User talk:Gooberliberation

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
You can experiment in the test area.
You can get help at the Help Desk

Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Wikipedia:Five pillars, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:How to write a great article

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

I'm curious[edit]

On the Undercarriage page, you wrote that the tandem layout a la Harriers "is common among large jet bomber aircraft because it allows room for a large internal bomb bay between the main wheels". Which particular large bombers did you have in mind? Cheers. Moriori 23:48, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

I too, am curious[edit]

Are you from acecombat.net? - RPharazon 03:46, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

Your edits to Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25[edit]

I reverted your edits to the MiG-25 page -- unexplained removal of information from Wikipedia is considered vandalism and you left behind an awful mess of a page. Please don't do that again. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 14:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...[edit]

Excuse me, Sir. My last edits to this page were not vandalism. The current photos at the top of the page(MiG-25PU) are hard to see in thumbnailed view. I felt that a clear side-view of a single-seat Foxbat in flight was more appropriate photo to illustrate what the aircraft really looks like, rather than a blurry shape against some buildings. As for leaving a mess of a page... it looks like a total mess now, with huge spaces of white surrounding the "development" header. If my changes totally screwed up the formatting, it wasn't apparent on my system. In any case, I stand by the changes I made, and I will make similar edits should I come across a page that needs the treatment. None of my edits(including vandalism removal) have been done in anything but good-faith, mistakes included.

Poor editor... mabye I am, I can live with that. Vandal, I am not.

Gooberliberation 09:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Your edit summary did not explain why you removed the images -- the reasons given in the above post are valid IMHO but your solution is not ideal. For your future reference, deleting material is usually not the right way to go on Wikipedia unless the material is obviously wrong or biased. There are better options for dealing with an excessive number of images such as image galleries at the bottom of the page. A simple inquiry on the Talk page for the article is always the preferred solution to hacking and slashing, and edit summaries stating the reasons are always appreciated. I have returned the page to your edit with the extra images tucked away at the bottom of the article. Sorry I was a bit harsh. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 16:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noel Gallagher[edit]

Hi, I tried to find an image to confirm Noel but I couldn't find anything definitive, you got one? Arniep 23:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013[edit]

Hello Gooberliberation, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Republic of Korea Air Force has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]