User talk:Ramaksoud2000: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:03, 25 January 2017 editAHeneen (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users5,743 edits →Improper closure of copyright discussion: forgot wikilinks← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:45, 25 January 2017 edit undoRamaksoud2000 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers16,924 edits →Improper closure of copyright discussion: replyNext edit →
Line 47:		Line 47:

	The ] should not have been closed by you. Per ]: {{tq\|Any ''uninvolved'' editor may close most discussions, not just admins.}} Second, the consensus is not strictly determined by the number of votes. Per ]: {{tq\|The outcome is determined by weighing the merits of the arguments and assessing if they are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. Counting "votes" is not an appropriate method of determining outcome.}} When closing, a summary of the arguments should be given (see ]) and "arguments that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" should be discarded (]). ] (]) 09:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)		The ] should not have been closed by you. Per ]: {{tq\|Any ''uninvolved'' editor may close most discussions, not just admins.}} Second, the consensus is not strictly determined by the number of votes. Per ]: {{tq\|The outcome is determined by weighing the merits of the arguments and assessing if they are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. Counting "votes" is not an appropriate method of determining outcome.}} When closing, a summary of the arguments should be given (see ]) and "arguments that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" should be discarded (]). ] (]) 09:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
			:I am well aware of those links. Closing my own proposal due to a clear lack of consensus and the necessary participation required for a major change like this is more than allowed. I should give you some links to read, regarding consensus and rule-following, but I can't be bothered now. ] <sup>(''']''')</sup> 22:45, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:45, 25 January 2017

This is Ramaksoud2000's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Buddhist culture

I noticed you removed a sockpuppet's edits. I understand it is the right thing to remove sockpuppet's edits but that edit wasn't violating anything. I'm not a sockpuppet and I made edits to the festival section by adding many festivals that weren't included last month. I'm not sure who the sockpuppet is but I don't think it's necessary to delete that since it wasn't only the sockpuppet's edits, I made constructive edits to that section too. According to the guidelines of Misplaced Pages it says, "it isn't necessary or desirable to try to revert every single article edit the sock puppet has ever made" and I don't think it's necessary to delete that information since it's informative. (110.148.150.170 (talk) 08:42, 6 January 2017 (UTC))

I removed the entire section because it was created by the sockpuppet, and edits by others were minimal. If you want to keep it, feel free. Ramaksoud2000 23:28, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I understand, thanks. (101.160.4.5 (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC))

Bot report request

I've been thinking about additional image related reports that your bot might be able to generate and I think I have come up with another one. A list of fair use images that are being used on more than one article. Generally these are fair use violations but they would have to be checked to verify that the FURs are there and valid. You could use Category:All non-free media as a starting point. Would this be possible? --Majora (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Starting with that category would probably produce too many images. I think what I will do is start with a small subcategory to see the percentage of fair use violations and decide whether to continue with a larger category. Thanks. Ramaksoud2000 22:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

That works with me. Hopefully it isn't too many. Else we have a much larger problem than I anticipated (which would be a large problem). --Majora (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Finacle

I am the Global Head of Marketing, Alliances and Corp Strategy for Finacle EdgeVerve. You reverted out the changes to our copyrighted material. Finacle is owned by EdgeVerve and it is a legally seperate entity from Infosys. I would ask that you please do not change anything from this user name. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Finacleuser (talk • contribs) 10:00, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

And I would ask for you to please take your spam elsewhere. Thank you. Ramaksoud2000 13:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

If you would like to update the article to reflect new ownership, then please limit yourself to that. Do not add in promotional material User:Finacleuser. Ramaksoud2000 13:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

FFD relists

Hi there, I noticed you've done a number of relists at FFD lately. Just wanted to point out the admin instructions for FFD, particularly that at FFD, a nomination to delete with no subsequent contributions results in a delete, not a relist. This helps keep the backlog under control as FFDs do not usually receive a lot of participation, so would otherwise just get relisted over and over. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

I am well aware. Is there a specific relist that you thought should have just been deleted instead? Ramaksoud2000 13:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

BAGBot: Your bot request Ramaksoud2000Bot 2

Someone has marked Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Ramaksoud2000Bot 2 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.

Your BRFA

Your BRFA, Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Ramaksoud2000Bot 2 has been approved. Happy botting, — xaosflux 04:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Improper closure of copyright discussion

The foreign copyright discussion should not have been closed by you. Per Misplaced Pages:Closing discussions#Closure procedure: Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, not just admins. Second, the consensus is not strictly determined by the number of votes. Per WP:RFCEND: The outcome is determined by weighing the merits of the arguments and assessing if they are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. Counting "votes" is not an appropriate method of determining outcome. When closing, a summary of the arguments should be given (see Misplaced Pages:Closing discussions#Consensus) and "arguments that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" should be discarded (Misplaced Pages:Closing discussions#Consensus). AHeneen (talk) 09:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I am well aware of those links. Closing my own proposal due to a clear lack of consensus and the necessary participation required for a major change like this is more than allowed. I should give you some links to read, regarding consensus and rule-following, but I can't be bothered now. Ramaksoud2000 22:45, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:03, 25 January 2017 editAHeneen (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users5,743 edits →Improper closure of copyright discussion: forgot wikilinks← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:45, 25 January 2017 edit undoRamaksoud2000 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers16,924 edits →Improper closure of copyright discussion: replyNext edit →
Line 47:		Line 47:

	The ] should not have been closed by you. Per ]: {{tq\|Any ''uninvolved'' editor may close most discussions, not just admins.}} Second, the consensus is not strictly determined by the number of votes. Per ]: {{tq\|The outcome is determined by weighing the merits of the arguments and assessing if they are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. Counting "votes" is not an appropriate method of determining outcome.}} When closing, a summary of the arguments should be given (see ]) and "arguments that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" should be discarded (]). ] (]) 09:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)		The ] should not have been closed by you. Per ]: {{tq\|Any ''uninvolved'' editor may close most discussions, not just admins.}} Second, the consensus is not strictly determined by the number of votes. Per ]: {{tq\|The outcome is determined by weighing the merits of the arguments and assessing if they are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. Counting "votes" is not an appropriate method of determining outcome.}} When closing, a summary of the arguments should be given (see ]) and "arguments that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" should be discarded (]). ] (]) 09:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
			:I am well aware of those links. Closing my own proposal due to a clear lack of consensus and the necessary participation required for a major change like this is more than allowed. I should give you some links to read, regarding consensus and rule-following, but I can't be bothered now. ] <sup>(''']''')</sup> 22:45, 25 January 2017 (UTC)