Misplaced Pages

User talk:OberRanks

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by OberRanks (talk | contribs) at 17:34, 16 October 2007 (Images: sounds good to me). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:34, 16 October 2007 by OberRanks (talk | contribs) (Images: sounds good to me)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

RANKS TALK PAGE

Hello OberRanks! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, 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 using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing!
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

κaτaʟavenoC 11:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

SS symbols

Please don't add the SS-symbols template back into all the SS articles. The death's head is *only* the symbol of the Totenkopf-SS, and is nothing to do with the Allgemeine SS, for example. The symbol template was added indiscriminately by someone with more enthusiasm than knowledge, who was now blocked for disruptive editing. Thanks. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 14:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I won't make a big deal about it, but the TV symbol was also the standard symbol used on the covers of the SS, making it outside the scope of just the Death's head unit. And the Sig Runes, of course, were used by the entire organization. -OberRanks 21:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair-use images in user space

Please jot down the image names at User:OberRanks/Ranks_Workshop, then remove the fair-use (i.e. Imperial rank) images -- they are copyrighted images used on Misplaced Pages under the fair-use policy, and the fair-use policy precludes them from being used in user: space. --EEMeltonIV 13:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a feature I've seen a few times where people can link pictures without showing the actual pictures (only a blue link appears). I'd like to do that to prevent a zealous editor from deleting the images before I've had a chance to merge the rank sections into the articles about the characters who hold them. GA, HG, and GM are the three big ones I plan to merge. Any chance of showing me about that feature? Thanks. -OberRanks 18:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Type a colon after the opening brackets, i.e.

Your reverts

You seem to have gotten it backwards. *Your* reverts to General of the Armies, which erase all of the material *I* added, is bordering on breaking the policy of Misplaced Pages:Ownership of articles not to mention that that sort of behavior is generally considered rude. *I* encourage *you* to discuss exactly what *you* have a problem with on the talk page before simply removing all edits not *your* own. - Shaheenjim 00:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. I removed one paragraph about "some people have said" and "it has specualted that". I touched nothing else. You, on the other hand, removed totally new material that was sourced and deleted a picture that was added to the article, also sourced. Believe it or not, I am actually trying to keep you out of trouble. The admins on this site usually go with the person who has policy on their side and block people who go against it. To compromise though, you can put back in the opening paragraph about "some people have said" and we can discuss. But reverting my every edit, even when it adds legitimate information, is uncalled for. -OberRanks 00:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Grand Marshal

Hey, by any chance do you know the answers to my new questions at Talk:Grand_Marshal? Thanks. - Shaheenjim 07:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look over the next week although my knowledge of the Chinese version of that rank is very low. -OberRanks 12:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
How about the question in the Usage section, rather than the question in the Republic of China section? - Shaheenjim 18:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the note. I kind of gathered the same after seeing that editor's talk page, along with the various articles' talk pages and histories. I guess it is what it is here on WP. :-) I'm sure I'll see you around; from your user page, it looks like there's some common page interests. — MrDolomite • Talk 21:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Henry H. Arnold

Heh, not long at all. Thanks for the service fixes in the table. I am still trying to find/make a better layout to show the progression of temporary and permanent ranks without being a total jumble. The navy ones were much easier :) See Chester W. Nimitz and William F. Halsey, Jr.. Thanks again. — MrDolomite • Talk 13:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Foreign awards for gallantry

With regards to the Medal of Honor page the foreign awards are all listed in the {{Highest Awards for gallantry}} template found at the bottom of the page. After a discussion on the peer review for Victoria Cross by the WP:MILHIST, it was thought the information was better placed in a navbox. Any problems with me reverting your changes to Medal of Honor? Thanks Woodym555 14:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope. It makes a lot of sense now. They just seemed to have disappeared the first time I looked. -OberRanks 15:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Great, i didn't want to revert in case you mistook it for an edit war. Better to inform than to war!! It looks better in the navbox in my opinion. Woodym555 16:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:VietnamAFDSO.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:VietnamAFDSO.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.  But|seriously|folks  06:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Last good e-mail address I had for the man who gave me that picture I can sent t you if there is a secure way to do it. -OberRanks 11:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Tips on images

Hi, if there are any images on[REDACTED] that either you or someone else uploaded under either a free license such as: PD, GFDL, CC-BY-SA, CC-BY, you can transfer them over to the commons, and they will still work just the same on wikipedia. One advantage is that on the commons border line images do not get deleted so easily, the deletion process takes weeks even months, just remember to add the images to your watchlist on the commons. If you would like do transfer images to the commons but don't know how I can explain. Obviously if some images are blatant copyright violations they will be speedily deleted from the commons too, and you shouldn't transfer them if you have doubts as to the veracity of the copyright tag. Jackaranga 14:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look into it. The recent purge of military insignia images based on personal feelings has left a horrible taste in my mouth. I will check it out. -OberRanks 14:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on User talk:Durin. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. I will not make any further edits. Two other users are blanking my comments with Durin, with which I am trying to reconcile a major difference. -OberRanks 16:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Well please don't because your comments are obviously been seeing as disruptive. Might I suggest you take a break for 30mins/an hour? There's no need to escalate this further and I've got to tell you that you're very close to a disruption block. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I plan to do so. Please speak to the other users about removing my edits and calling me a "troll". Thats uncalled for and violates WP:NPA. This account is clearly not a vandal/troll account. -OberRanks 16:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I have reinstated the comments you made, and told Betacommand and Videus Omnia (spelling may be faulty) to knock it off, as that, at least, was unfair. Particularly on Ryan Postlethwaite's part, who is giving you a 3RR warning right after closing the WP:AN/I thread and ordering you to discuss it on Durin's talk page. However, not all good news, see below. Neil  17:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Images

Per Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Husnock, you were ordered to conscientiously follow Misplaced Pages's Misplaced Pages:No original research and image copyright policies when he returns to regular editing. It is clear you have not done so. I am going to ask you to refrain from uploading any images. You may edit existing images, but not revert other editors' edits to images. Breach either of these rules for the next month, and I will block you.

WOW. Glad I had my wireless on. No image uploads for a month? I'll give you better than that. I promise to you there will be no image uploads from me for the rest of the YEAR. That will show good faith, I think. -OberRanks 17:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

After that, if a single image you upload is found to be a copyright violation, it will be another month block.

I would expect nothing less. Every image uploaded on this account has been solid, I feel. -OberRanks 17:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Denying you are Husnock at this point will exhaust my patience entirely. If you do, I will stop trying to defend you, and will agree with everyone else that any further accounts you use will be blocked on sight because you will have exhausted the entire community's patience (right now, I'm pretty much the only one with any left for you).

Please understand the complexity of that question. Who is Husnock? Who am I? We are accounts on Misplaced Pages. But who sits at the computer behind the account? One person, 2, 15? I once worked in an office where the entire office had one account on Misplaced Pages. The point is that I dont think its fair to ask someone who they are in the real world; in fact in todays age its dangerous. I have activated my e-mail system and will explain it further that way. Does that answer your question?

Basically, consider this an enforced mentorship. If you experience any problems with other editors, let me know, by email or via my talk page, rather than complain on WP:AN/I.

That is wonderful. I would like to again protest the mass deletion of every image Husnock ever uploaded without discussion. I don't think thats fair, but its a dead horse now. -OberRanks 17:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I have helped you out by deleting the images you requested, defending your edits, asked people to stop the name calling and reverting of your edits, and so on. Your continuing to act fooliishly will make me look like an idiot for wasting my time on helping you. Neil  17:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

You are the prime example of the shining administrator. Your terms are accepted. -OberRanks 17:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
User talk:OberRanks Add topic