User talk:Mark.t2006
Byford Dolphin
[edit]Hi again, and thanks for the question. I didn't get the article online, but photocopied it from the original journal in my local medical library. I don't think it is available online anywhere. Cheers, FP (talk)(edits) 12:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Mark, according to Wikipedia's policy on verifiability, "the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." That means that it is your responsibility to provide sources when you make edits, as you did to Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. If you don't provide a source for your edits, it is impossible for other editors to verify what you've written is true, and it's also impossible for editors to fix grammar and spelling errors because they don't know what was meant. In addition, Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. Please continue to provide reliable sources in the future, as you've done recently on the above article, and do not refer to the actions of editors enforcing Wikipedia policy as "ignorance & stupidity." If you violate policy in the future, you may be blocked from editing. TomTheHand (talk) 21:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Sometimes the wikipedia editors can make stupid errors, like deleting current revisions, on important events. Without trying to fix them or search for source, so by calling it ignorance, it's by no means a personal attack, but a critical comment to a foolish action.
- Again, if you add content, it is your responsibility to provide sources, and any edit lacking sources may be removed. This is Wikipedia's policy on verifiability and is not negotiable. TomTheHand (talk) 21:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok thanks for the info, it seems you have done some research on the current news, regarding the carrier yourself. But keep in mind specifics on location & events surrounding the incident, without removing them.
Also regarding the source, I should have added it myself, but im not such a frequent user & forgot the procedure.
Carrier Kuznetsov.
[edit]FYI, I consider ANY unwanted changes to the userspace with my name (since I can't say "my userspace") to be vandalism. Vandlism is against WIkipedia POLICY - it's not a guideline, so how did I bereka my own rules?? Idiot. I know we didn't start off on the right foot today, but I did aplogize for it. Yet you insisted on redacting my userspace, like I was a common vandal, wtihout even the courtesy to appraoch me first liek a real adult would. If the wiki-break notice is a personal attack on my paer, then I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. I've had it today with people protecting the real vandals and abusers, then going after me like I'm worse than the vandals. Well, I've had it with idoits like you. And you really are stupid for nominating the largest airlines list. THere, now THAT was a REAL personal attack. GO get me blocked if you wish, but I'm gone from WIkipedia anyway. THought I may come back as an IP, since they get more respect than regular users from the likes of morons like you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.4.227.155 (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The file File:Badge of the NDSA.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
orphaned image, low quality
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
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 proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
