User talk:Guest2625

Welcome!

Hello, Guest2625, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Tim PF (talk) 19:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Albinobeach

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

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

A tag has been placed on Albinobeach requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the importance of the subject, . Clicking that button 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 article's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Guest2625. You have new messages at TParis's talk page.
Message added 15:19, 13 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

v/r - TP 15:19, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Free Syrian Army Green Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Free Syrian Army Green Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Free Syrian Army, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Arms (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Free Syrian Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rastan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Free Syrian Army, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Qusayr and Air raids (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Siege of Rastan and Talbiseh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Baath

Syria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Circassian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Message for you

I left a message for you at the Template_talk:Campaignbox_Syrian_uprising#Why_the_divisions.3F.Greyshark09 (talk) 18:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Syria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canaanite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:23, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Jojalozzo 23:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for using edit summaries!! Jojalozzo 16:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. When you recently edited Air Force Intelligence Directorate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syrian uprising (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

FSA

Please try to explain you edits on the take page. There is an ongoing discussion there.--Rafy talk 22:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Siege of Homs map

You created this map with the bombardment of Homs. More districts since have been under shelling or are under shelling per article. (Example: Jeb Jandali, Bab Dreib, Old Homs, Hamidiea, Ghouta, Jobar, Rifaat, Arabis, and Juret al-Shaya. The last two have got the brunt lately: and somewhat Ghouta.) If you can update this mpa it would be nice. Jacob102699 (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

And Inshaat too. Jacob102699 (talk) 14:34, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't create that map. I got it from the Voice of America website. The VOA is a US government organization so all the work they specifically create is in the public domain. If I have time I might be able to use Adobe photoshop and shade in additional neighborhoods although it's not a top priority. I'm also not that sure how beneficial it's to shade in more neighborhoods, because it's starting to sound like most the neighborhoods in Homs are being bombarded.--Guest2625 (talk) 04:41, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for the major edit mess ups on idlib governorate. The page must be messed up, because it only happens on that page to me. It keeps saying Wikimedia Error and I have to reload while editing. Maybe the server is down on this page. Jacob102699 (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. It sucks when the editor/server messes up. I've lost a bunch of work that way.--Guest2625 (talk) 04:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. When you recently edited Buffett Rule, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallup (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your more than 1,000 edits to articles! Pages like Buffett Rule are much improved with your help. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 19:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy prohibits original research, including syntheses or analysis

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to multiple articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. See discussion and examples below.

Dear Guest2625,

Please discontinue posting charts, graphs, and/or data of your own creation except where the data and conclusions are clear, unambiguous, and published by reliable sources. If a graph is merely the presentation of items from a reliable source and does not involve any analysis, such graph MAY be permitted. If such graph, chart, or data requires ANY analysis, or is based on results or conclusions not fully published in a reliable source, then it constitutes original research (OR), which is prohibited under Wikipedia policies. The policy states that "each statement in the article [should be] attributable to a source that makes that statement explicitly. … Take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources." It has been widely discussed what deviation can be made from this, with a concensus that very little deviation is permitted. For example, it is OK to add two numbers in a source together. Going even a tiny bit beyond this likely is not OK.

Examples: Your chart at Estate tax in the United States appears to accurately present data from IRS Statistics on Income by year for about 30 years. Without addition, that should be acceptable. You also overlayed names of Presidents in those years. This is public record, and thus the combination might be acceptable. However, you also added data for 2009 and 2010 which was not in the main source IRS data, and for which the denominator of the fraction presented (total number of deaths) was not shown in the secondary data. In addition, the data apparently used as the source for your 2009 and 2010 items states clearly that it is by year of tax return not year of death, and thus not comparable to the main data. The 2009 and 2010 columns are OR and not permitted. Further, they are not even consistent with the 1982-2008 columns, according to the IRS second data file.

Your chart at Excise tax in the United States is based on data presented in a 2007 CBO report. The chart presents the CBO report table accurately in chart form. As such, it may not be considered not OR. However, the chart title and descriptions differ materially from the CBO descriptions. Therefore, even though the chart itself is not OR, the captions are OR. Further, the captions used indicate the material is presented in a manner not intended by the source. This renders the entire table OR.

Your chart at Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax cites no sources. Though the data presented might be accurate and calculated from the IRC, it is OR and is not permitted. To quote WP:OR, "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so."

I will delete charts that appear to be OR. If you believe a chart is not OR, please provide justification and sources in the article discussion and/or file information.

I can relate to frustration that the media does not adequately or accurately cover many tax topics, particularly those involving incidence of tax. WP, however, is NOT the forum for redressing this problem.

Continued publication of original research is disruptive editing, and may result in sanctions. Oldtaxguy (talk) 21:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggested improvements to the graphs mentioned above. It's more constructive if these suggested improvements were given on the specific article talk pages so that other editors could contribute their thoughts. The wikipedia project very much appreciates image files for articles, because these help to advance and improve the content of the project. It should be noted that essentially all featured articles on wikipedia contain images, so it is great that you are helping to improve the images of the articles that you are following. I look forward to any suggested improvements you have on the relevant talk pages. Guest2625 (talk) 01:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Zabadani

I saw the situation developing at the article on the Battle of Zabadani. And I think we have to look at the time-frame and what the sources really do say. So I have carefully worded the article per the sources. First, I agree that it seems that a large part of the town is not under the control of the government, with the military only focusing on guarding government buildings in the town and the roads into and out of Zabadani. However, the sources are clear that the FSA itself doesn't have any control of Zabadani, with them holding positions outside the city (not being able to enter due to the checkpoints) while the ones who are actually on the streets of Zabadani are civilian opposition members who are organising the protests. Second, I do not agree the battle is ongoing because too much time has passed since the last phase. Three months, and the sources themselves state that battle ended with the military regaining control of Zabadani. So the event that the article covers is done. If there is a new event create a new article. However, as it seems, there is no actual battle for the city. The Army won the battle. Now it seems more of a situation where the military controls the critical points of the city, while they are letting the opposition protesters roam free on the streets. Again...three months, too much time has passed. All this now is for the aftermath section of the battle. EkoGraf (talk) 16:59, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Sounds fine with me. I was just going along with the wording in the Economist that "much of the town is again under opposition control." From the sources it appears that the Syrian army has control of the entrances to the town, but does not control the town, perhaps because the army fears attacks if they station throughout the town, or perhaps because they are physically not able to. The Guardian source also appears to say that there's a truce or fragile peace in Zabadani with the civilian opposition in control of the town, and the armed opposition and loyalist forces stationed outside the town. But describing it as part of an aftermath section rather than a third phase is fine with me, since the exact details of what is happening in Zabadani is not clear. I think a more accurate heading or subheading for the last paragraph, however, would be either stalemate or truce as stated in the Economist and Guardian. Guest2625 (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2012 (UTC)