User talk:Vmrgrsergr/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Omerlives
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

how do i create a new article?
helpmeI've been editing articles for a while but I don't know how to create a new one
 * See..Help:Starting_a_new_page.. Cometstyles 17:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Pakistan-North Korea relations
I was looking at this article with great interest. Please make very sure you add good references to the material. You might want to have a look at WP:RS. It's not enough that what you write is true, it must also be verifiable, so see also WP:V. These are vital areas of concern here. I encourage you to keep writing but make sure you get those sources. This particular subject could be very controversial so keep it well documented. I'm always happy to help in any way, just click on "talk" beside my name and leave me a message on my talk page.  Jody B talk 03:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a good start. But if you want the article to really shine why not make citations inline with the text. That way, a person studying the subject can immediately go to the place where the information is contained. Take a look at WP:CITE. Your sources are good, I'm sure, but the inline citations are a suggestion to make it better. Good job!  Jody B talk 03:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I would improve it if I had the knowledge. I don't think its in any danger of deletion or anything like that, I just thought that if you were familiar with the external links and references you might dress it up a bit. Should I have the time in the next couple of weeks I will try and take a look at it. This week ahead is shaping up as a busy one in my work so it could be a while.  Jody B talk 12:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You're making progress here, that's for sure. I would make the following suggestions:

Keep up the good work!  Jody B talk 12:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Something needs to be fixed in the infobox, it doesn't look right.
 * 2) I have rewritten the lead paragraph to make it conform better to the Manual of style. You always want to use the name of the article at the very beginning.
 * 3) The section on scandal needs to be cited and sourced. Remember that anytime you make statements that could reflect negatively on someone you should make sure and document it.
 * 4) Continue to develop the article as you have time. It doesn't have to be done at once.

One other thing. Notice how I sourced the statement about Pakistan denying US claims of nuclear assistance to NK. Use the WEB CITE template and just fill in the blanks. It's much better than just having a bunch of external links someone has to go through to find the information. IT takes them straight to the source. I suspect everything is probably backed up in the external links but put them in references to. Also, try to craft the bulleted points into flowing prose. It will make the article easier to read. I'll try to do that myself later this week if I can. Have a good day!  Jody B talk 12:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Nadir
Hi, you recently added that "In modern-day Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Urdu, the word nadir means rare." Can you explain why you did this? I don't see the importance of this to the English-language meaning of the word, which is what the article is about. It seems to me that the word is an example of a faux ami, that is, a word that has different meanings in two languages. Regards, &mdash; BillC  talk 21:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. I fully agree that the origin of words that have found their way into English should be explained. But does the word "nadir" originate from the Arabic/Persian/Turkish/Urdu meaning of "rare"? The American Heritage Dictionary, for example, gives the etymology of "nadir" as coming from the Arabic "opposite". The Collins English Dictionary says "C14: from the Old French, from the Arabic nazĩr as-samt, literally opposite the zenith". Webster's has "Middle English, from Middle French, from Arabic nadhIr opposite". Are they wrong? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I am genuinely interested in whether the word comes from this meaning, or from another. Regards, &mdash; BillC talk 23:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * But isn't the origin of the word what is important here? That is what etymologists study, for it indicates the route a loanword takes into a language. The article says what the origin of the word is -- from the Arabic for "opposite". My point is that if "nadir" has other meanings in Arabic, this is interesting, but has no bearing on the article: it is the meaning being used in Arabic for the word when it was borrowed into English. Plenty of words in English have more than one meaning; it would be surprising if Arabic, or other languages did not do so as well. I don't speak a word of Arabic; if you do, perhaps you could look it up and see if there is any linguistic link between the two meanings. &mdash; BillC  talk 23:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Documented?
Please fill out Edit summary when you edit and participate in talk for controversial edits. Regarding this: what documentation are you basing this claim upon? Before you respond at Talk:Criticism of Judaism, please review WP:RS. ←Humus sapiens ну? 05:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Question
Hi there i am Balouch too, no there is no template for balouch,i was looking for some good pic that should represent balouch,still i am looking for it. if u have any pic we can create template for Balouch.there are few balouch users i knows.Khalidkhoso 19:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Iran
Hello, regarding your edit and addition of "Though it is a modern-day state founded in 1935, Iran as a land and a nation..." in the Iran article.

This is in correct. Iran as a modern state was founded by the Safavids (and prior to that, as an Empire, it was founded by the Medes and Achaemenids). It was already a state by 1935, the official name was simply changed from Persia to Iran.Azerbaijani 16:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Balouch Template
Hello Balouch Sahib how about creating Template for Balouch user?

Khalidkhoso 17:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

You can keep eyes on these topics
Welcome, Dear Balouch you can keep eye on these topics.
 * 1) Balochistan_conflict
 * 2) Raja_Dahir
 * 3) Mohenjo-daro
 * 4) Sindhi_language
 * 5) Baloch_tribes
 * 6) Baloch_people
 * 7) Balochistan_Liberation_Army

these topics are offten vandalized. Khalidkhoso 20:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Baloch template
Thanks for this,sure i will put this template in my user page.But can you please add Balouch,arabic,Urdu Script in it(written Balouch,Baloushi,Balouch).i will be thankfull you. Long Live Balouch

Khalidkhoso 19:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Vmrgrsergr! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.  Daniel  05:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Vmrgrsergr 03:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Dont put in tags without discussion
You cant put in tags without any discussion on the talk page as to exactly why the tag is needed. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 11:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries are not enough to justify tag insertions. Read what the tag says. It says, "see talk". If you dont have anything on talk, the tag is not justified. You have to raise an issue and explain what exactly it is that needs a tag and why precisely. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 19:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright, look. Your edit summary said nothing: "Jewish article refuses much criticisms.Same standards must follow here in that case and all other critical religious articles.)". If you want to discuss, you have to discuss the issue on the TALK page of the article, not in the edit summary. See the little text on that template? "Please see the discussion on the talk page.". Did you initiate any discussion on the talk page? No you did not. So, please dont put in the tag without discussing what the POV issue is. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 22:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for The Photographer's Barnstar,I really appreciate that:)--Aziz1005 16:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

- Also thank you for the Barnstar, regards, Jasra 21:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages
Thank you for your work on. Unfortunately, disambiguation pages do not follow the same stylistic rules as normal pages.

Please see the disambiguation style guide for more information. If you have any questions not answered there,

or try the help desk. Fourohfour 19:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't be stupid.
All of the things you listed as "relialbe sources", were posted on April 1st. One of them even admits that it's an April Fool's Day joke. 71.178.237.82 23:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deleted scenes
Unfortunately, deleted scenes are regarded as unencyclopedic. Namely, it's common practice for films to be edited and trimmed, and unlike Star Wars, most films don't have the scenes restored, or most importantly have scenes created specifically for the new version (ala the original Star Wars trilogy special editions). Superman II would be the only real important on to include such information, and that already has a completely separate article, since they released Donner's version of that film recently. If you check out this page on featured articles, and click on the various film articles, you'll notice they don't contain that type of information. Sorry to discourage you, as I could tell from your message that you really want to help. I'm not sure if you have those deluxe editions of the films, but the production information on just about every one needs major expanding and sourcing. I don't have those versions (bought my box set before they decided to release special editions for the films), so I'm not much help in that regard. The article for the original film has a nice, but unsourced, section on the restoration of the film and how they changed things. But general listing of deleted footage isn't very encyclopedic. There are ways to go about including such information, but it involves expanding the production sections. In a subsection of "Production", maybe titled "Filming", one could discuss how the director was filming certain scenes and explain why he chose to remove them. But again, that would require some sort of source to verify the reasoning for removal (which he may have a commentary in the "deleted scenes" section of the deluxe edition of the films). I don't watch those pages, there was a lot of drama over at the Superman III article over its neutrality, so I don't know how things are being handled over there. You're best bet is to follow the featured article page, which I linked above, and click on the films that have reached FA status. They are generally good models to follow, if even for just one simply section of the page. You can see how people address certain issues, and how they write about them. Bignole 03:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I mean you can use the deluxe edition to expand other aspects of the article. DVD commentaries are usually great sources of information about how they worked up scenes, and also to find themes that the director was intending to convey. Do the deleted scenes have a commentary track? If so, they may discuss the cemetary scenes without actually showing it. It could have very well have been lost somewhere in WB's film vaults. Bignole 12:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
welcome,Balouch Sahib Khalidkhoso 03:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Project tag
Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents

Fixed it. :-)

--EEMeltonIV 06:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

CR collection
I think you are going to run the risk of major copyright violations with all those images. There isn't any critical commentary, just details about the films. It just looks like a promotional tool for the box set of movies, because the only thing there are details about what each film disc gives you. You should look for some critical reviews about the box set, maybe how many millions it made when it was released. See if you can find some information on what it took to make this new collector's set.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  22:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Nope, I don't believe I've ever seen the page till you showed it to me. User:Osaboramirez created it, and he's been indefinitely blocked. The problem is that it's just listing the scenes. What should be on Wikipedia is critical commentary on the addition or removal of those scenes.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  12:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't worry. I don't have any intention of nominating for deletion or anything. I have far too much stuff on my Wiki-plate to go through a long AfD process. I'm fixing all the Smallville articles, Friday the 13th related articles, and upcoming films as well. Plus, a bunch of us have recently created a review process for all television episode articles, to determine notability, and that generally takes quite a bit of discussion. If you get the time, just try and find some critical commentary on these new discs. I'm sure you could find some DVD reviews. Maybe not, but it can't hurt to look.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  20:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know. Space opera isn't really considered a "genre" of film, but more of a stylistic sub-genre. Star Wars is, at its core, just science fiction/fantasy. I could see where it would be good to have a developed section that talks about its relation to "space opera", something more defined that the brief commentary on the space opera section.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Hindutva terrorism
Hi, please see Articles for deletion/Hindutva terrorism deeptrivia (talk) 04:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Islam is not for me
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Islam is not for me, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Islam is not for me is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Islam is not for me, 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. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Islam is not for me itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Commercial use of Image:Supergirl-dvd06.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Supergirl-dvd06.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Supergirl-dvd06.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-2.5 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Supergirl-dvd06.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 06:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The image is not for commercial use.I simply added it to use on a single article.There is no other use for it aside.No commercial use.Thanks.-Vmrgrsergr 06:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Commercial use of Image:6a00b8ea0675b8dece00c225260508549d-320pi.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:6a00b8ea0675b8dece00c225260508549d-320pi.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:6a00b8ea0675b8dece00c225260508549d-320pi.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-2.5 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:6a00b8ea0675b8dece00c225260508549d-320pi.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes this is the image I had mentioned.It is not for distrubution or for profit.it is just to improve a single artile.Please I have used it just for that.--Vmrgrsergr 07:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Images
Please do not just take Amazon.com's (or some other commercial site's) pictures of DVD covers and upload them here. These are copyright violations and will be deleted. Please delete them from the articles you've added them to. --EEMeltonIV 07:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Addendum: see Images, Image use policy, and Non-free content. --EEMeltonIV 07:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:B000FQVX78_01_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:B000FQVX78_01_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Use of speedy deletion template.
Hello there. You recently listed Pakistan Studies for speedy deletion, and cited WP:OR and WP:SOAP as reasons. Neither of these policies have anything to do with the criteria for speedy deletion. It's also a good idea to provide an edit summary if you want to list an article for deletion. Naturally I removed the tag. I also removed the POV and OR tags you placed on the article, as you have made no attempt to describe the problem you have with the article on the talk page. Again, they had no edit summaries. Just a heads-up. I hope you are enjoying your Wikibreak. Best regards Tree Kittens 11:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply on my talk page. I note that you have relisted Pakistan Studies for speedy deletion, citing WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV. Again, you fail to provide an edit summary. As you really should know by now, WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV are not listed as criteria for speedy deletion. I am going to remove the template. If you want to have the article deleted, please use the correct process if you really think that will work. If you tag the article for speedy deletion again, having twice been pointed to the relevant policy articles I will have to take up the matter with an administrator. Also, if you wish to litter the article with the other templates you have reinserted without an edit summary, will you at least open a discussion on the article's talk page. That is what the templates point to. Thanks. Tree Kittens 21:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Free Palestine
Template:Free Palestine has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — deeptrivia (talk) 07:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Moving template into namespace
To put the “Free Palestine” into user space, create User:Vmrgrsergr/Free Palestine, with the contents

&lt;div style="float: left; border:solid green 1px; margin: 1px;"&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

Then, where people would previously have used “ ”, they can use “  ” to precisely the same effect. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 23:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:request for comment
Dear Balouch i have done editing in that artilce.thanks for telling. Khalidkhoso 14:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Apbcp_lost1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Apbcp_lost1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)