User talk:Renetus
Welcome!
Hello, Renetus, and
- 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
{{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
And don't forget, the
]Image tagging for Image:CCTV Headquarters.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CCTV Headquarters.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
- Wikipedia:Image use policy
- Wikipedia:Image copyright tags
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot 22:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Future Dome
Unexplained One World Trade Center reversion
Why did you revert my own revert to an IP's edit, and without explanation on top of that? At least I gave a very simple explanation for reverting that IP's edit: It has already been covered with the following sentences in the general Architecture & Design section: "The building's footprint is a 200-foot (61 m) square" as well as-- "As the tower rises from its cubic base, the square edges are chamfered back, transforming the building's shape into eight tall isosceles triangles, or an elongated square antiprism.[35] Near its middle, the tower forms a perfect octagon in-plan, and then culminates in a glass parapet whose shape is a square rotated 45 degrees from the base." There is absolutely no need for repetition or reiteration in this case. Please give me a clear explanation as to why you reverted soon or I will be inclined to remove those unnecessary sentences once again. Cadiomals (talk) 19:30, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
- It's been six hours and you haven't yet replied. If you don't reply to this message within 12 hours, I will regard your reversion as simply an attempt to disrupt and restore my edit. Thank you. Cadiomals (talk) 01:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
- I was unaware that the sentence was repetitive as I didn't read the sentence you quoted. At first I thought this was a nice addition. Now that I see that it repeats a better worded phrase earlier in the article I agree that this sentence can be removed. (User:Renetus) 12:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Flag of Syria
I'm telling the truth GhiathArodaki (talk) 04:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
ghiath looks to be from the syrian electronic army that is vandalizing websites
]Hahaha, Funny , Must i laugh more ?How a silly wordGhiathArodaki (talk) 19:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
what are we going to do if ghiath tries to vandalize the article.
]In my opinion you are both too involved to be neural and it would be best for both of you to stop editing this article. As a Syrian GhiathArodaki is to passionate about his standpoint and is clearly violating wikipedia rules. His contributions are mostly reverting, deleting and adding poor english language. Your (Alhanuty) edits are les disruptive but you also reverted some constructive contributions and have started threatening me if I didn't leave the article the way you left it. I have the impression that as a Kurd you strongly favour the Independence flag (to support the opposition) and are doing everything you can to represent this flag (and the opposition) as being of equal status in the name of objectivity. In the case of Lybia the green flag was a Kadhafi symbol. Because the red-white-black flag is not an Assad symbol I can understand that people object to the title "Flag used by the Assad government". I personally would prefer calling section 1 and 2, United Arab Republic flag and Independence flag as in the introduction. If GhiathArodaki (or you) would continue to violate wikipedia rules I would report that again which would probably lead to a higher sanction this time. Renetus (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
i wasn't vandalizing the article,i was making it neutral and i was reverting ghiath vandalism,but we have to find a solution for ghiath vandalism because he is refusing to stop his vandalism and he is vandalizing the article even he got blocked for 72 hours
]He will get himself blocked if he continues his behaviour. We'll see.... Renetus (talk) 20:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC) when i said leave it,that was about the introduction,because the explanation of the flags was in the article,so i was meaning that,but now i agree to what you did in the introduction
]- Can you tell me what is disputed about the Syrian flag and coat of arms? Do you now about the colours of the Syrian flag which is still rising over the UN headquarters? Do you know that the Syrian passport bearing the two-starred coat of arms is accepted abroad and any other passport is not legal? Do you know that Bashar al-Assad is still called president by the entire world? If you know all of those facts, so please do not play dirty games and restore the official Syrian flag at the infobox.--Preacher lad (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- The legitimacy of the Assad government is disputed and the flag is as well. I know about the UN seat, and about the Arab League seat. The "entire world" is not calling Assad the legitimate president anymore. Many countries now recognize the Syrian National Coalition as sole legitimate representative of Syria. Renetus (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- Then, we will stand at the UN representation. Yeah, a group of islamists with long beards are becoming legitimate representatives for Syria, funny kidding me?! Do not tell me that Jabhat al-Nussra front is the official army of Syria, please do not tell me!--Preacher lad (talk) 04:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
RfC for Syrian Infobox presentation
I have noticed that you have attempted to address the
]ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Renetus. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Renetus. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Renetus. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Shtove (talk) 23:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Altavista-logo.png
Thank you for uploading
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the
Disambiguation link notification for October 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
The file File:Future Dome1.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the
The file File:Future Dome3.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the
The file File:Future Dome5.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the
File permission problem with File:Future Dome5.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Future Dome5.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in
File permission problem with File:Future Dome1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Future Dome1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in
