User talk:Usergreatpower

September 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on White people. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Elonka 21:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

"Compliment" means to say nice things about someone or something, in your edits to Royal Navy, you mean complement. David Underdown (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

In regard to your edits to Royal Navy#Submarines, it is interesting that you read your source MPR 07 as saying that 7 Astute boats have been ordered. Here are a few quotes from that report:

"The Department has approved three boats, but it is expected that there will be a class of seven. The project is now £1.2 billion over the original budget in the main investment approval. A contract was placed for the fourth boat1, which is crucial to the sustainment of the Submarine Industrial Base, on 21 May 2007. This initial £200 million contract covers manufacture work through to March 2008."

"In the shorter-term, they will be able to maintain their skills by working on the Future (Aircraft) Carrier project and the recently approved fourth Astute Class Submarine. The Government’s decision to proceed with a successor to the nuclear deterrent has provided some certainty to the sector in the longer-term."

"Using the Maritime Industrial Strategy, the Department has ordered ‘long lead items’ for a further three Astute Class Submarines, although the boats have not yet been placed on contract. These orders will sustain the industrial infrastructure by ensuring a consistent supply of work, for example for specialist gear box manufacturers which without further orders may go out of business, and allow the Department to take advantage of economies of scale.""

"In the submarine sector, despite the award of the initial build contract for the fourth Astute Class Submarine and the decision on the Future Nuclear Deterrent, Industry does not have the same level of certainty on the likely forward work plans."

Could you please point us at the part that says that seven Astute boats have been ordered?

David Biddulph (talk) 23:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Great Power

I thank you for that gesture. You have got good analyzing capability and is not restricted by beliefs otherwise you must not have made such a decision. Regarding the addition, I don't think it will be possible to make those guys to agree. They will not. So it's better to wait till 2012-13, the exact timeframe when India's emergence as the third/fourth largest great power will be complete and the next phase of rise will start. Statistically it will be easy for them to understand that. During that time they themselves will add it.Chanakyathegreat (talk) 04:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries please

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to United Kingdom. This is a simple mistake that is very easy to fix. For further information, you can ask at our help desk. Thank you. --Jza84 |  Talk  15:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

... and while we're at it, on a number of articles you have got into the habit of making multiple edits to the same section of the article at intervals of a minute or two. Such multiple edits make the edit history very untidy, and it is preferable if you use the preview facility to check the edits as you go, and then save the edit only when you are happy with the result. I would recommend that you look at Help:Show preview and Help:Edit summary. David Biddulph (talk) 16:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

India in Commonwealth

Why is it notable ? I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

On Bridge to Nowhere

Hi there. I suspect you may not have been aware of this, but there have been pages and pages of long discussions on what is to be in the bridge section of the Sarah Palin article in the archives of the talk pages, including many many comments on the picture, its caption, and the internal link to other bridge material in the campaign section. Please review this material before proposing a change. Then, if you still wish to propose a change, please put your suggestions on the talk page before making the change. I suspect, as I haven't seen you on the talk page on this issue before, that you weren't aware that the changes you made were contrary to a long-standing consensus by dozens of wikipedia editors. If you want their reasoning for including the picture, caption, and internal link, check that page. Thank you.GreekParadise (talk) 15:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

UK Defence budget

I reverted your changes again as the values are off by 10bn, can you please explain where you get those values?
According to the link you gave [1] the budget is 33.6GBP or 58.4USD and the budget for France is 48.0EUR or 64.9 USD.

So, can you please explain when you get your calculations from. FFMG (talk) 16:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

United Kingdom

I have reverted your changes which removed Robert Burns from the above article on te grounds that his image should be on Scotland. The title of the article is "United Kingdom" and so it is quite appropriate for the image to be there. So, your reasoning was a bit askew here. If you wish to change it back, please discuss it on the talk page first giving your reasons.  DDStretch  (talk) 07:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Ireland Numbered.png

A tag has been placed on Image:Ireland Numbered.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Ireland Numbered.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Thanks, Ainlina(box)? 08:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries, again

Hello Usergreatpower,

You appear to only use edit summaries to attack other users, not to explain what changes you are making. Stating that certain contributions are "anti-English" ([2]), and "POV" ([3]) are not conductive to creating an atmosphere of mutual respect and camaraderie. Much more helpful summaries could have been used in these instances. England and the United Kingdom are high profile articles, and so your changes are watched by many users and several administrators.

Again, use edit summaries for all the changes you make to articles, and use a constructive description as to what you're changing. Negativity against other users in summaries does nothing but harm Wikipedia, polarise the community, harm your own reputation and bring about an atmosphere of hostility towards you. They could even be used as evidence to restrict your editting capabilities. Regardless of your intentions and interpretation of your actions, please be mindful of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Please don't

I can't claim to understand your obsession with Marilyn Monroe, but we've had this discussion regarding images of people on the White people article. You accepted this in the past, now you've decided to ignore the talk page and go ahead against the general feelings of the editors of the article. There's no real consensus to having images, and I personally don't see any reason why Marilyn Monoroe or Stephen Harper would be considered particularly exceptional examples of "white". Alun (talk) 06:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

You flatter yourself by thinking this is true. The reason this is an easter egg link is because it does not link to an article about Europeans. It's clearly not correct to claim that an article that is about the different ethnicities of Europe discusses Europeans as a group. Links to ethnic groups from the article are clearly due to a mention of that specific ethnic group in the article. Europeans are not an ethnic group, they are the population of a continent. In my opinion if you want to link this anywhere than I'd suggest Demographics of Europe. It's still not brilliant, but I'd be prepared to accept that. I can't speak for Ramdrake, obviously. But if you want to link to the Demographics of Europe article then I won't revert you. How does that sound like for a compromise? Alun (talk) 13:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm white so I'm special

• Define "white skin" appropriately, using reliable sources. Then when you have a good definition find some good images that are supported by your definition. Then include these images in the article. Oh, by the way, did you find a source that claimed that the images that are already included don't represent "whitness?" No? So why did you remove it then? What's that? Can't hear your reason? We have a reliable source that state that these people are white. At least it's better than someone with a uselesspowerless .......flacidity......pft......how embarasing for you. Alun (talk) 00:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Do not Delete Content against Consensus

Doing so is vandalism. Slrubenstein | Talk 20:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Markus001.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Markus001.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Hong Kong.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hong Kong.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 16:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

File:UK Northern Ireland map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:UK Northern Ireland map.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 16:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Spanish language map.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Spanish language map.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Current-Major-Military-Alliances.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Current-Major-Military-Alliances.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

File:World Major Military Alliances.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:World Major Military Alliances.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Spanish language map.png

A tag has been placed on File:Spanish language map.png 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 blatant 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.

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, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:File:Spanish language map.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, 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. ViperSnake151 20:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Current-Major-Military-Alliances.png

A tag has been placed on File:Current-Major-Military-Alliances.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:File:Current-Major-Military-Alliances.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, 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. ViperSnake151 20:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

List of states with nuclear weapons article

You added in a number of changes to the summary total list in the List of states with nuclear weapons article, referencing this article at The Herald.

That article is less accurate than the topic expert sources we have there now. General press overview articles are less preferred than topic expert publications, in this case such as The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nonproliferation Review, etc.

In addition, you misread what The Herald article said in several cases. You used "5000" as the value for US weapons, when what their article indicated was 5000 strategic weapons, 1000 tactical weapons, and 3000 reserve weapons in US inventory, for example.

Because this seems to have reduced the accuracy of the article, I have reverted those changes back out. If you can identify other sources which are reasonably credible, within the expert publications on the subject not general media ones, which support the specific numbers that you used, please feel free to remake the changes and / or bring the sources to the article talk page for a reliability discussion.

Thanks! Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Commonwealth Realms

No there never was any problem with adding Commonwealth realms, your edit was the problem. WP:AGF. Justin talk 20:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of of File:Location Spain EU Europe world.png

A tag has been placed on File:Location Spain EU Europe world.png, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

1:1 copy from File:Location_Spain_EU_Europe.png, created in 2007. --Kolja21 (talk) 01:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:File:Location Spain EU Europe world.png|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kolja21 (talk) 01:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)