• User talk:Alinor/Archive 1, 2

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For wonderful way of editing, with cold head and great peace. Thank you for your wast help in articles regarding Kosovo, and other questionable "hot" subjects. Keep up the great work! WhiteWriter speaks 11:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Traffic.png

Hello, Alinor Could you please modify your map? Use proper list of countries from proper Vienna convention. Because of Your mistake somebody will pay fees for driving car on territory he should not, because his country didn't sign Vienna convention on road traffic. List (offical) of countries is here: www.unece.org/trans/conventn/CP_Vienna_convention.pdf or here http://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetailsIII.aspx?&src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XI~B~19&chapter=11&Temp=mtdsg3&lang=en There in no Turkey for example. Now look to Your map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.252.243.228 (talk) 22:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alinor Could you please modify this image

• Countries that have no diplomatic relation mark them red (particularly areas which are Grey/or no color.
• And also mark Disputed areas. Thanks--Kkm010 | Talk with me 05:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's on the commons. Alinor (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't you edit commons images? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 07:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have account there. Alinor (talk) 08:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should just be able to set this account to global and have it linked to commons in the My Preferences page. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This "article" is a rehash of Foreign relations of Palestine, albeit modified to portray your own POV. I must remind you that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a platform for your own political agenda. If you continue to misappropriate facts through the creation of your own versions of the same article, I shall have to report it at AE. Nightw 05:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations of Palestine is a redirect. I assume you mean Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority. And it doesn't push any POV - what is POVed in it? As explained at "Talk:Foreign_relations_of_the_Palestinian_National_Authority/Archive_2 13:45, 31 December 2010, etc. comments" (this is the edit-line description of the edit that created Foreign relations of the Palestine Liberation Organization) - since a few editors oppose moving FR of PNA then a separate article FR of PLO should be created - to deal with the PLO relations. I opened a discussion on the problem of content duplication between the two here. Alinor (talk) 07:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alinor. Have reversed several times my edits on the map every time you want to add to Uruguay. You could add to Uruguay on the map? I await your reply, thanks. Regards. MauriManya (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a version with Uruguay - [1] and there is also another map with it - File:State of Palestine recognition.png. The problem is with not with Uruguay, but with other states that Night w wants colored in a way that isn't supported by sources. I don't agree with this WP:V breach, but he still reverts the map. We are discussing the issue and my latest proposal is this.

I don't object if you want to revert the map (again) to [2]. Alinor (talk) 04:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you are the creator of this image, would you mind adding Somaliland as 'orange' per the sources on the page since it has applied for observer status. Outback the koala (talk) 05:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Alinor (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Outback the koala (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're contributors to past discussions. The first set is from this pages archives, the second is from those that contributed to the [[State of Palestine]] → [[Palestine]] discussion. I normally just post to the community pages, which I did, but it wasn't garnering enough of a response. Do you have an objection? Nightw 09:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the RM discussion I don't see notifications about notified "community pages" (Wikiprojects? have you notified these?) - only about specific users. And there are not in "first set" and "second set" - the first set as you say is from the previous RM I linked. Then you added Harlan. Then I asked why. Then you added additional editors. Alinor (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a notification on WikiProject Palestine. Harlan was first notified because his contributions came up on my watchlist and I recalled that he had contributed to previous move discussions. When you asked me to find the contribution, I initially couldn't, but then I found the RM I'd been thinking of in the State of Palestine archives, and then promptly contacted all those involved there. What are you accusing me of? Nightw 09:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject:Palestine notification isn't mentioned in the RM discussion. So, you notified the other editors only after I asked why Harlan is individually notified? Anyway, I don't want to accuse you of anything, just to see what your motives are. Alinor (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since you so often blindly cite it, I'm sure you haven't forgotten the arbitration enforcement requirements imposed on you (as well as myself) —that is, to discuss changes before making them on the articles. You're attempting to move entries in the list at Foreign relations of Palestine —an undiscussed change without consensus, and against reliable sources.

The "noticeboard discussion" you've cited as justification pertains only to the use of a particular source (Doebbler) to substantiate a particular claim. It did not address the issue of the placement of entries. Other sources have been provided in the talk page, which you're aware of and continue to ignore. If you continue to block the use of these sources, fine, but don't expect to get a consensus to move the entries they pertain to. Nightw 11:30, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only source in the article that supports the placement of Syria and Turkmenistan in the "conflicting/inconclusive sources" section. What I did is to remove the source per the noticeboard discussion - and since it's not longer used, there is nothing else in the article to support such placement, that's why the two got moved out of this section.

Whether there are some unknown other sources is a separate issue. You are free to propose such on the talk page. When you did it last time there was no agreement to use the source you gave (for this purpose), because it didn't even mention Syria or Turkmenistan (and also has other flaws).

So, please stop violating the noticeboard result, restore [3], and use the talk page if you want something changed. Alinor (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

? I'm not making any changes... That would be you making changes, and I've been reverting. You're free to remove any sources that were deemed unreliable by the noticeboard discussion. You do not, however, have a consensus to move things around, and that's quite clear from the talk page. Even the noticeboard discussion wasn't very conclusive since it only got a response from one editor, see WP:CONLIMITED. Nightw 14:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since the source is unreliable the arrangement that depends on that unreliable source is removed along with the source. If you want to add another source that results in a different arrangement - you are free to propose such on the talk page. Alinor (talk) 14:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. Just because a user unilaterally blocks the adding of reliable sources without the consensus of the community (nor any attempt to get one) because of a POINT he or she wishes to make, doesn't mean that the information is then changed because of it. You'll need to get a consensus before you can change information. Any discussion on the topic so far has failed to achieve one, and you were well aware of that—hence my criticism of your behaviour. But before any of that, the source currently used may or may not be unreliable (your thread didn't achieve any significant level of response from editors). Nightw 14:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. My disagreement about some sources that you want to add (because they don't show what you want to use them for) is not related to the removal of another source that is unreliable. And yes, the noticeboard did reach consensus - and you were informed about both the start and the end of the discussion, and you were also informed about the result long ago. So, your current "not significant discussion" comments are misplaced - you had all chances to object and to give meaningful opposite reasons (if there are any). You also didn't say "not significant discussion" when you were informed about the results. Alinor (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant. Doesn't change the fact that there is no consensus to move entries and that your attempts to gain one have failed. Your changes were reverted, and per WP:EP, you should now go about trying to gain a consensus to repeat them. End of discussion. Nightw 15:00, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant. Consensus reached is that the source is not used regardless of your unreasonable objections. End of discussion. Alinor (talk) 05:54, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alinor. Please see my suggestion at User talk:EdJohnston#Talk:Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to your Talk:Constitution_of_Kosovo#UNMIK_framework_de_jure_still_in_force.3F. I have come to the conclusion, per my reply, that all acts of the government have to be promulgated by the SRSG to have effect. So, for the Constitution to be law, the SRSG should have promulgated it, correct? Where is this promulgation? (UNMIK haven't published regulations since 2008, around the time of the Constitution.) Int21h (talk) 21:57, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I commented there. Alinor (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have anything that states that the UN considers the status of Kosovo to be unresolved? Or like a "Question of Kosovo" or something? Nightw 10:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is UNSCR1244 - it's still in force and not superseded.

Also, we have sources showing that the UNSG takes into account the 'recognition as State by the international community'[4] when deciding on who can become a State party to an international treaty deposited with him. The result can be checked at [5] and examples such as [6]. The RoK, SoP, ROC, SADR aren't such states - they aren't recognized as State by the international community and they aren't State party to any UNSG deposited treaty.

Also they aren't displayed on the UN map of the world.[7]

All these sources show that the real world distinction is "other10 vs. the rest". Of course some of the other10 have "substantial" recognition by other states, but this doesn't mean that they are "generally recognized" or "mainstream regular states". Alinor (talk) 12:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent. Many thanks. Nightw 12:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a thread on the State of Palestine talk page that you might be interested in. I've also some reading material for you to look at [8][9][10]. And I voted to support your proposal on that mediation debate. Nightw 01:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will look at the section on SoP talk and at the links you put here. I'm glad we aren't opposing each other suggestions "by default" because our unrelated disagreements on other topics - so, thanks for that. Alinor (talk) 07:25, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Nightw 01:20, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also be interested to hear what you think of this...? Nightw 02:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the other issue, is there a way that you could perhaps simplify your proposal or at least the language used in it? It might be better received that way. I consider it to be a more NPOV setup, since you're not relying purely on voluntary subscription to a hand-picked group of organisations. Nightw 08:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will look at it, but I won't be quick to answer (if at all) for the next few days. Alinor (talk) 06:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alinor - I didn't mean that to be a show-stopper. I'm simply trying to push this past the "we're completely stuck" phase to some kind of forward progress. trust me, everyone is going to have to compromise here, I'm just starting with you because you're in the minority position. once you give in on something, that will be leverage to encourage other people to give in on other things, and then we can start drawing it together. see what I'm aiming for? --Ludwigs2 00:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to look at the discussion. I'm in the middle of a period without much internet access, so excuse me if I'm late with responses. Alinor (talk) 06:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I was jsut worried that I was being too brusque (been having an un-fun time with things lately). --Ludwigs2 16:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Alinor, could you upload File:Seabed Arms Control.png to Commons as I'd like to integrate the map with the German version of the Seabed Arms Control Treaty. Thanks in advance! Teddychen81 (talk) 13:54, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have such account. But if you have you can do it - you either put a template 'image proposed for move to commons' or do it yourself and leave a link in the description to the original file/uploader - for edit history/author acknowledgement/licensing information. Alinor (talk) 06:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and done Teddychen81 (talk) 08:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The move request at Talk:Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority was closed, so we're now taking suggestions for an alternative. I took the liberty of lodging your old proposal on your behalf. Night w2 (talk) 04:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, where did you find out, that Ukraine issues biometric passports, but believe me it doesn't! I can't wait for the day, when they'll start, but the only thing they do is talk. Not a single biometric passport of any type has ever been issued to Ukrainian citizen. Please, correct the map on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Biometric_passports.png

User:Igor alexandrov has added Ukraine - I don't know his source about it, please contact him. Alinor (talk) 12:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking for Arbitration Enforcement for your recent conduct on List of sovereign states. This is just the standard procedure. Will provide you with a link as soon as the page is created. Ladril (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC) It is live now: [11]. Ladril (talk) 21:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your questions, UNMIK cooperates with the institutions of the Republic of Kosovo "at arm's length". UNMIK does not recognize Kosovo's institutions as independent, but recognizes them as if PISG, because they were elected members chosen through democratic elections, in a sort of sense giving legitimacy to it'. Think of it the same as the international recognition of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the Republic of Kosovo enjoys international recognition as the body of internal self-government on the territory of Kosovo excluding North Kosovo and the two Serbian municipalities south, however with no recognition for its external representation on the capacity of foreign relations as a whole, i.e. no international recognition of its independence.

It's the same as with the Serb institutions e.g. in North Kosovo, effectively de facto in that manner run by the Republic of Serbia. While there is absolutely no recognition of the division of North Kosovo, or the two southern Serb municipalities from the remainder of Kosovo, which legally and internationally remains an indivisible whole UN-governed Serbian territory (but with the temporary suspension of the sovereignty of the latter).

There was no legal transfer between PISG and RoK, but UNMIK has found a solution in the manner of such a jurisdiction hole by mainly cooperating through EULEX, who is actually the main arm of cooperation between the two. You see, although UNMIK and EULEX function under the auspices of UNSCR 1244 (1999), and are in effect neutral to the status by "ignoring" the RoK's claims on independence (which they effectively do, EULEX has in a number of moments been signing treaties which surpass the sovereignty levels of Kosovo with other parties, such as the Treaty of Cooperation with the Serbian Police signed with the Serbian Ministry of Interior Affairs, despite the opposition of RoK, which was effectively meaningless because EULEX draws its authority from the UNMIK as per endorsed officially by the UN SC in late 2008), there is one big difference - UNMIK was created in 1999, meaning it functions under the capacities of such a period, pre-UDI of the RoK. However, the EULEX was officially approved in November of 2008, after the declaration, in another reality - in which there is no such thing as PISG, and only RoK. This field of functioning poses the EULEX as within its framework to cooperate with RoK in the same way as international parties cooperate with the Palestinian Liberation Organization (and the State of Palestine shares significant similarities with Kosovo, in the manner that both enjoy a significant level of foreign recognition), whereas the UNMIK, created within the realities in which there is no RoK, is thus free of implication in activities which would make it seem as if it is de facto or de jure recognizing Kosovo's UDI.

AFAIK, this was all the most important reason for deploying EULEX in place of UNMIK - sure, a refreshment was needed and the mission was already deemed a partial failure in some fields, but the real motive behind deploying EULEX lies precisely in the difficulties created around the UDI of the group of representatives of the people of Kosovo. You see, between Kosovo's UDI in February and the November takeover on EULEX' part, there was quite a lot of chaos and jurisdiction problems in Kosovo, causing everyone to hurry up to deploy EULEX.

I hope this clears up things, regards --AVNOJist (talk) 10:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P. S. And as for the Rep. of Kosovo, it recognizes only the ICO as the supreme holder of all powers (be it executive, judicial or legislative) over Kosovo (e.g. the ICO is the one that approved the Constitution of Kosovo). The international military mission it refers to is KFOR. The RoK objects EULEX and UNMIK and politically wants them out, but through a reciprocal approach from them, politically accepts them as an illegitimate reality that must be. RoS recognizes UNMIK and KFOR since 1999 and cooperates with them, while also having a limited form of cooperation withe the PISG prior to the break-off at the status talks. Since the UNSC's green light on EULEX, Serbia also recognizes it and cooperates with (having already signed a specific treaty I've mentioned to the above), but considers the RoK and ICO illegal institutions and boycotts them in every way. The Serbian parallel institutions in Kosovo are recognized by solely Serbia and enjoy no recognition from anyone else, but the UNMIK and EULEX intervene and treat them as legitimate representatives, the same way as e.g. PLO is being treated, as I've already mentioned. ICO though, despite its formal recognition of Kosovo's independence, maintains a form of informal but strong connections (duh, SR of the EU, its obvious) with the EULEX, and thus UNMIK too. NATO's military presence is strictly a militaristic mission and enjoys full recognition from all parties, being the sole body in Kosovo that actually enjoys that. I know, pretty chaotic. :D --AVNOJist (talk) 10:53, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:WIPO logo 2010.gif. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ACP EPA Groups.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- Smurfy 20:37, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Launch vehicles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. GW… 23:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Republic of Kosovo/Sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Republic of Kosovo/Sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Republic of Kosovo/Sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. RL0919 (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Western Sahara lists of positions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Tachfin (talk) 00:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Energy Community.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 06:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
As you contributed to Morocco and Western Sahara related articles, I think you might be interested in this discussion. Your input would be appreciated.

Regards --Tachfin (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please join a preference survey on how to divide our List of sovereign states. All responses are appreciated. Thanks, Nightw 13:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Three files that you uploaded, File:SoP recognition and PLO relations.png, File:State of Palestine recognition.png and File:State of Palestine explicit recognition per official sources.png, have been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nightw 17:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alinor, I made a new article, and from one the list of spaceflights article I wandered into the Template:ISS modules following your link, also looking at who is about, I see you are the one who knows what your up to, so I thought you may want to know of the existence of the new article. There are also two new articles I will create soon, for NEM-1 and 2. I'll need to think of a good name for them though. The node module won't go up on a Proton, it uses a smaller class of progress and modded soyuz like Pirs and Piosk did. Penyulap _talk 03:47, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Alinor! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:58, 25 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Could you update the aforementioned map to show an independent South Sudan

Please add Libya as a coutry has an Independence-related National Day to File:National Days.png. Moreover, I think Egypt has no day like that, see List of national independence days.--Maher27777 (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please update the image to include the following countries?

• Saint Lucia
• Vanuatu
• Guinea-Bissau

I completed the list of countries, but the map needs to be updated to include the most recent members. Thanks. Questionkiddo (talk) 06:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Alinor. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you split Sudan & South Sudan in the photo? Also, Monaco isn't green on the map even though they & Croatia have had relations since '07. Finally, Trinidad & Tobago has had relations since Dec. 14 of last year, but it isn't highlighted. Could you fix it?

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Australia Group.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:WIPO logo 2010.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of continental intergovernmental organizations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of continental intergovernmental organizations until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. CMD (talk) 11:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in Talk:Women's_suffrage#Disenfranchisement_of_.2Aeverybody.2A. – Smyth\^talk 02:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a dispute at Talk:Palestinian_National_Authority#Organization or Place? and Talk:Palestinian_National_Authority#Palestinian Authority - an organization (government) or a geopolitical entity? -to weather the PNA is a government (like the Government of Hong Kong and the Kurdistan Regional Government), or a geopolitical entity (a psychical location like like Hong Kong and Iraqi Kurdistan). I'm telling you this because you seamed to express an opinion on this at Talk:Palestinian_National_Authority#Economy_and_demographics_belong_in_State_of_Palestine. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 06:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Previously there seemed to be a large consensus that elements higher than Z=173 cannot exist which seemed to be backed by large number of scientific articals. Why is the limit now z=218? Robo37 (talk) 09:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As former participant of discussion regarding "Palestinian National Authority and Palestinian people" template at Template_talk:Palestinian nationalism#Proposed_merger, you may be interested in participating in discussion over its rename at Template_talk:Palestinian_National_Authority_and_the_Palestinian_people#Requested move.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alinor. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. TDL (talk) 23:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:SPC 2010 Pacific.png is great, where did you get the international waters map?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello about

, I would like to say Melbourne Australia has a metro ! Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Alinor, we are a Croatian team of researchers who are looking at the editing dynamics on different language Wikipedias and are focusing specifically on the topic of Kosovo. We are looking for editors who have participated in editing, or discussing, articles about this topic, and who would be willing to be interviewed for the purpose of this research project. This is a project approved by the Wikimedia Foundations´ Research Committee and you can find more information on this meta-wiki page. Research results will be published under an open access license and your participation would be much appreciated. If you would like to participate you can reach us at our talk page or directly at interwikiresearch@gmail.com and we will set up an interview in a way that best suits your needs. Pbilic (talk) 18:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:IFAD logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Croydon Guardian logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:WTO negotiations (May 2010).png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cube00 (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:International Maritime Organization.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cube00 (talk) 08:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:CEFTA members.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:CrudeEU27.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:54, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Inter-parliamentary institutions and international parliaments has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. PanchoS (talk) 14:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alinor/maps, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Alinor/maps and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Alinor/maps during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. This map seems to be incorrect in Europe. Greece, Latvia, Italy, Portugal and Norway have unofficial relations with Taiwan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szqecs (talk • contribs) 16:55, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect South African Antarctica. Since you had some involvement with the South African Antarctica redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:45, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:AECoverlap.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

• File:Agadir in UMA.PNG
• File:Agadir.PNG
• File:SACU.PNG

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Earth exploration has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is just a short list of other Wikipedia articles (which hasn't been edited in 6 years). It's basically equivalent to the "Exploration" section of the Colonization navbox or the Exploration by continent category.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kaldari (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Timeline of Yugoslavia's evolution as a republic (1943-onward) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are around could you read the Talk Page entry "UNTEA in West New Guinea" and consider if you can further assist the List of territories governed by the United Nations or related articles. Thanks for any assist. Daeron (talk) 19:33, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What about light pink like for China? It does not seem to be explained in the legend. Can you update it? --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 04:47, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Colonization on Earth is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colonization on Earth until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Decolonization of Europe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decolonization of Europe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 21:26, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Colonization in Europe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colonization in Europe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Most active regional blocs has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Exploration in Europe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exploration in Europe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 21:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I love your map of Economic Integration Stages. Did you make it via GIS by chance? Do you have it in an editable file?

Thanks!

Aerlenbach (talk) 16:52, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Euro Plus Pact.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Prum Convention.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Europe regional FTAs.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:SAp states.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could be kind enoug to update the above. It’s out of date insofar as it’s made of the EU is concerned and may have other out of date features that I haven’t spotted I would have no idea how to update it. Thanks. Frenchmalawi (talk) 15:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Iceland EU accession logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:36, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Black Sea Forum for Partnership and Dialogue requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.

Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas ^{I'm researching Wikipedia} _Questions? 10:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flexible path is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flexible path until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Iljhgtn (talk) 22:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of spaceflights to the International Space Station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article is a duplicate of List of International Space Station expeditions/Assembly of the International Space Station and is unmaintained

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 03:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]