User talk:Lusum

Soltam M-65
Hi, I am the original editor of this article which you had tagged for speedy deletion and it has been deleted already by the admin. I am curious as to why you had tagged it as such? FYI, I had written the page in my own words (accounting for about 75% of it), the rest were borrowed from that website you've mentioned. If that is not allowed, then would a complete rewrite be acceptable instead? Please clarify this with me, thank you. --Dave1185 (talk) 16:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * this page date is sab 28 gen 2006 22:21:58 CET and your article is written in 2008. ( ps: sorry for my bad english ). I have made a control line by line of your article and the site. Most of article ( at least 75%  ) is equal to site and a 10% are lines cut and pasted in other places. So i have decided to put the template for delection. I assume good faith, but the similarity was too much. Lusum (talk) 00:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * i think that a complete rewrite, removing some sentences and using other words would be acceptable, using the facts explained in the site's page but not exact words Lusum (talk) 00:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I shall rewrite the article completely in my own words again later tomorrow and I request that you assist to edit check it for me but please let me know if any part(s) needs to be improved on instead of you tagging it again for deletion. How about that? And for heaven's sake, I hate fragmented discussion... so can we keep the discussion here instead of letting us run around? I do monitor your page after leaving you a message here. Thanks. --Dave1185 (talk) 02:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, i agree. I will assist to edit check when you will have rewrited the article. I'm on en wiki quite seldom, but i will try to be here more often. Lusum (talk) 09:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

AGF
As per Wikipedian's requirement, you need to assume good faith and might want to read up on these article below: - --Dave1185 (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Articles for deletion,
 * 2) Don't demolish the house while it's still being built,
 * 3) There is no deadline,
 * 4) Potential, not just current state,
 * 5) The Most Important Thing Possible,
 * 6) Assume bad faith; &
 * 7) A nice cup of tea and a sit down.

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)