User talk:Joshdboz

I wanted to thank you for your compliment a while back regarding my work on Quds Force. Alas, I think I will take a break from it. A whole bunch of new editors have come to the page. In accordance with wikipolicy, I assume goodwill on their part but sometimes it seems like special interest groups form to systematically push a particular agenda or view on pages related to their agenda. A good example might be the battle between people who are apparently ethnic Greeks and apparently ethnic Persians over the Battle of Thermopylae and the film 300_(film). Anyway, it appears to me, that a group of ethnic Persians who have a bias towards Iran have been editing pages in a way favorable to Iran both on the Quds Force page but also on pages like US raid on Iranian liaison office in Arbil. In both cases I have tried to provide balance but I am one person and they are a group (that appears to be coordinated). I will assume good faith on their part and that they really believe that the Iranian view of current events is the objective view. I just this it is frustrating and a shame that because an apparently coordinated group decides to "adopt" a page and there is only one person working on the same page with a different perspective, that the article takes the POV (IMHO) of the special interest group. Again, thanks for the compliment and for letting me vent here. I'll be back to that page after a while :-)--71.197.138.180 18:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me! I resent the copyright violation allegation against the material I added to the Teva Pharmaceutical Industries page. The history of the company I wrote is sourced from the company's website, and inevitably uses a few words and phrases from it, but I did write an original text that I think flows somewhat better, and is more objective (ie, less of a sales script). Please would you restore my text. --GJeffery 19:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GJeffery, I'm sorry to cause any hard feelings in this matter and appreciate the time you put into the article, but after reviewing the previous Teva Pharmaceutical History section as well as the introduction section still remaining, both are clear violations of copywrite. For example:

Your text[1]:

Teva was founded in Jerusalem in 1901 as a small wholesale drug business, distributing medicines imported on the backs of camels and donkeys. The company was called Salomon, Levin and Elstein Ltd., after its founders, and this name still serves as the pharmaceutical marketing arm of Teva in Israel.

Company text[2]:

Teva was founded in Jerusalem in 1901 as a small wholesale drug business in Jerusalem that distributed imported medicines loaded onto the backs of camels and donkeys, to customers throughout the land. The company was called Salomon, Levin and Elstein Ltd., after its founders. From that day until the present this name has served as the pharmaceutical marketing arm of Teva in Israel.

Your text:

In 1980, Teva acquired the second largest Israeli drug manufacturer Ikapharm, together with Plantex, a manufacturer of pharmaceutical active ingredients. This acquisition enabled Teva to separate penicillin production and non-penicillin drugs, an essential requirement of international health authorities, paving the way for Teva's entry to the US market. In 1982 Teva was granted FDA approval for its Kfar Saba (Ikapharm) manufacturing plant. At the same time, Teva commenced trading its ADR on the NASDAQ.

Company text:

In 1980, Teva acquired the second largest Israeli drug manufacturer Ikapharm (later dissolved in 1982 and merged into Teva) together with Plantex - an API manufacturer. This acquisition enabled Teva to separate penicillin production and non-penicillin drugs, an essential requirement of international health authorities, paving the way for Teva's entry to the US market. In 1982 Teva was granted FDA approval for its Kfar Saba (Ikapharm) manufacturing plant. At the same time, Teva commenced trading its American Depository Receipts (ADRs) on the NASDAQ, over the counter market in the USA.

I've been editing enough to completely understand that it can sometimes be difficult to avoid similar wording or phrasing when writing an article, but some of these sentences are copied word for word. Even if properly cited, I don't believe Wikipedia allows this much quoting unless there is a very good reason/rationale and it is unmistakably marked. You might want to look at these pages for further clarification Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ, and Wikipedia:Fair use#Text. This article needs to be completely rewritten anyway because the existing introduction, written by a previous user, is a copy/paste job from the front page here. Before I do anything though I'd appreciate a response. Thanks, Joshdboz 20:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joshdboz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Lectonar 30 June 2005 13:05 (UTC)

After you prodded Robert Kilmain, someone removed the prod tag and hoax warning without explanation. So I've moved it to AfD. Personally, I'd just use AfD for hoaxes, if you're pretty sure. A bad-faith entry is likely to get a bad-faith objection, forcing it to AfD anyway. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Kilmain. NickelShoe 04:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only removed it because I felt it was obvious, pretty much I think when somone is identified as Israeli they are assumed to be Jewish unless it specifally says otherwise.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"And I gathered you together, and I rescued you from all places" is what the seal says. Sounds like a quote but I don't recognise the source. --woggly 19:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a biblical verse. I will find the source for you this evening. Danny 20:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you! I will update the page. Joshdboz 20:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Miri Regev.jpg. The image description 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.

Please go to the image 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 '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 fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dan Harel, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 19:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just discovered you're a great contributor of Israel-related articles. Please add any news ones to Portal:Israel/New in order to let others know too. --Shuki 18:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will do in the future. Joshdboz 19:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joshdboz. I rewrote the article. I was aware that the content had been copied, but it was a very small amount and was fact-type information (facts cannot be copyrighted). I should have rewritten it, but I was hoping that it would be reworked eventually. When an article is composed of copyrighted content, but is notable, it is common practice to write a short paragraph or two so that Wikipedia has at least some information on it. Also, the existence of the article encourages contributions to it.

If you continue to have problems with the editor, you can try the most appropriate administrator contact on Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention. However, it should be made clear that it is a policy matter (like not posting copyrighted content), rather than what should go into an article (content dispute). Thanks, Kjkolb 17:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, on the image description page, this is all you had written:

Cropped photo of Miri Regev from IDF website

So under the terms of CSD I6 this image had been tagged for lacking a fair use rationale and was deleted per policy. I can restore the image description page if you like, but considering it's one line it would seem to me that it would be just as easy for you to copy-paste it when you re-upload the image. Regards, howcheng {chat} 06:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am at work at the moment and cannot make to many Wiki edits but I think you may find this article informative. In it SSgt Wuterich giving his side of the story to the Washington Post.--Looper5920 12:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, will add from it. Joshdboz 14:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Could I ask you to revert the change of Operation Just Cause until the argument has been finished on the Military History talk page. While I agree that the original article should be titled the invasion of Panama there is still not a consensus on whether it is appropriate for military members to have operational names on there pages. I am not going to revert war or argue incessibly but rather ask you just keep it until a consensus is reached. Your call. Cheers--Looper5920 10:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, no problem --Joshdboz 11:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this you? How cool is that??? - CobaltBlueTony

Yeah, thanks for the link!--Joshdboz 01:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't get to it right away, but I can drop in and look over the article for you. --Lethargy 21:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was no problem. Sorry I took so long to get to it, BTW. --Lethargy 00:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zaam ha-El is correct. Danny 21:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. It was a great article and deserves to be FA.UberCryxic 23:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		In recognition of your work in helping to keep the extremely controversial article Operation Wrath of God as much NPOV as you can, I award you the Barnstar of Diligence. CG 22:11, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just started a Mandarin class, so I looked up Farber's book on the subject, and that got me thinking about Farber, who I haven't heard on the radio for a long time. His book has wonderful anecdotes and his own brilliant metaphors, which I remember from his show. I hope to do more with it later, partly from some of the biographical information he has in "How to Learn Any Language." Thanks again, Noroton 19:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

I don't know if you'd have an opinion on this or think it worth voting on, but the "Category:American conservatives" page has been proposed for deletion. I think it's a useful category so I voted to keep it, but three others want to delete it. If you have an opinion, please cast a vote. Thanks for the link to the web page, by the way.Noroton 22:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joshdboz, Thanks for your vote at the Category:American Conservative discussion. The votes were 2:1 in favor of keeping it. You might have an interest in an article I've just created Pre-Iraq War opinions on Saddam Hussein. It's poorly named (something I want to change) but as it stands now, it's essentially statements made about how dangerous Saddam's regime was considered before the war. The article is being proposed for deletion, but I of course think it's useful. I'd be interested to know what you think.Noroton 01:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. I think there are a number of different ways to reform this into something else, and I'll be exploring it. Much appreciated, Noroton 15:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm. Just noticed it. I think mine is alot better. Will be longer to, mine is more likely to be featured then the other one. By the way my title is better then "Reconstruction" it is alot more desprictive. --Zonerocks 04:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look im still working on this. It isn't finished. But i am dedicated to this article. Ive been working on it for a very long time planning it. It should be finished by tuesday. Don't put this up for deletion. I am proud of my work. Just keep it. --Zonerocks 18:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look don't send it to AFD until im done making it, ok? --Zonerocks 21:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking about whether it's OK to change the reference style to footnotes in the Muslim Brotherhood articles. Please go ahead; I think footnotes are much better, and I just used the Harvard style references because I couldn't figure out how to make footnotes in Wikipedia. Many thanks! Beroul 02:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Josh! Just want to say congrats again for making it on FA! Great work for all the NPOV and others you strived to work on! Vic226 01:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Strike-through text[reply]

Thanks so much! Joshdboz 01:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. As a Jew, I feel very passionate about this subject, and would like as much of the full story to be told as possible.

I get a bit irritated when people climb all over me for NPOV, when it's plain that facts have no POV. The fact that the Germans botched the rescue operation and failed to save the Israelis cannot be glossed over or whitewashed. At least one person who complained to me about POV sounded like he was an apologist for the terrorists - and when I told him so, in just those words, he backed off. A lot of what I've contributed to the article comes directly from the Groussard, Reeve and Klein books - if people want EVERY SINGLE CITATION included, the article would be twice as long as it already is.

Again, thanks for reading, and for your kind words.

BassPlyr23 18:00, 26 November 2006 (EDT)

This discussion was moved from User:Joshdboz by Vic226.

The dictionary definition is very clear. Read it. Any other definistion is an insensitive, ideological insult.

Im my case, the terrorists, who tried to kill 400 university students, are routinely called "activists". It's an insult. And yeah, I take it personally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Adler (talk • contribs) 03:28, 27 November 2006

I'm sorry for what you have gone through. However, Wikipedia is not therapy, and therefore could not and should not be responsible for what you have experienced. While this might sound harsh to you (and I apologize for anything in advance), we cannot be lenient on and introduce edits that are against the Wikipedia policies and guidelines (in this case, maintenance of neutral point of view) just because it is the only way to make you feel better. Regards, Vic226_talk 05:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I've left comments on Talk:Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States.

Cheers, --Ling.Nut 04:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Cocoaguy_contribs^talk 00:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The usage of the word "terrorist" is required in this situation. These groups are terrorist organizations and should therefore be called terrorist organizations. Calling them anything else allows them dignity that they dont deserve! Simply calling everybody a 'militant' makes a soldier and a terrorist equal. A terrorist is clearly completely different than a militant. These groups are the definition of terrorists. Brilliance 02:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I have revised the article to be neutral as well as inform the truth. Brilliance 03:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for reminding me of this. Brilliance 19:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Gabi_Ashkenazi.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. MECU≈talk 00:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:128.206.48.17#Thank_you_for_experimenting. Travb (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I will take care of the article as soon as I finished with Abbas Kiarostami. Take care. Sangak 17:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask an admin who deleted the image. I think it's best to watch any image you upload (or the talk page of the uploader) because usually a warning will be given before it is deleted. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 03:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you ultimately figured it out, but the deletion log should be helpful. Tewfik^Talk 02:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joshdboz. I notice you have an interested in the Mossad. I also notice there are a lot of Mossad related articles but there is no Category:Mossad. There is precedence for such a category as Category:Central Intelligence Agency exists. Do you think it is worth creating a Mossad category? Best. --70.51.232.70 19:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Meyrav Wurmser.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ed g2s • talk 15:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a template Politics of Iran and on this template, there is a link to Iran international crisis since 24 December 2006, which seems to me normal.

Because he does not like the page, Gerash77 not only has suppressed this link on 9 February 2007 and has since entered into an edit war by suppressing it every day. On top of that, he is trying to create problems for me. He has told an administrator, user:AndrewRT that I was the problem, created this edit war, asked him to send me warnings etc.

Since you have contributed to the Iran international crisis article, I thought you could help me. Any idea how to fight this? Alain10 19:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thank you for putting up a picture of the book cover! I tried unsuccessfully to put up a "too-high" of resolution picture of the cover recently, but it was hastily deleted, so thanks again. Fdssdf 23:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Joshdboz 00:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the move. However, I wanted to mention that cut and paste moves are to be avoided, for GFDL reasons. Please see m:Help:Moving a page or Wikipedia:Requested moves in the future when moving a page. --Interiot 17:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I was unaware of the issue. Joshdboz 17:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Every argument for keeping Image:Samjhaut Express bombings.jpg was equally argued for deletion. If you look at sheer numbers there were four keeps (TheFEARgod, Joshdboz, Nishkid64, and Kafziel) and four deletes (Rebelguys2, lamunknown, Geni and Megapixie), as I count someone refuting a keep statement as someone you supports deleting the image. Plus, I believe deletion is the correct thing to do per current Wikipedia fair use policy, specifically #8 and counterexamples, specifically #5. In my opinion, the image did not add significantly to article and was being used merely for illustration. If you want to see the use of a press photo that I believe meets policy, look at the image in the Oklahoma City bombing article. Read the "Effect on children" paragraph and you will see commentary about the copyrighted image on the right. If you would like to get someone to review my decision, please request a deletion review -Regards Nv8200p talk 16:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I make my decisions based on policy, guidelines and consensus in that order. Like you said, consensus did not exist, however, I think the guideline and policy pointed the way toward deletion. Request a deletion review if you believe the image should stay. -Nv8200p talk 22:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About "Asgari", you are right. One of the admins shoud move it (it's not possible now). About "Ali-Reza" or "Ali Reza", "Ali-Reza" is correct, because it's his first name (the difference between "Ali Reza" and "Ali-Reza" is not important for google search). Jahangard 23:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article you contributed too is up for deletion. --70.51.234.169 23:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some random Needham guy did a pretty good job on this article: [3] Vic₂₂₆^說 23:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ap munich905 t.jpg does not qualify for fair use in the article Operation Wrath of God. The use of this Associated Press photo is being limited to Munich Massacre. Use in Operation Wrath of God violates WP:NFCC #8. This image is not significant for this article. Please do not add it back or it may result in the image being deleted from Wikipedia all together. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 16:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion over use of the image at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_June_27#Image:Ap_munich905_t.jpg. The way you are using the image is decorative and unncessary. The event depicted in the image happened before Operation Wrath of God. Yes, this is opinion, but seems to be the majority opinion these days. You are welcome to start the dispute resolution process. I am adding comments to the Operation Wrath of God talk page. -Regards Nv8200p talk 16:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joshdboz. You are off to such a great start on the article Nuclear weapons and Israel that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you pasted stockpile information in Nuclear weapons and Israel, you lost most information on bibliographical reference. I am reverse engineering it, but for single author works it is practically impossible. I could not find from where you copied the reference pointers. Can you fix it, or at least point me to your sources? Thank you very much. Lgfcd (talk) 23:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nuclear weapons and Israel, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 00:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Elyezer Shkedy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I think you're misinterpreting the meaning of the word vandalism. What I did cannot on any planet be classified as vandalism. Ok, now that that's settled, you agree that is OR, and OR is not allowed. Therefore, it is not allowed. ColdFusion650 20:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that criteria is listened on WP:VANDAL. Making bold edits is explicitly listed as not vandalism. I also gave a reason. It's original research. While I understand that there is some confusion between vandalism and edits you don't like, some people around here can get mad at being called a vandal. So, you should probably be careful with that. ColdFusion650 00:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Elazar Stern.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 14:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josh, I have commented on your nomination at T:TDYK. The entry is unlikely to be used on the main page unless the issue I have raised is adressed. Please note that this page asks nominators to: "Please check back for comments on your nomination. Responding to reasonable objections will help ensure that your article is listed."--Carabinieri 13:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! Joshdboz 17:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. If you look at the last edit from this article, an anon user has added two sentences, one refering to a book and one refering to a YouTube video. Could you assess the relevance of these two references, and maybe modify their locations to suit WP manual of style? thank you. CG 19:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On November 20, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert F. Kennedy's speech on the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename I simply renamed it for the purposes of alphabetical order. You'll note that your US and UK examples also incidentally fit this standard. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Cheers, Davnel03^{Sign It, Junior!} 16:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from your recent edit on the Benziar Bhutto page. Thank youEldorado91 (talk) 21:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend instead taking this discussion to the talk page of the article. Further, I recommend that you cite policy for deletion and read WP:POINT, Eldorado. SorryGuy  Talk  21:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad that I could be of any help ;-) Feel free to ping me in future, however you may get a quicker response from Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Earthfrisk Launches Meta Social Search.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image 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 '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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was from the soc gen network facebook, not sure if it is legit to post. I however just noticed that it is also up on the Telegraph website, so I would think it is fair use. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/01/24/bcnsocgen924.xml

Tell me when you're exhausted with Directorate of General Security. You've done a great job so far. --Sharkface217 04:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You deserve this:

		The Original Barnstar
		For doing an incredible job on Directorate of General Security and Directorate 14, I, Sharkface217, hereby award you this barnstar. Keep up the good work! --Sharkface217 19:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. --Sharkface217 19:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My edits unstacked the refs, too, and I was reverted by the same guy. I wish we could get some official guideline on this. Should template refs be stacked or shouldn't they? Robert K S (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to be any guideline. The choice of how to format citations is up to each editor, so I think it would be best to bring it up on that article's talk page to arrive at a consensus. Joshdboz (talk) 13:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mohammed al-Shahwani, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 05:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating Democrats Abroad primary, 2008! Kingturtle (talk) 13:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It sounds like they were trying to steal some thunder by being the first count reporting on Super Tuesday, but judging by media coverage so far they'll need to work a bit harder to compete with Dixville Notch. Joshdboz (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thing maybe probably accidentally. sorry) —Preceding unsigned comment added by US - Jimmy Slade (talk • contribs) 22:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I have been writing about the IDF more and more these days and may try to expand the article during the weekend. Maybe not. Currently I'm writing another article, Bamahane. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 02:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that the Telegraph says that, but they don't provide any evidence, and I really think they just misread the other article. If it happened, it would be all over the news, which it still isn't. Feel free to discuss further at Talk:Imad_Mugniyah#CIA_station_chief. Superm401 - Talk 13:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Republican_primary%2C_2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by US - Jimmy Slade (talk • contribs) 19:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Benjamin Gantz.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 (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Maybe you remeber me. Yesterday I has writted some wrong and after this I have blocked. Can you unblock me? pleaze I'm User:US - Jimmy Slade 89.178.46.126 (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, and it is only a 24 hour block. If you want to dispute it the instructions are on your talk page. Joshdboz (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see cathegories http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:69.202.64.143 US - Jimmy Slade (talk) 21:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:United States presidential election in Massachusetts, 2008#Merger proposal.—Markles 00:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You are listed as one of the main contributors to the article here. I just wanted to let you know the article is now on the featured articles candidates list and your support or input here would be valuable. Thanks --Zaindy87 (talk) 02:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help on the "A More Perfect Union" speech. I had thought that there would be an article on this speech by now, but I thought I would get a start on it. Again, thanks for help in expanding it. I really appreciate it. conman33 (. . .talk) 01:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just added it to Did you know? for March 18. Just my luck, now there's a movement to delete the article. Be sure to help keep it, man! Thanks again. conman33 (. . .talk) 04:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated A More Perfect Union, 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A More Perfect Union (2nd nomination) 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, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the not you left on our project's page and I just wanted to let you know that one of the articles that the MMM team has been working on is now up for FAC. We are hoping to get our first FA soon and so if you have the time to look over the article and leave your comments on the article we would love to hear them! :) --Mfreud (talk) 00:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - yeah, I suggested it'd probably be best re-written from scratch, but if you want to have a go at creating a stub from this mess, I have userfied the deleted article at User:Black Kite/DIS. Black Kite 01:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Opération 14 juillet, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cirt (talk) 12:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, as a member of Wikipedia: WikiProject Power in international relations, I'd like to invite you to come back and work on the project. There's still a lot of work to be done and we'd all appreciate your contributions. Please come back. --Hobie (talk) 02:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry, I just saw the debate on some user pages. If it is true/debatable, I am sure it will be published in some newspapers pretty soon. Poppy (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I notice you're using one of the {{motd}} templates, run by Wikipedia:Motto of the day. You may have noticed that some of the mottos recently have been followed by a date from 2006, or on occasion simply "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". The reason for this is that Motto of the day is in some very serious need of help. Participation in the project, which has never been especially high, has dropped considerably over this past summer, to the point we have had several days where no motto was scheduled to appear at all. Over the past several weeks, I've been the only editor scheduling mottos at all, but there aren't enough comments on some of these mottos to justify their use. If we do not get some help - and soon - your daily mottos will stop. In order for us to continue updating these templates for you, we need your help.

When you get a chance between your normal editing, could you stop by our nominations page and leave a few comments on some of the mottos there, especially those that do not have any comments yet? This works very simply; you read a motto, decide whether or not you like it, and post your opinion just below the motto. That's it - no experience required, just an idea of what you personally like and what you feel reflects Wikipedia and its community. If you do have past experience with the project, then please close some of the older nominations once they've got a decent consensus going. There are directions on the nominations page on how to do this.

If you have any questions, please let me know, or post on the project's talk page. I'm looking forward to reading your comments on the suggested mottos, and any additional suggestions you'd like to make. Until then, happy editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sarah Palin wheel war arbitration case, on which you have commented, is now open.

• Evidence for the arbitrators may be submitted at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Evidence. Evidence should be submitted within one week, if possible.
• Your contributions are also welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Workshop.

For the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny ✉ 21:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[4] I have reverted your edit. While I can understand why you feel this way, WP:BLP applies throughout the encyclopedia. Let's try to keep that talk page focused on the actual article rather than the three-ring circus that surrounds it. Thanks. Risker (talk) 00:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that your comment on Talk:Naked Short Selling was summarily deleted by User:Risker.

I'm still getting up to speed with Wiki policies, but I thought that this was a no-no? cojoco (talk) 00:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eitan Ben Eliyahu, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Victuallers (talk) 18:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I see you're the one who created some of those articles, including Eitan Ben Eliyahu recently :) -- Nudve (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 October, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) 2008 Abu Kamal raid, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 00:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am extremely concerned about the action you took in deleting most of the page for `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. This man played a central role in the early years of the Moslem religion and the Arab empire. He was a major historical figure. The action you took could be seen as an attack by Wikipedia on a religion shared by many hundreds of millions of people. I strongly urge you to immediately revert your edit. You may of course post appropriate notices to initiate a debate over copyright infringement, neutrality etc. I am sure many editors would be glad to help improve the article. But please revert immediately. This is urgent. Aymatth2 (talk) 03:19, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of the text in that article had been plagiarized from another website (linked to on the talk page), without any permission given to use it. We do not use copied text without specific permission, its the law. This decision had nothing to do with the subject of the article. If you would like to, I would encourage you to improve the article yourself. Joshdboz (talk) 03:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The text on http://www.bizbrowse.com/yarehman/islam/Special/companions/part-I.htm is probably in the public domain. Did you check? In this case, given the significance of the subject, it is far better to open the article to editor review than to arbitrarily remove it. I suspect that what you have done would seem to a Muslim like deleting most of the article on Christ on the basis that it is derived from one book, with dubious copyright. Will you revert or should I? Aymatth2 (talk) 03:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a sense of the importance of this topic, check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/`Abbas_ibn_`Abd_al-Muttalib Aymatth2 (talk) 04:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not doubt the importance of the subject. There are two issues with the text: 1) It was clearly copied, thus the burden is on the editor adding it to prove that the text is licensed in such a way to permit its use. The default is to delete copied text when in doubt. 2) Regardless of whether or not it is legal to use this text, it is written in an unencyclopedic way and frankly this is a very suspect looking website. Is this a reliable source? Is this historical fact or a somewhat embellished story? Again, I encourage you to improve and expand the article if it is important to you, but you should focus on writing your own words instead of looking for things to copy. Joshdboz (talk) 13:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I reacted too soon. It was late, I was tired, and when I found this massive deletion I was concerned, since the subject seems sensitive. But when I look at the content, you are right - not very encyclopediac at all, and clearly just copied from one source. One unfortunate effect: if you go back to the version before all this material was dumped in, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=`Abbas_ibn_`Abd_al-Muttalib&diff=79290943&oldid=77539921, there was slightly more information and better references than there is now. Since then, a lot of editors have made changes, which will all have been lost. But yes, you did the right thing. Ignore my previous comments. Maybe someone who knows something about the subject will improve the article. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article International opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 03:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Yishai Be'er.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) 05:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Avi Mizrahi.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) 05:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josh! I am also against copyright paranoia, however, the new fair use rules (actually in place for over a year by now) are fairly clear on this issue. Paragraph 12 states: Pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) would serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image. This includes non-free promotional images.

In light of that, I can't really see a way that those images can be included. The IDF website is merely repeating what Israeli law already says, and according to both US and Israeli law, using an image of a living person on Wikipedia would be fair use. However, Wikipedia tries to make as little use as possible of fair use images without compromising the quality of the encyclopedia in the long run, which is what this policy/guideline is meant to explain (among other things).

On a side note, why not join WP Israel? Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Joshdboz! The hook was a bit of a gift when I realised that an anecdote Stott told at her birthday gala concert could actually be reliably sourced. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We had the prepared expansion of the main IAF article who was supposed to be published at the end of November. Unfortunately the friend is late and we will still wait. And at present I am concentrating the work on the description moshav, kibuts and city of Israel going along main roads - from the motorway No. 1, No. 2 and currently dual carriageway No. 3. I am moving the expansion of military articles away for the more distant future, because you are wspracying economies of Israel and tourisms are being given to be an more important sentence. In this subject matter an aid from the English side would be useful Wiki. I am greeting, Gedeon07

Hey Joshdboz.I was checking some new pages and found out that you have written many new articles on the squads of IAF.The articles are very short and have been marked as stubs. I would like to ask you if you could make a new article on the squads with all of them included.Regards, avs_dps —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avs dps (talk • contribs) 16:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Yitzhak Harel.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) 06:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good edits! Stick around, we need you. Viriditas (talk) 02:59, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply