User talk:Sec 1971

Welcome!

Hello, Sec 1971, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

{{helpme}}

I do enjoy editing here. I also edit at the terminator wiki at terminator.wikia.com--I know you don't run this, but I think it's a more friendly site with contributors who work together to create good articles. Here, it's different. Everyone seems to delete everything they don't personally agree with (even if sources are cited). It's all a big competition to see who can get their own name (and edits) to the top of the dung heap. If these people continue to delete my edits for this reason, I might as well just delete my own account. That's bullshit, and I consider it vandalism. Something that is common knowledge shouldn't have to have a million references. Besides, most of the references found in articles in this site are from other websites. What makes anyone think these sites are any more accurate than something that's just spewed out of the mouth of a psychotic homeless person on a street corner? Could I put the phrase "George W. Bush is half lizard, and eats babies for lunch while fingering his own ass" on my website and call this a reliable source? Probably not, but that's basically the way most of the editors here are siting their sources. Make up your minds, are require deletions to be DISCUSSED FIRST before finalized. We're not Nazis here, common knowledge is common knowledge. Would I need a reference to say that Bill Clinton was threatened with impeachment due his liaisons with Monica? I think not, because everyone knows this.....

PS. Concerning my recent contribution that was deleted, I'm 99.9% sure that getting your head slowly sawed off with a knife doesn't tickle (as, I'm sure, everyone will agree).

Shawn Crapo (talk) 04:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watch it with the attacks please. I'm sorry that you just can't deal with the way we do things here. Some things are indeed common knowledge, but we generally go for reliable sources. I can imagine that something like a newspaper article would be accurate. There's no way you can delete your account though, it just doesn't work that way. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 04:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't an attack on anyone. I was basically stating my frustraion with the fact that my contributions are always deleted but there are hundreds of articles here with absolutely no reliable info, or info that is strictly media garbage (case in point, Nick Berg). Newspapers never cite sources, so there's no way to tell if the words you see are accurate. They get shit wrong all the time. That's why they have a correction section (Can you say 'the newspaper erred')? Shawn Crapo (talk) 04:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still, we operate in good faith. There're many articles under construction, sure, and many that lack sources, but you can always fix it yourself, or ask someone else to fix it. That's the whole point of this being a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit; we all work together to try and make it better, even if it's far from being complete. Admittedly I'm a big complainer in real life, but I do at least know that it's better to try and find a solution than to complain. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 05:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was my point, basically. My last edit was deleted without even a discussion or any time to properly put the sources in. Sometimes you get halfway through the edit and have to leave in a hurry. Nobody wants to have to rewrite their edit later on, it's never as good as the first time. It just seems like these particular two users are targeting me for some reason. And, yes, it's been the same two every time. One of them isn't even an Admin to my knowledge. Shawn Crapo (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Creation

{{help me}} I f I want to actually create an article do I have to write it all at once, or is there some way to save it before publishing it?

Shawn Crapo (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can create a sandbox at User:Sec 1971/Sandbox if you want to work on the article first before moving it out into article space. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 21:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can write a STUB and then expand from there or start in userspace as TenPoundHammer mentioned. See also: Your first article and the Drawing board. Cheers --Jeremyb (talk) 21:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea to quickly provide sources for things that might be controversial, though. If you say "Michael Jackson was the greatest singer ever (source pending)", it's likely to be reverted pretty fast. Generally speaking, though, people are willing to be patient as long as you don't make unsourced assertions that they think are probably wrong. Looie496 (talk) 05:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with your edit on Decapitation

I removed the edit because first it was unsourced. Any unsourced edit can be summarily removed. Second, it contained several errors: the Zabihah is performed with a slicing, not a sawing motion. The execution of the animal is meant to drain it from as much as possible of its blood, granted, but the addition "before the heart stops" is both dubious and unnecessary. And lastly but most importantly, it is done to minimize the pain of the execution (short of stunning) for the animal, which is plain contrary to what you state in the paragraph.--Ramdrake (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then any sentence you've deemed dubious could ahve been removed or changed. The entire paragraph did not have to be removed. I feel it necessary to reference the insurgents' murders, and the method used. If you have seen any of the videos, you'd notice that before the beheading actually takes place, the group is usually qiuetly chanting "Zabihah, Zabihah>" Then, when the killing begins, they chant "Allahu Ackbar (Allah is Great)". Sometimes the executioner him/herself silently mouths the words (in the case of Kenneth Bigley). They don't always completely cover their faces. On a side note, I find it odd that these victims stoicly accept their own imminent demise. I don't know about you, but I would kicking and screaming and attacking them. Getting shot would be much better than beheading.

Shawn Crapo (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that neither of your references make a connection between the Zabihah ritual slaughtering technique and the beheadings, and as such is original research, which is forbidden as per WP:NOR. These nmay be things you have seen on the videos, but you'd need a reliable source pointing it out for it to be admissible on Wikipedia.--Ramdrake (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it should just be a seperate article, with reliable sources? If so, I would be hard pressed to think of a name. Perhaps we could work together? I'll create a sandbox and experiment, and I'll let you check it for admissibility. When it looks acceptable to you, then we can submit it. No hard feelings, I just think the violence should be documented here somehow.

BTW, I'm 1/4 French. haha. 3/4 Irish. That's one hell of mix, eh? Shawn Crapo (talk) 18:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Reaper20-small.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Reaper20-small.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually tried to add it to the REAPER page, but it won't display for some reason. I don't know why, I'm pretty sure there are other .gif files used here, but this one won't display. I'll try to convert it to .jpg and re-add to the article Shawn Crapo 23:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Reaper20-small.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Reaper20-small.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{help me}} Go ahead and delete both images. Neither one of them will display on the page, anyway. I don't know what the problem is. I'm familiar with Wiki markup as I work at Terminator.wikia.com but the infobox doesn't appear to be working correctly. Windows Vista's infobox (which is identical, appears to work OK, though. I give up. Someone else do it. Shawn Crapo 23:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

You did the wrong formatting. It should be been [[Image:Reaper20-small.jpg]]. You seem to have missed some of that. In any case, I added it for you :) NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 23:49, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair-Use Rationale

Hey, do you mind filling in the blank information here. I figured that you would know it because you uploaded the image :) Thanks :) NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 23:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what license is required. It's a screenshot of a non-free but unrestricted shareware program. Feel free to tell me what template to add. Otherwise, why don't you just do it? What difference does it make who adds it? We're supposed to be working together, not challenging each other to use the proper template. As I said, go ahead and delete it. I really couldn't care less. I was just trying to help by adding a screenshot so that people would understand how the GUI is similar to Acid Pro, despite minor cosmetic differences. C'mon, man. I did my part, do yours. No hostility intended. 00:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Kumans

I have, since 2010 tried to add a new theory of the Kumans origin with crystal clear explanations, but everyone on that page attacked with various ridiculous comments. I had at one time put up a perfectly reasonable ethnicity section but that was removed - I am having a lot of arguments with these guys and it never ends - as they are clearly opposed to any other theory of their ethnicity except Turkic. I said they could have been Iranic since they were blond with blue eyes -something which is impossible, in genetics, to happen naturally to Turkic people (and Chinese, African etc). I then mentioned that just becasue their language was Turkic does not necessarily mkean that they were Turkic in genes - their language could have been lingua franca. You simoply do not get blond and blue eyed Turks in the world - it is impossible and it never happens (unless they are mixed with a caucasian), just like a chinese person will never be blond with blue eyes - it just doesnt happen (Turkey has exceptions since a lot of the Ottomans mixed with the native greek population that was all over anatolia). They then respond that I am "retarted" and that I need to provide sources that blond hair does not happen in Turkic people (how do you provide a source for something like that - something that is a fact and is known- its like providing a source that blond hair does not occur in Chinese - its known by everyone and is common sense and a person can see for themselves). Clearly strong sentiment exists against Iranic people or something, because otherwise it doesnt make sense why these editors would forfeit their common sense and basic genetic knowledge to oppose me - and every time they delete my edits they never consult and discuss the core of the problem - like that blond hair does not naturally occur in Turkic people, they always just throw the wiki rules at me, and twist them, saying these edits are unexeptable and need sources. For an article to be NPOV, all major views must be mentioned (a wiki rule) - but they do not seem to understand that - there is also a wiki rule (forgot exact name) - something like "ignore all rules" if using wiki rules goes against common sense - like in this case where blond hair cannot occur in Turkic people - all cultures that came into contact with the Cumans clearly stated that they were blond with blue eyes - their names - Folban, Vallani, Kun and Polovtsy all mean blond for goodness sake. The pictures of the Cumans on the internet - a lot of them were drawn blond for a reason - I have seen them. After explaining my points so clearly I just really dont see what the trouble is. To really understand what I am talking about, please, please read the past edits that I made - anan ip of 41 (in the edit history - I think I started somewhere around March, April 2010 - please take a look at my past edits, my edit coments all through to now, under ip 41 and the current one, and also read the discussion page) I am sending you this message since I read in the talk page that your uncle said thatey were descendeds of the Sarmatian (who were Iranic) - so you might agree with me on this, and maybe you can help at the Cuman page - my point is also that blond hair does occur naturally in Iranic people (though it was more common in ancient times before some, not all, of Iranian people mixed with Arabs from the Arab invasian and Azeri Turks), but it still happens today - there are numerous pictures on the net with blond Iranian women, for example —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.232.75.208 (talk) 15:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Location for Constitution Trail photos

Hi! Thanks for your pictures of Constitution Trail in McLean County. I noticed that File:Constitution-Trail-004-02.jpg and File:Constitution-Trail-007-02.jpg don't describe where they are on the trail. These files are being moved to Commons for everyone since they are freely usable, and I've started a topic about the pictures at Commons:File talk:Constitution-Trail-004-02.jpg#Location_needed. If you are still around here and remember where these are (or whether they are really Bloomington or really Normal), feel free to go to that page and add some detail. Eventually someone may be able to geocode the images based on your details. Thanks! --Closeapple (talk) 10:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Gian pyres live.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Gian pyres live.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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org, 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 {{OTRS 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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 12:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Gian pyres live.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gian pyres live.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 17:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sec 1971. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sec 1971. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Sec1971.jpg

The file File:Sec1971.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused personal photo. Out of scope.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]