph with just 300bhp. Source or not, it should be obvious that the figure is not accurate, I dont really care about having a source or not, if the figure stated was 150mph, then I wouldnt doubt it for a second, but really give it a thought and work out if 205mph is realistic. Sennen goroshi (talk) 04:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think its likely that 205kmh is the truth, then perhaps it would be a better idea not to mention the speed at all.Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Institute for Middle East Understanding
An editor has nominated Institute for Middle East Understanding, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ArrowPhoto0Half.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:ArrowPhoto0Half.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

New antisemitism mediation
Heya Liftarn.

I would first like to apologise on behalf of the Mediation Committee for the delay in this case being dealt with, which is due to a shortage of available mediators. I have expressed interest in taking this case to help with the backlog and to assess my nomination to join the committee. As i am not currently a member it is common practice to for the involved parties to consent to mediation of an RfM from a non-committee member. To give your consent for me to act as mediator for this case please sign as you have for the acceptance of the case on the case page. I look forward to working with you and finding a solution to the dispute.

Seddon69 (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Liftarn, i was wondering whether youd be able to let me know on whether you wanna carry on with this mediation and whether you accept me as a mediator. Im hoping to start the case soon but i want to make sure the parties are happy with me as a mediator. Seddon69 (talk) 09:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Cobra (computer)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Cobra (computer), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Cobra (computer). Kubanczyk (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Celebrations of the September 11, 2001 attacks
An editor has nominated Celebrations of the September 11, 2001 attacks, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Any articles featuring false charges antisemitism?
Noticed the discussion here Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_1 and that your suggested changes not made. All such mentions also kicked out of Jewish Lobby by regular suspects. Given all the "See Alsos" under antsemitism it almost seems the subject could get its own article, though obviously there would be a big brouhaha. Carol Moore 11:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}
 * I guess so. There is a huge WP:OWNership issue over at the Antisemitism article. I jutst can't be bothered fighting over it. It just isn't worth the effort. No amount of sources can convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced. // Liftarn (talk)

Mediation Update
Just to let you all know, the case has been started. I have created a little navbox for you to navigate between pages and will be expanded as the case goes on so that its easier for you to navigate. The first page you need to visit in this case is here so you can give youre opening statement. There i have left a few questions for you all to answer. For those that have been busy and unable to confirm their participation in the mediation, they are welcome to join the mediation at any stage.

I can be contacted in several ways in the event you need to. I am normally present on the wikipedia-en, wikipedia-medcab and wiki-hurricanes IRC channels at some point between 15:00 UTC and as late 02:00 UTC depending on college and real life commitments. To find these channels and instructions on how to access IRC go to WP:IRC. Throughout the day, even when i am in college, feel free to email me using the email tool or by emailing the email address on my user page or both to make sure. You can also leave a message on my talk page which again ill do my upmost to reply to as soon as i can. Seddon69 (talk) 20:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Björn Söderberg
I have nominated Björn Söderberg, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Björn Söderberg. 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. Sceptre (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Blink (band)
I have nominated Blink (band), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Blink (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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? [ LukeTheSpook ] | [ t c r ] 04:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

New AS mediation
The mediation im getting rolling as its been a long time waiting so i think its best to get moving. Most of the mediation will be on the talk (discussion) page. so make sure its in your watchlist. Seddon69 (talk)

CfD nomination of Category:Muslim atheists
I have nominated muslim atheists for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 08:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

New Antisemitism Mediation
I think thats its time we got moving. A couple of the points have been raised before and felt they were the foundations to the dispute:


 * Firstly whether the picture can be confirmed to have been taken in the rally in San Fransisco.
 * Secondly to come to an agreement on what new antisemitism is and then to decide what the image is depicting and whether it purely illustrates New Antisemitism or whether it also addresses other issues which could be confused with new antisemitism by new readers.
 * If we cant confirm the those then we need to find a viable alternative.

A point i would like to raise is that at some point a lead image might need to be found if this article got to FA. The image in question is not free and couldn't be put on the main page with this article as todays FA. Although not an immediate point a long term solution might wish to be found so that this article could feature on the main page with a viable alternative.

Does anyone have access to Lexis Nexis? It might help as a search on the network could uncover something not readily available on the internet. Reliable sources that use the image would be helpful. Do you reckon that there would anyway of finding third party images that might possibly contain the poster/placard? Also i would be grateful if images of other placards at that rally could be found to find whether this was a small minority at this rally or perhaps a larger group.

Whilst that is being done i wanted to find out on what the consensus view is on what New Antisemitism is? I have read the article and the previous discussion and attempted to get a proper understanding but i wanted to ensure that this was current.


 * PS any sources you find can you please post in the section at the top of the mediation talk page. Seddon69 (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Following discussion at the mediation talk page, i would like to bring up a suggestion that until the end of the mediation to remove both images from the article. There is currently no real consensus on the images so in the interests of fairness it seems best to simply have no images. If you have any suggestions or comments then please come to the mediation talk page to be discussed. The discussion will be open for around 5 days if there are no problems. But the discussion will go on if there is ongoing discussion. &Scaron;&xi;&THORN;&THORN;&oslash;&Lambda; talk 00:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Catabyss.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Catabyss.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --06:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Leona_Lewis2.jpg
Hi Liftarn, a Commons user marked this pic as missing permission. It's under public domain, but there's no permission from the author. If there is, can you send it to the WP:OTRS so it doesn't get deleted? Cheers. Spellcast (talk) 01:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Back to the future 02.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Back to the future 02.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you the copy-right holder ?
? --Julia1987 (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's what it says. // Liftarn (talk)


 * What is the source ? --Julia1987 (talk) 04:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.pchrgaza.ps/special/tv2.htm // Liftarn (talk)


 * So you are not the copy right holder. --Julia1987 (talk) 03:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I draw the map based on information in the article. // Liftarn (talk)

External links for Teardrop trailer
You continue to spam the Teardrop Trailer page with an external link to a link farm. The community of editors clearly disagrees with your edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwerks (talk • contribs)


 * Community of editors? One anon IP have been consistently blanking the external links for no good reason. Please see External links where it clearly says Where editors have not reached consensus on an appropriate list of links, a link to a well-chosen web directory category could be used until such consensus can be reached. The Open Directory Project is often a neutral candidate, and may be added using the dmoz template.. // Liftarn (talk)

Muhammad al-Durrah
Liftarn, hi, I noticed that you reverted an edit at this article. Please be aware that the article is currently under ArbCom restrictions, with specific Conditions for editing, one of which is "no reverts except for obvious vandalism". If you disagree with an edit, you are welcome to improve it, change it, re-word the paragraph, add a source, move text somewhere else, etc. But no reverts please. I know that this may sound a bit "un-wiki", but this article has been in dispute for a long time, and these editing conditions seem to be being successful at helping to restore stability, so I'd like to keep them in place for awhile longer. Thanks, Elonka 18:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oops, missed that one. // Liftarn (talk)
 * Thanks very much! :)  And again, if you'd like to change the edit, please feel free. --Elonka 19:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thises and Thatses
Hi Liftarn, I had a question and offer: Let me know, Elonka 15:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed that your signature tends not to include a date. Is something broken in your signature formatting?  If so, I could  potentially help you to debug it.  Do you normally sign posts with three tildes, or four?  ~
 * I noticed that your talkpage is getting kind of long, and is currently over 100K. Some people's browsers start having trouble with anything over 32K.  If you'd like, I could set up an archive bot for you?  That would automatically archive anything older than a certain date (like 30 days), and then you wouldn't have to worry about it anymore. :)


 * Yes, I usually sign with three tildes. Page archived. An archive bot might be a good idea. // Liftarn (talk)
 * Sure, happy to set one up for you. :)  Also, could I ask you to try and sign with four tildes, to date your posts?  Especially if setting up a bot, they'd need a date to be able to tell how old a particular post was. --Elonka 00:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)