Userboxes This user lives in England. UTC This user's time zone is UTC. This user assumes good faith. This user strives to maintain a policy of neutrality on controversial issues. SB This user lets SuggestBot recommend articles to edit once a month. more...

Archives

User talk:ErrantX/Archive/July 2006 User talk:ErrantX/Archive/August 2006 User talk:ErrantX/Archive/Pre 2010 Archives January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018 August 2018 September 2018 October 2018 November 2018 December 2018 January 2019 February 2019 March 2019 April 2019 May 2019 June 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 October 2019 November 2019 December 2019 January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 September 2020 October 2020 November 2020 December 2020 January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 July 2021 August 2021 September 2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 January 2022 February 2022 March 2022 April 2022 May 2022 June 2022 July 2022 August 2022 September 2022 October 2022 November 2022 December 2022 January 2023 February 2023 March 2023 April 2023 May 2023 June 2023 July 2023 August 2023 September 2023 October 2023 November 2023 December 2023 January 2024 February 2024 March 2024 April 2024 May 2024

This page has archives. Sections older than 8 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

I know its not your job but perhaps you can help.

Have not checked this file in a while. I am a wiki amateur but this is about the only wiki page I maintain. I noticed this deletion. Very curious as to why it was deleted from here: File:Person rokossovsky3.jpg I looked for a discussion on this topic elsewhere but could not find it.

http://ww2db.com/images/person_rokossovsky3.jpg

This photo of Rokossovsky is easily one of the most famous photographs of the second world war, and symbolic of the underlying story of the competition between two of the Red Armies most important commanders of WW2, Georgy Zhukov, and Konstantin Rokossovsky, the first on a white stallion, the second on a black one. It easily qualifies for fair use as significant photo in and of itself -- in much the same way as the photo of the Soviet soldier flying the Red Banner over the Reichstag in Berlin qualifies as a historically important photograph. It entails an important incident where these two famous commanders of the Red Army were both given command of the victory parade in Moscow in 1945.

It reflects Rokossosky's political and military significance as one of the most important military commanders of the second world war, since is shows him being honoured at the Moscow victory parade of 1945 as one of two commanders selected by Joseph Stalin to lead the parade.

The fact the wiki article on the Victory Parade on Red Square is mostly about the story of how these two competitors were given "joint" command, despite their years of competition. That wiki article is a good example of the political and historical significance of this event that is the subject of this photo. It is a photo that captures the culmination of the whole war from the Russian (and Soviet) point of view, including the important personalities of the conflict on the Russian side.

Furthermore it helps tell the story of the article because Konstantine Rokossovsky's life story is heavily bound up in the competition with Zhukov, and this is referred to repeatedly in the article, and no other existing photo really captures that theme.

The rendition of this event has even been made into paintings: http://great-victory1945.ru/marshals_zhukov_and_rokossovsky.jpg as found on this site: http://great-victory1945.ru/victory.htm

Other images of this parade, and incidents relating to it appear all over wiki, but this one is deleted. I don't get it.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

realy i want to talk with u i 'm a fan girl i'm just wanna 2 know u i'm an egyptian girl i don't know why i want to know u closely if u don;t mind i want that if u want to a realy good egyptian friend reply the msg i'll be waitin 4 u--41.196.226.47 (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)mayada[reply]

(talk page stalker) This is not Facebook.Jasper Deng (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's certainly the oddest message I've got from WP yet :) --Errant ^(chat!) 04:30, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to [1], I have uploaded a more appropriate cover version. Next time, please just ask me to fix the issue beforehand instead of deleting and assuming I need to have fair use explained to me. Thanks, Steven Walling • talk 23:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I am not sure where that aggressiveness is coming from. I deleted the image because we had a perfectly reasonable OTRS request from the copyright holder, I saw no possibility of it passing NFCC and you seemed to be currently AFK. Then I left you a note on the issue - certainly not explaining fair use, but specifying which part of the policy made the image problematic... I'm not sure what else you would want me to do. I don't know why you take that as an affront - it was a mistake, but hardly a big deal. :) --Errant ^(chat!) 08:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Errant. When you get a minute, the AN thread you commented in could use your input. Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I did kinda saunter into that debacle didn't I :) I commented - my preference here is to try a common sense discretionary approach, and close it quickly. --Errant ^(chat!) 22:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd have preferred something more symmetrical, but I'll defer to your judgment. 28bytes (talk) 23:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm; symmetrical, how so? I'm a bit tired at the moment, so I might have misfired (which I thought the second I hit save TBH). I aimed for the middle but, to be honest, it's probably easier just to get consensus on your proposal. --Errant ^(chat!) 23:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a bit unfair to make Prioryman go through an RfCU to get DC from badgering him off-site. I'd prefer we just say to DC "stop badgering him off-site." 28bytes (talk) 23:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True; we don't necessarily have a well defined way of sanctioning that, though. Or at least the community hasn't been very good at it in the past. If a modified IBAN goes into play and DC mentions prioryman off-wiki, for which he is then blocked, I expect it will simply generate more dramaz. Without a really firm and broad community view on this I don't see that it will actually work. --Errant ^(chat!) 23:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I'm underthinking it, but it seems pretty straightforward to me. DC's pretty visible off-site, it's not like there'd be any great detective work involved in noticing whether he's continuing to poke at PM or not. The idea of an interaction ban in which implicit permission is given for off-wiki poking just seems kind of pointless to me. 28bytes (talk) 23:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about simply asking DC to cease interacting with me off-wiki from accounts that he controls? It seems to me that if he genuinely wants to disengage he wouldn't want to interact off-wiki - wouldn't you agree? Prioryman (talk) 23:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry folks, I am simply not going to agree to anything that attempts to limit my off-wiki activities. Nor should anyone else. I'm not even going to get into why it is a bad idea - we all know it's not going to fly. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:48, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem, DC, is that you're increasingly giving the impression that you're here more to fight battles with other editors than to do useful work building and maintaining the encyclopedia. That you refuse to even consider disengaging from commenting on Prioryman offsite strengthens this impression. 28bytes (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not mistake my refusal to entertain a ridiculous ban for something that it is not. I guess when I make a fairly innocuous post on AN about an issue which has come up recently and is quite simply solved, I don't feel like I'm fighting a battle. I feel like I'm making a procedural request that will improve the administration of Wikipedia, which is just as important as correcting italics in articles. For ErrantX's sake, why don't we let this play out on AN instead of here? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you noticed my italics! Always happy to help. But sure, let's wait for ErrantX to return. I'm sure he's already dreading what he'll find here when he logs in in the morning. 28bytes (talk) 03:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't blame him for dreading it but, for the record, thanks Errant for your thoughtful approach to this issue. Prioryman (talk) 13:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, both parties have now consented to a total interaction ban [2] so please feel free to go ahead and implement it. Prioryman (talk) 08:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting that out. One procedural question if I may: given that DC has adamantly refused anything that limits his off-wiki activities, it seems distinctly likely that he intends to continue going after me off-wiki. What is my recourse in that event? An RFC/U would quite rightly not be allowed under the interaction ban and would be useless anyway, as it would turn into a circus. Prioryman (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest that the terms of the interaction ban be changed to exclude dispute resolution processes, so that you may file an RFC/U, Prioryman? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note.Image under notice is absolutely free from any copy right and in public domain. Actually I am not technically very sound, so this lapse occurred.I seek ur help in this regard.M.A.Harifal. 12:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Muhammad Akbar (talk • contribs)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Usage share of web browsers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]