User talk:Vanished user 34958

Super stall
This article is very very short. Would this information be better off in the main Stall (flight) article? Friday (talk) 16:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC) Maybe a redirect to deep stall would be better. Its different from a normal `safe stall'
 * I didn't notice that section at first.. looks like someone else already got it taken care of. Friday (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * PS. Please don't use edit summaries like this one. Friday (talk) 16:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Gordon Brown
Thanks for you addition ,but your addition to Gordon Brown's BLP is still not correct... During Browns time as chancellor has also pressed ahead with the telecom spectrum auctions, resulting in 30,000 jobs being lost in the UK high tech sector Your comment implies that through Brown pressing ahead with this the direct result of this was that 30000 jobs were lost, I was wondering ..why were they lost? Did this actually have anything tto do with brown? Also your comment is not exactly supported by the citation? Also it says in that article that over 20 billion was made from the actions, all of which belong to us, the taxpayer. Can you directly attribute Brown being directly responsible for the loss of these 30 000 jobs? Off2riorob (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC) To put it totally clear for you, this comment that you have inserted is not included in or supported by the citation that you have provided... "resulting in 30,000 jobs being lost in the UK high tech sector". Off2riorob (talk) 16:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

If you read the references you will see that a similar auction was applied the year before in America and that an industry watchdog made them re-run it. So in the light of that evidence, it was apparent that the auctions were going to apply great strain on the telecoms sector, and put them into debt. Here the USA seems to be ahead of us in terms of protection of Industry. Chapter 11 Is a good example of this philosophy. As Gordon Brown was responsible for the auctions, and already had evidence of how destructive they potentially were I see no problem laying the blame. The same New York company that ran the flawed first American auctions, ran the ones in the UK, and charged aroun 700,000 pounds for setting them up ! He took a risk and it backfired. Similar to him selling the Gold off at a low. Really someone with a PhD in something useful like economics would be better for the job of COTE. vanished user) 19:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I am afraid that your opinion is not a citation, please remove your uncited addition. Off2riorob (talk)

i also want to suggest to you that the Gordon Brown article is a wikipedia good article and perhaps as good faith if your have additions you are interested to make that a little discussion goes a long way. Off2riorob (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Your addition to othe lede
You do not have a history degree on a certain topic, your addition to the lede is also poor, a lot of work was done to the lede to stabalise it, I would suggest you take any alteration you want to majke to it to the talkpage. Off2riorob (talk) 19:46, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry what is lede ???? User:vanished user (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The Gordon Brown talkpage would be a good place for you to discuss your additions to the article, as I said it is a good article and although people don't like him we have a responsibility as wikipedia editors to edit in a neutral way. Off2riorob (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand that alot of people do not like him. But to not mention the telecom auctions would be to `sweep a large mistake under the carpet'. I understand no politician is going to not make mistakes. But that was a mistake, there was also precedent for it being a mistake (the re-run spectrum auctions in the USA). If this were to be removed it would seem to me like not mentioning the poll tax riots on Margret thatchers page !

I had put this on the page b4, along with refs, and refs to the german auctions. I feel like people are perhaps removing this stuff for the wrong reasons. I know this is political, but I am sticking to facts and have refs. AND its is very bad for wikipedia when a politician mistakes just seem to 'dissappear' or get watered down. I notice Brown sold the gold at a LOW point. The way its worded now, anyone casually reading would not even realise he sold it all iduring a dip, at the worst possible time ! User:Vanished user (talk) 20:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As I said your addition about the 30000 is totally uncited, and your addition to the lede is just wrong, the way to affect change here at wikipedia is through discussion and following policy. I have asked you more than once to remove your uncited addition and I suggest you do that. Off2riorob (talk) 20:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Dug through my E&WW journals and now have a citation for it. User:vanished user (talk) 20:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That citation will not be strong enough to support your comment here on this article. Off2riorob (talk) 20:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Why have you read it ? Its a well researched article by a PhD in electronic engineering in the most well respected electronics journal in the UK. Also I forgot, in it he takes estimates from european employment statistics to show the german auctions in combination with the uk one destroyed approx 100,000 jobs in Europe. Please go to your local library and read this. User:vanisheduser (talk) 20:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Who is it written by? that citation is not strong enough to support your addition. Off2riorob (talk) 20:30, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it an opinion that has been widely supported by anyone? Off2riorob (talk) 20:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

written by David Rudd who gives titles as PhD F.I.E.E C.eng. Wow so a fellow of the institute of electronic engineers! I cannot think of a better citation for something like this. Also thanks for getting me to re-read the article. Good wiki is getting so professional. I had forgotten about the 100,000 European workers and the german auctions. Widely supported view, yes. I think Hellstro"m (head of ericsson in sweden) had alot to say about this around that time too. User:vanished user (talk)

Off2riorob, I shall talk to you tomorrow I hope. I am being requested to get off the computer and join some people on "Wii DANCE DANCE REVOLUTION" dance pad game; I hope you understand ! User:vanished user (talk) 20:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Bold, revert, discuss cycle
While your here please read this BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle Off2riorob (talk) 20:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

File:248533936 2daa6f841b b.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:248533936 2daa6f841b b.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 09:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Flying saucer mars.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Flying saucer mars.jpg, which you've sourced to Picture of Cedric Allingham book. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Binary angles.png missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Binary angles.png

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Bag of Cooking Apples.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bag of Cooking Apples.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 00:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Binary angles.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Binary angles.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 08:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Blastwave.org


The article Blastwave.org has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Not a single source to back this article."

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. acagastya 16:52, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Image source problem with File:Replay cover CIMG1210.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Replay cover CIMG1210.JPG.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 04:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC)