Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:48, 5 February 2010

Hello, Omirocksthisworld! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Scientizzle 04:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

File:Divine Signs (HA).png

You put a invalid license on File:Divine Signs (HA).png. Only for use in Misplaced Pages is not a license we can accept here. It may be possible to justify the image under fair use, as long as write about the poster, not just the concept the poster illustrates. But you will need a fair use rationale. The same applies to the other posters. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the info. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC))

Younus AlGohar

Hi, I've moved Younus algohar to Younus AlGohar ϢereSpielChequers 12:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:MFIatIranianEmbassy.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MFIatIranianEmbassy.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I have reduced the resolution of the image and added more information about why I think its suitable to keep. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 01:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC))

Edit War!!!

• You don't belong to His Holiness Gohar Shahi, you dirty soul belongs to younas harami & Let me tell you that you are not working for the cause of His Holiness, but you are a group of opportunists. Don't mess up with us, otherwise we would open your reality to all.--116.71.2.18 (talk) 07:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
• I hope you understand that in Misplaced Pages, we assume good faith with other editors, and do not automatically become hostile with other editors. Please understand that no edits done by myself to any of the Younus AlGohar, Messiah Foundation International or Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi articles were done as a personal attack. They are rather what I perceived to be constructive edits. I was merely pointing out to you editing this article to include"Son of a ......" as part of said person's name is vandalism. If you wish to add information or have any other objections, I would advise you to discuss it in the talk pages. Thanks for your cooperation. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 07:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC))

• I've blocked one IP for a week for edit warring, the other has been warned re personal attacks and appropriate edit summaries. Mjroots (talk) 07:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

• I've semi-protected both articles without the NPOV tag. If the edit war continues it will be met with by longer periods of protection and longer blocks for the IPs. I've asked that any issues be raised on the relevant talk pages. Mjroots (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I always forget about that. I'll try to remember from now on. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 07:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC))

January 2010: Sufism

There is an ongoing edit war in the article Sufism in the Sufi Sheikhs -> Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi sub-section of the article. Could we please discuss this issue on the talk page? See Misplaced Pages:Edit war. Thanks. Esowteric+Talk 10:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• Once again, please at the very least, attempt to be cooperative in improving the articles instead of re-pasting the same edit summary with every revert, as you have done here and here and here. Please stop the vandalism, and instead discuss why you believe the changes need to be made on the talk pages. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.15.61 (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason for re-posting my own notice to you? (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 09:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 08:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it to the attention of those who can help. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

Minor edits

"A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions: typographical corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearrangement of text without modification of content, etc. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. An edit of this kind is marked in its page's revision history with a lower case, bolded "m" character (m)." Could you please be sure that you follow this guidelines? Odd, you're the 2nd person in about 5 minutes where I've posted this. Maybe it's catching? :-) Dougweller (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for edit warring

Template:Z9

Omirocksthisworld (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Although I understand that in recent days I have been involved in edit wars with IP addresses, I have tried with the IP addresses to first reach an agreement (see Talk: Messiah Foundation International and Talk: Younus AlGohar), however they have proved unresponsive to my attempts to explain my reverts and have instead ignored my requests for discussion. I feel that I should not be blocked from editing, as I have tried to assume good faith with the editors and reason with them.

Decline reason:

The correct thing to do when dealing with an IP user who will not listen is to report them here or ask that pages be protected, not continue the edit war with them. There are a lot of people hiding behind IPs who don't care for verifiability, only their Truth™, and while I wholly sympathize with you, I'm just not finding enough here to unblock. I'm sorry. —Jeremy 09:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I did see your belated attempts, such as this to use talk pages for discussion. However you must really do this much earlier on, and well before you're in danger of breaching policy. In the last day alone, you've reverted at least 17 times on the article. You must not revert more than 3 times in 24 hours on a single article, nor demonstrate a pattern of reverts that is disruptive (see WP:EW). While you feel as though your intentions were correct, obviously so did the other party. All both of you had done is cause disruption, and you're blocked to prevent further disruption.

In future, you should attempt page discussion earlier on, and if that's unsuccessful then follow the steps at WP:DR, but never edit war as it's silly and disruptive. Also, you might have considered requesting page protection at WP:RFPP for genuine disputes. NJA (t/c) 09:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response...I'm sorry, I realize I should have paid more attention the dispute resolution steps. I assure you that from now on I will follow the steps more vigilantly, and will most certainly make appeals for page protection, as this seems like the only way to stop the random removal of cited information and the like. It, however, looks as if I cannot comment on that page to appeal for page protection. But anyway, thank you for dealing with this mess, I haven't made it easy for you to see the reasons for dispute with all my reverts. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

I just took a look at the page to see if I thought it needed protection and it has already been protected. Dougweller (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick! (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 11:09, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

Block reduction

From our correspondence you seem to grasp the reasoning for the block, particularly how best to approach situations where you find yourself in a dispute that has lead or appears to be leading to an edit war. Due to this, and due to the fact that the articles have been protected to allow for discussion and the formation of consensus, I'm reducing your block from the original 31 hours to 12 hours (as you do have two technical violations of 3RR in the last day). Note that the IP user is still blocked for the initial 31 hours, thus you will need to allow time for them to join in on any discussions. Cheers, NJA (t/c) 11:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for being patient with me :), and of course, I will discuss the articles and issues relating to them with the IP as soon as my block is over. (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 11:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

I was involved in the reduction, please don't let me down. And note what I said about about marking edits as minor. Dougweller (talk) 13:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for giving me the chance then :)! And I'll try not to make edits in such a hurry- that way I'll take time to decide if the edit I'm making is minor or not. Thanks again! (Omirocksthisworld (talk) 21:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC))

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on RAGS International. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.

• • On a condition that you would not delete anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.18.209 (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)