Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:09, 9 March 2010

Hey and Welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Hi, I am LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! and I am an editor for Misplaced Pages. This is my welcome message given to you so that you know your way around this site. If you ever have a problem, come and find me (the link to my page can be found on my signature.

Some places you may want to see before editing!

If you would like to sign your user name, just type 4 tildes (~~~~). That's all I really need to say about Misplaced Pages, but if you need me, just ask me on my talk page, or add {{helpme}} to your user talk page.

Good Luck and Happy Editing!

LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 18:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

A word of advice

Sharpen your command of English. You'll go a long way. - Two hundred percent (talk) 10:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for the kind words. Unlike some Wiki Nazis we currently have at the moment, you are very different. Roman888 (talk) 11:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually, I also despise the appalling ways of the vast of majority of poorly educated M'sian editors. As for you, I really don't have much of a beef with you. Yet. - Two hundred percent (talk) 15:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Friend, Malaysia is Malaysia. You can't change the country overnight. Our education system is what it is because of 50 over years of mismanagement by ruling government. As for the previous incident I will try to be civil with those Wiki Nazis, but if push comes to shove, then I will pull my own punches. - Roman888 (talk) 20:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Clearly, we're in agreement that the education system sucks because of neglect by the government, but I was raised in the same system too; it's how one could better themselves on their own that is important.

        In the meantime, I'm busy rewriting the Ahmad Ismail article. As it turned out, much of the first half is a direct copy of the The Sun's article, and copypastas could be easily tagged as copy violations and deleted. Given I was originally planning to write the whole thing from scratch, that article is probably worth saving, but I have no idea how many more of these copypasta article are around. I suggest you begin considering writing using your own compositions rather than effortlessly duplicating things, it does help improve your writing skills.

        Filled with WikiNazis or not, it's a 💕 we're trying to promote. We can't tolerate copyrighted stuff. - Two hundred percent (talk) 15:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

      • Copyright or not, one thing I was taught is there should be proper referencing in all articles. In wikipedia lots of people copy word for word on certain articles. Reason is probably a poor command of English language and writing skills in certain countries, notwithstanding our public school system in Malaysia. This can always be corrected or rectified by you, myself or any concern editors out there. Look at the discussion made regarding this China milk topic: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/International Reaction to the 2008 Dairy Scandal. Notice that idiots like Ohconfucius think that wikipedia is their own personal fiefdom to merge the article with the main article, when no concensus was made. Even the Wikieditor said to keep the article and not to merge it. You might agree or disagree with me, but idiots like that should not run roughshod over other people's entries whether they feel like it. As for your editing of the Ahmad Ismail article, I support you all the way. Roman888 (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Schooling

Hi, you might like to see what you can do to clarify "National School" in the Malaysian context - see my comment at Talk:Education in Malaysia

2008 Chinese milk scandal

Please refer to the comments I posted at Talk:2008 Chinese milk scandal#Article split. Ohconfucius (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems with File:Melamine biscuits.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Melamine biscuits.jpg, please note that Misplaced Pages cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/11/18/nation/2572286&sec=nation. As a copyright violation, File:Melamine biscuits.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Melamine biscuits.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Melamine biscuits.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at File talk:Melamine biscuits.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Melamine biscuits.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Misplaced Pages takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. WilliamTheaker (talk) 20:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

JL 09 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Roman, I reverted your editing of the Chile deaths, because the ref says (equally to the hidden comment) 116 deaths + 11 being currently assessed. FHessel (talk) 07:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The right figure is 116(11). Compare the official Chilean ref, Table 3 on page 6, they are saying 128 deaths in which the virus was present, from which 11 are being investigated and in one other causes have led to death. FHessel (talk) 16:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kitchen Nightmares. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Nja 09:01, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Please also note that canvassing like you did here and here is strictly forbidden. If you continue to canvass for support of your edit war, you will be blocked for disruption. Parsecboy (talk) 11:35, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I could care less about whether the updates are in the article or not. What I do care about is your actions, which have unambiguously violated Misplaced Pages policies. Parsecboy (talk) 11:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but those Misplaced Pages policies at best are ambiguous and are up for translation. If you follow them word for word your just going to sink in a hole. As for canvassing argument, many people have called or messaged me to contribute to their discussions or articles. Maybe you can report them as well since you care. Roman888 (talk) 11:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Votestacking is an attempt to sway consensus by selectively notifying editors who have or are thought to have a predetermined point of view or opinion...and thus encouraging them to participate in the discussion.. That is exactly what you did, and is in no way ambiguous. This isn't about the behavior of anyone else, this is about yours. Parsecboy (talk) 11:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but I am trying to be WP:Civil here, but you are making an accusation which you can't back up. There is no way I know whether they are here to support the removal or keeping of the updates. Misplaced Pages policies I repeat are up for translation all the time. Roman888 (talk) 12:04, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Why then did you only invite editors who support your view? Why didn't HelloAnnyong or Thirteen squared get notices? Parsecboy (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I was in the midst of sending out messages to everyone, when you inadvertently told me to stop. Not knowing that you were a moderator or not I wouldn't chance it. If you want I can sent out the same messages to HelloAnnyong or Thirteen squared. Will that be fair to you? Roman888 (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

IP-vandal

To clarify something for you, the IP that vandalized your talk page today (110.55.50.93 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS)) did so after hitting a half-dozen other user talk pages, all of whom seem to be unrelated. It's unlikely that anyone involved in the Kitchen Nightmares dispute was behind it. Parsecboy (talk) 20:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

New column in 2009_flu_pandemic_table / your message

I think, that we have a misunderstanding here. Someone had screwed up the header and the explanatory footnote of the new column.
Please see my talkpage entry for more information.

What regards the numbers, based on population figures: I am thinking about this topic every now and then. It does not really fit in this table, though. I guess, that it would need another table, which is organized on a weekly basis and also allows comparison over time (which is the most interesting information in it). I'll think of an solution (but this can well take some time!)
What we could do in the context of this table:
Adding two columns for population and death toll per capita (respectively million inhabitants).
Doing so has two drawbacks:

• This would inflate the table further.
• Can you imagine every editor maintaining the ratio, after changing the death cases?

FHessel (talk) 07:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

2009 Flu Pandemic Timeline

We may have a notability issue that's a moving target which needs to be resolved. India has jumped out of nowhere to nearly 500 deaths (which in of of itself is probably an artifact of the official reportage), but to me the continual addition of three deaths here and four deaths there is the death of a thousand cuts, savvy? I'm not quite sure how to handle this problem in a timeline article of this nature, except to note that Misplaced Pages has a global perspective. Orders of magnitude after a certain state, perhaps? kencf0618 (talk) 23:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Careful wth your labelling of other editors please. Comment on the content - not the editors.

Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 16:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Swine Flu Count Website

I've been to the website many times, but I don't know if I can fully trust the material. My faults with it: North Korea has had 7 cases since forever and only (maybe) just got its first case the other day. Georgia is still shown as having one death (because ECDC accidentally put in on their website and then took it down).

Some of it I can find suitable, but these countries, no:
North Korea: (7 cases?)
Georgia: (has a death when there's no source)
Ghana: (has a death because of ECDC site, when sources are still telling us there isn't one)
Liechtenstein: (still has the 13 cases ECDC had before they removed them back down to five)
Guyana: (73 cases? Not sure about that one...)

That's all I see wrong with it. CaninePitDog (talk) 17:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

This website is giving us numbers, without giving the original sources. Thus I would not use the numbers. Nevertheless it is interesting to see, where the differences are and trying to find out, why we have these differences:

Deaths WP < FluCount (do our numbers have to be updated?)

Deaths WP > FluCount (are our sources credible?)

For US I deducted the unspecified additional 2,200 of the FluCount numbers.

Cases WP < FluCount (do our numbers have to be updated?)

Cases WP > FluCount (are our sources credible?)

Furthermore FluCount has denoted numbers, which are included in others (see footnotes in the WP table)
FHessel (talk) 09:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

• FHessel, most of those (are our sources credible?) countries are usually more recently updated and FluCount hasn't had the time to update them (they don't update every day I think. As for the extra cases that Misplaced Pages doesn't have, I'm not sure what to say...

I don't believe we should reference the site as it has various differences for unknown reasons, and, as said, no sources. CaninePitDog (talk) 03:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Kitchen Nightmares

Hey, I was looking through the discussion page of that article and realized you were experiencing a similar problem that I am now encountering at the moment. I located this article from August 2009 http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/item_yqKoVV87bg5GB8Qs8fRRwN and am wanting to use it as a source, but you can only guess what I am going through. I suggest you take a brief look if you're interested. CenterofGravity (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Delete for attack article per BLP

Attacks in the article Scandals of Najib Tun Razak

Please do not make personal attacks as you did at Scandals of Najib Tun Razak. Misplaced Pages has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Misplaced Pages and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Riverpa (talk) 15:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Roman - I have no side on this dispute, I was directed toward the article through a posting to the NPOV board. I only looked at the "Scandals" article since it was the only one listed, and there was no "Talk" on that article. To me, it clearly violated the BLP policy against Attack articles, even in its title, and so I flagged it for attention by an Administrator, and followed the instructions on the Attack template.

I did not research the history of the other article or its Talk page since it was not cited in the NPOV discussion. This appeared to be a clear speedy delete to me. If an Administrator decides differently and restores the article I have no problem with that, but due to what I believe to be a clear violation of BLP policy I think I took the correct action. Riverpa (talk) 17:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI discussion about the article you recently created

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 17:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

You do not appear to be behaving civilly or acting in good faith. I will be suggesting that you be blocked to temporarily. Monkeyassault (talk) 17:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Irregardless of how you feel about certain individuals, you shouldn't be going to people's talk pages and threatening them. I hope to get the situation about the article Najib Tun Razak resolved quickly. Roman888 (talk) 17:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I am letting you know what I am doing as a courtesy so you have a chance to contest any action taken. It is what we are supposed to do. Monkeyassault (talk) 17:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I will also take some ancillary actions so that the situation with the article can be resolved. Your posts in my talk page can be construed in a negative manner. Roman888 (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Another Najib Article

You might want to check out the edit history of Murder of Shaariibuugiin Altantuyaa. Claims of BLP, Coatrack and FRINGE resurfacing with regards to Najib's involvement again. Removal of content withotu discussion or use of Talk page. Just waiting for a 3rd revert before triggering the 3R report. Zhanzhao (talk) 08:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing much we can do except to wait for any further edits from that individual - he will try to make it seem like that article goes against BLP, Coatracking and Fringe argument and delete the whole sections. Best we wait before reporting him at the 3R noticeboard. Roman888 (talk) 09:02, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

user monkeyassault

hey, I've been monitoring user monkeyassault and I doubt he is a bona fide user. many times, he simply removes lot of statements (sourced!) and makes claims to reinsert it after rewriting it. For a number of times, he has failed to make good of his words. Even if he does, lot's of sourced information got lost. Since you have been dealing with the user longer than I am, do you think there's a case to report his behavior to the admin? __earth 13:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Categorisation of Malaysian BLPs

Hi there - I'd really appreciate your input into this discussion on the categorisation of Malaysian BLPs by ethnicity and religion if you have the time. Cheers--Mkativerata (talk) 16:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi. I have noticed that you almost never write edit summaries. Could you please begin doing so? Sometimes it is a little difficult to figure out what you are dong and the summaries would be very helpful. Monkeyassault (talk) 16:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for starting to use edit summaries. It is very much appreciated. Monkeyassault (talk) 17:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Malaysia Military Scandals

A decision to merge this article was reached after debate in AfD. Your removal of the tag at the top of the page announcing this decision and your addition of yet more material to this article or entirely inappropriate. You are obviously not acting in good faith. If you persist I will report this incident at ANI. Monkeyassault (talk) 17:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Removal of source from Najib Tun Razak

G'day there - I undid your restoration of the inclusion of a general source to Najib Tun Razak. I think User:Monkeyassault's deletion of this was appropriate (without prejudice to my views of some of his other edits): as it didn't appear to support any material in the article it amounted to WP:BOOKSPAM (especially as it seems to have been originally added to the page by the book's author). --Mkativerata (talk) 07:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sentences added to Najib Tun Razak

Hi there - I re-phrased a couple of sentences you added to Najib Tun Razak today. The reason I did so was because I felt they lifted words from the source directly, or paraphrased the source too closely. See this guideline and this essay. Even if a source is properly attributed, it can't be used in the article word-for-word. Cheers - --Mkativerata (talk) 06:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

• FYI, I have done some more re-phrasing at Perkasa. As an example, the final paragraph initially read:

Many political analysts have said that there is a dangerous tag team developing in Malaysia, one that involves the current governing party UMNO and Perkasa. The pointed out that this team’s sole aim is not about keeping power in Malay hands, for that is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution, but keeping power in the hands of corrupt and self-serving elite. In order to stay in power, this group is willing to pit the Malays against the non-Malays, the Muslims against the non-Muslims.

The source cited for this paragraph states:

There is a dangerous tag team developing in Malaysia. One that involves some in Umno and the new kid on the block, Perkasa. This team’s sole aim is not about keeping power in Malay hands, for that is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution, but keeping power in the hands of corrupt and self-serving elite. And to stay in power, this group is willing to pit the Malays against the non-Malays, the Muslims against the non-Muslims.

In my view, this paraphrasing is too close: after the first sentence, the source is lifted almost word for word. Further, one article in The Malaysian Insider does not represent "many political analysts". So I've rephrased the paragraph to read:

The Malaysian Insider has criticised what it sees as a "dangerous tag team" developing between the ruling UMNO party and Perkasa, where the two groups have the sole aim of keeping power in the hands of a "corrupt and self-serving elite" by playing off Malays against non-Malays and Muslims against non-Muslims.

Cheers - --Mkativerata (talk) 20:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I'm an administrator who has worked extensively with copyright concerns on Misplaced Pages. While emphasizing that you are obviously working with good intentions, Mkativerata brought this issue to my attention. I chose an article at random from your last 500 contributions, and I'm afraid that I found duplicated content concerns with Teoh Beng Hock as well. I have restored the article to its state as of 5 February 2010 and set out some of the problems I found at the article's talk page. Your careful research is all still there in the article's history, but the material does need to be rewritten before it is put back to the article's face.

It may that after further checking some additional work may be found to necessary in other articles as well. If so, there is a process we use to help clarify which articles need such further work, at Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations. If it seems necessary to conduct one of these on your contributions, I hope that you will help us to address any concerns we find. As I noted above, it's obvious that you are a careful researcher, and you are meticulous about citing your sources.

If you have any questions about rewriting content, I am happy to help. I know this is sometimes a pain in the neck, but I'm afraid that Misplaced Pages's copyright policy gives us no other option. We are only allowed to incorporate copyrighted content from others if it is clearly marked with quotation marks and used in accordance with non-free content guideline and policy. Otherwise, everything must be written in our own words. --Moonriddengirl 01:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

As explained at the article's talk page, you do have the option to rewrite content removed for copyright concerns before restoring it, but you do not have a right to revert copyright violations and restore them to publication even temporarily. Such future behavior in the future is likely to lead to your being blocked. --Moonriddengirl 12:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

CCI

Several more examples having been located, the contributor copyright investigation is open at Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations/Roman888. You will not receive individual notice of articles with problems; if you are interested in helping to rewrite any problems that are located, please keep an eye on that page. In some cases, content is immediately removed; if the content is too embedded in the article, it may be reverted. If you created the article with problematic content, it may be blanked and listed at the copyright problems board. In the last case, you would then have approximately a week to submit a proposed rewrite for the text.

Again, please do not restore any content removed for copyright concerns. You may rewrite it, but you must not publish any content on Misplaced Pages that is not properly licensed in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. Likewise, you should not remove {{copyvio}} templates that may be placed on these articles yourself. These are to be removed by an administrator after the rewrite is examined for usability. Any page so blanked will provide a link to the subpage where the rewrite should be placed. Although I and the other administrators who work at the copyright problems board routinely check these subpages, it is always a good idea to note on an article's talk page if you have placed proposed replacement text at that talk page just to ensure it is not missed. --Moonriddengirl 20:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Like I said in your talk page, all this investigation and effort which you place in checking the last 1000 or so posts is just a waste of time and energy. (As an administrator I would expect you have other pressing concerns to deal with) I don't agree with the timescale of a week in which you submitted for any rewrite, as it can be done immediately without resorting to removing the information wholesale and posting a copy-vio template at the top of the page. During this time the article will look mangled and partially destroyed because of your removal of the information wholesale. I prefer the normal method of discussing with other editors and gaining consensus to rewrite the information in the article concern so that if conforms to the rules. This together with my good faith in working hand in hand with the other editors will suffice. Irregardless I have added my comments on the recent article Teoh Beng Hock which you have chosen to take your original course of action. Roman888 (talk) 11:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the one week process doesn't reply on your agreement; this is policy as has been developed over a number of years. It is not my original course of action. You can read more about it at Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems, Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations and Misplaced Pages:Copyright violations. Unfortunately, you have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violations. This is why the WP:CCI has been opened to evaluate your contributions. You do have the option of working within the established process to address these concerns, but you must not restore material that has been removed unless you have first rewritten it and you must not remove the copyright violation templates. --Moonriddengirl 12:07, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Copyright block

In spite of warnings, you have restored copyrighted content to Misplaced Pages after it had been removed. In this series of edits, you added the following:

The involvement of IMT Defence only became known because in March 2005, a former director of IMT, Mohamad Zainuri Mohamad Idrus, filed suit against several Adib-related companies, alleging that Adib and his sister, Askiah Adam wanted to prevent him from exposing the Sukhoi deal. In 2006, Mohamad Zainuri lodged a police report alleging that Adib had stolen the US$108 million commission that was supposed to be channeled to the company while Najib Razak was the Defence Minister at that time.

The source says:

The involvement of IMT Defence only became known because in March 2005, a former director of IMT, Mohamad Zainuri Mohamad Idrus, filed suit against several Adib-related companies, alleging that Adib and his sister, Askiah Adam, "wanted to prevent him from exposing the reality of the Sukhoi deal." In 2006, Mohamad Zainuri lodged a police report alleging that Adib had stolen the US$108 million (RM 380 million) commission that was supposed to be channeled to the company.

Additional material was copied from sources or too closely paraphrased, which you have also been warned against.

Please be careful after your block expires to ensure that your future contributions conform to our copyright policy and that on non-free content. Additional violation of these policies is likely to lead to an extended or indefinite block of your account. --Moonriddengirl 19:55, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

In light of the fact that you have already received a 48 hour copyright block, in 2008, and are still creating copyright issues more than a year later, even to the extent of restoring copyright violating content as it is being cleaned up, I have adjusted your block to indefinite. I do not believe you should be unblocked without some very credible indication that you understand and intend to comply with Misplaced Pages's copyright policy. --Moonriddengirl 22:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

To me this is an abuse of your administrative powers here in Misplaced Pages. I have already said that your investigation is just a waste of time and effort. I have not restored copyright violating content as you claimed but reworded the one of the articles that was brought up in your investigation page so that it conforms to copyright rules. You did not even view the changes that were made and just arbitrarily blocked me. Roman888 (talk) 04:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Arbitrarily? Just two posts above yours is a detailed explanation (with a convincing example) of why your "re-write" remained a copyright violation. I'd strongly urge you to accept the invitation to credibly indicate that you will comply with wikipedia's copyright policy in the future, rather than persist with questioning and contesting the deletion of your past contributions.--Mkativerata (talk) 04:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I have already ACCEPTED your invitation to make the changes needed. I already posted in your talk page about rephrasing certain articles that don't comply with the copyright violations. You seem fit to try to want to delete materials wholesale, without trying to rephrase the materials that have been mentioned. You are not an administrator, yet you try to put up a copy right warning in the talk page and you get an impartial administrator to back you up. You also have the guile to report me for copy-right violations which has now let me to being blocked. To me that is blatant censorship and worse than the Malaysian government and mainstream media. Worse my past edits are being dug up and everything is being put under the microscope. If I don't get unblocked by MRG, I will just proceed my own way without assisting you in complying with Misplaced Pages's copyright policy. You don't want me to be your enemy and I am think I will proceed my own way if things don't change. I also will not be posting url links to the articles which will defeat the purpose of what you are doing. This is not blackmail, but you guys are not being WP:CIVIL and you don't even try Misplaced Pages:Consensus. Since I only am allow to post in my talk page, this will probably be my last post under Roman888. Roman888 (talk) 12:09, 9 March 2010 (UTC)