User talk:Fatimiya

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image[edit]

Need to figure out how to upload a .jpeg and then put it into an entry. Am a little confused. A quick primer would be most appreciated --Fatimiya (talk) 11:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:IMAGE. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Fatimiya (talk) 15:25, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks[edit]

Wikipedia has a no personal attacks policy which means you need to address the comments, and not comment on the editor. Another key policy is to assume good faith. As per the no personal attacks, edits who do make comments about editors can be removed on sight. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 11:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The assumption of good faith is on the demonstration of good faith. You have not demonstrated good faith so no further assumption can be extended.--Fatimiya (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An AfD nomination is not a demonstration of bad faith. Stop attacking the nominator and concentrate on constructively bringing the article up to Wikipedia standards for sourcing and notability. An assumption that someone who disagrees with you is a part of some sort of organization working against you is a prima facie assumption of bad faith. Asserting that you're reporting an editor's action to a third off-wiki party for action constitutes an extremely inappropriate attempt at intimidation, and is considered disruptive editing. Please address the problems in the article. Acroterion (talk) 11:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to understand. This individual has a well-known and long documented history of harrassment of groups and people that are deemed to be ideological enemies of the Haifan Bahai organization to which he blongs. He serves on the wikipedia taskforce of the Bahai Internet Agency: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Baha%E2%80%99i_Internet_Agency . I would have no problem assuming good faith if any other editor had nominated. But this specific editor has an ideological axe to grind on behlaf of the BIA and a history to go with it. No problem about bringing this article to scratch. Happy to do it. --Fatimiya (talk) 11:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix the article and stop with the accusations. They do nothing to further your case, and while we give editors of articles proposed for deletion some space to vent, patience with personal attacks is limited. Acroterion (talk) 12:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? I am not the author of the article. I have just edited it. The article was authored by someone else --Fatimiya (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Term fixed, point unaltered. Acroterion (talk) 12:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I'm an "independent administrator," and any further accusation of this kind will result in a brief removal of your editing privileges, to be escalated if it is repeated. Acroterion (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No accusations have been made without a prior record based in evidence. If deemed necessary, this record and evidence can and will be submitted for perusal for yourself and to impartial third parties. That stated, I am well aware how wikipedia works and the kind of people that act as administrators. Given this, I would like to talk to three or four further independent administrators, please, besides yourself because I do not appreciate being condescended to. Thank you --Fatimiya (talk) 12:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning[edit]

Note that the three-revert rule states that "Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block." Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 14:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the placing of the stubs does not exist. Kindly remove them. --Fatimiya (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bahai Internet Agency[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Bahai Internet Agency requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contesting deletion[edit]

I posted a reply to your contesting the deletion. This article seems not to meet WP:V for lack of reliable sources. No doubt the information is useful and it would be great if you could fix it, but in its present state, it seems not to meet standards. See the welcome menu I posted for advice on getting started. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Fatimiya! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can 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 by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

File copyright problem with File:1st Khanaqah of FSO.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:1st Khanaqah of FSO.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 15:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This picture was taken by me with my own camera. I hold the copyright. Wikipedia may use it. Tell me how I may grant license to wikipedia to use the picture --Fatimiya (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The best way in almost all cases is to upload it through Wikimedia Commons using the form for your own work. On the left side of a page, click upload, click my own work, then go to Commons. Make a declaration in the drop down menu that the work is yours. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean I have to delete the picture and reload it again? Or can I just amend that information to the existing upload? --Fatimiya (talk) 15:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And how is that done? --Fatimiya (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Under what licence do you wish to release the image? Choose one from this list and let me know. Then I will place a template at the file location, where you can essentially just fill in the blanks. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:37, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. How about this one? *Creative Commons: Attribution-ShareAlike - {{cc-by-sa-3.0|Attribution details}} - This is one of several CC licenses. This version permits free use, including commercial use; requires that you be attributed as the creator; and requires that any derivative creator or redistributor of your work use the same license. The desired attribution text should be included as a parameter in the template. --Fatimiya (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Okay, go ahead and review what I did here. I'm thinking it should be sufficient. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thanks. Should I just go ahead and remove the delete tag now? --Fatimiya (talk) 17:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'll remove it. Remember... don't ever remove deletion notices from articles or images that you have created yourself. Doing this can get editors in trouble and may result in account blocking. Nobody wants that. If you ever have questions or need help, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 17:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SecretChiefs3. Thank you. Edward321 (talk) 02:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is nonsense. --Fatimiya (talk) 05:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011[edit]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Fatimiya Sufi Order. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 13:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is already nominated for deletion. Why are you placing a speedy deletion tag in the middle of a nomination process? Why don't you want to let the nomination process run its actual course allowing people to express their views on the matter. This is arbitrary and I would like to see the citation for the allowance of a speedy deletion of an article in the middle of a nomination process. Please take the tag down and allow the nomination process to run its course. Also, there is nothing to click on above per your statement --Fatimiya (talk) 13:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Click what to contest speedy deletion? --Fatimiya (talk) 13:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • On Wikipedia, the copyvio deletion process takes precedence over the AFD process. This is the process of editing in a collaborative environment. We take copyright protection and violation very seriously. We simply cannot accept articles that are unambiguous copyright violations. Please see this link for more information about this policy. (You've have already contested the deletion at the talk page.) Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What you put up as a copyright violation was a quote on a page that was quoting the Fatimiya Sufi Order blog which was administered by me. This does not violate such copyright, and furthermore, the original copyright of the quoted material is mine. I have removed the tag --Fatimiya (talk) 14:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Fatimiya Sufi Order. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have just explained to you that your reasons are nonexistent. The material quoted on the website is originally mine. I hold copyright of the original quote --Fatimiya (talk) 14:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the creator of the article. FYI. The creator of the article is Roya Jakoby --Fatimiya (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you can provide evidence of ownership of the copyrighted materials, you will need to follow the instructions for donating copyrighted materials. Simply follow the guidelines and email the Foundation. Remember that continued removal of deletion tags may result in a block or suspension of your editing privileges. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me spell it out for you. The content of the page you are using as an excuse to put up the speedy deletion tag is a quote from a blog that belongs to me. I am the owner of the blog. What evidence do you need exactly? You have also accused me of originating the article here when the author is someone else and two other people have been accused of sock-puppetry on no evidence. The instructions for the tag say that someone who has originated the article may remove it. That is what I did because I am not the article's originator --Fatimiya (talk) 14:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is your evidence, the quoted material on http://indigosociety.com/showthread.php?38059-Monotheism-and-the-Doctrine-of-the-Trinity/page2} clearly links to my blog http://fatimiyasufiorder.org/ . Had you cared to look closely you would have seen it above the quoted material --Fatimiya (talk) 14:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, I noticed copyright notifications on both websites. Even without the copyright notices on the website, use cannot be accepted on Wikipedia without following the guidelines for donating materials. The CSD tag states that "If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice". The article unambiguously meets the G12 criteria for deletion. Fixing the copyright violation includes removing the copyvio from the article. On the flipside, instructions have been provided for donating materials to the Foundation. Neither of these steps, criteria for removing the CSD tag has as yet been done. Honestly, just follow the instructions for donating materials. You need to document proof with the Foundation that you own the copyrighted materials. There's no conspiracy here. We're just serious about protecting individuals' copyrighted materials. Cind.amuse (Cindy) 14:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the copyrighted content; do not re-add it unless you have completed the process for donation that has been explained to you and it has been verified by the OTRS volunteers. Acroterion (talk) 14:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you walk me step by step through that process. Assume I know nothing. --Fatimiya (talk) 14:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's all at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The section on "Granting us permission to copy material already online" is the most relevant. Acroterion (talk) 14:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Acroterion (talk) 18:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since you repeated your attacks on the nominator [1] after being clearly warned not to do so, I have suspended your editing privileges for twelve hours. Any repetition of such an attack will be met with increasing block lengths. Acroterion (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Edward321 (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- DQ (t) (e) 14:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have extended the above block to indefinite due to the violation of our no legal threats policy. You may not edit Wikipedia while judicial or quasi-judicial actions are progress. Please see the WP:NLT policy for more details. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fatimiya&oldid=1079477566"