User talk:RSatUSZ

Welcome!

Hello, RSatUSZ, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Multiple line breaks

Could I ask you to refrain from using multiple line breaks between paragraphs? It is frowned upon by our manual of styles. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 18:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another, slightly annoying habit: inserting some new material, changing your mind, but leaving a number of line breaks behind. You've done it lots of time, leaving it to others to clean up. Favonian (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Shoulder has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Marek.69 ^talk 20:10, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Shoulder with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Marek.69 ^talk 20:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Cartilage, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your edits are disruptive--removal of content, insertion of unencyclopedic content and its subsequent removal, etc. Please stop and listen to what other editors have tried to tell you on this talk page. Drmies (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent adding/removing of contents, leaving spurious line breaks and unwillingness to discuss actions. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Favonian (talk) 10:34, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

RSatUSZ (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

hey, i just got blocked by Favonian. but i didnt intended to vandalize, it is a misunerstanding, sorry! i tried to leave the article just the way it was before. all i wanted to do is to create a .pdf of the whole article, including the chapter "imaging" which i wrote. i have to send my mentor the .pdfs. now i'm banned until the 15.10., OMG, an i have a deadline. could you please UNblock me again? i'm aware that my way to get those .pdfs is irritating for you. but now i found the sandbox, where i can play around without disturbing anybody. but i need to be able to see the edit site in order to create a copy of the original article at the sandbox. i learned my lesson, wikipedia sometimes can be very confusing, but i really need no proceed with my work now. thanks for your work on wikipedia, i really appreciate it. greetings Rafael RSatUSZ (talk) 13:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per below remarks and the fact that you chose to ignore the clearly worded specific warnings that were left for you, I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Uh, deadline? Were you using Wikipedia for homework, or what? — Joseph Fox 13:56, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. (RSatUSZ (talk) 14:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC))[reply]
- I won't answer the unblock request since I'm already on this talk page, but it's clear that the rationale doesn't address the concerns: this talk page is full of questions and warnings, and you chose to respond to them only after you were blocked. That you never commented on any of the notes, that you never left edit summaries, that you continued to edit in precisely the same disruptive manner is quite damning. Besides, what could possibly have been the point of these futile exercises, in which you add a bunch of stuff and then remove it, leaving a blank line? Finally, homework should be done elsewhere, and any unblock request should show that you realize that. Drmies (talk) 14:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:2 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg

Thanks for uploading File:2 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:1 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg

Thanks for uploading File:1 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:2 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:2 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:36, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again

RSatUSZ, I see you are still doing the same thing that got you blocked earlier. The content you added is not properly verified and is not written in a style that could be called encyclopedic, many of them striking an inappropriate tone, ranging from essay-like to unreadably technical. The images you put in add little to the article, and for all intents and purposes it appears as if you are inserting image galleries for the purpose of inserting image galleries, with pictures derived from University Hospital Zurich, an institution with which you seem connected, judging from your user name. I am not pleased to see this and have asked the admin who blocked you in October last year to have another look. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:14, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That blocking admin would be me. I second Drmies' concern about your contributions and especially your unwillingness to provide a proper explanation for them. In fact, your only attempts at dialog were requests to have your previous block lifted. I'm sorry that I have to be brutal, but if you make further additions in the same style, you will be blocked again, maybe indefinitely, so please respond to Drmies' comments. Favonian (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not. I'm not vandalizing. I'm not editing, saving, deleting, and leaving new multiple line breaks in the article. My contributions are well researched and verified. Yes, the style at certain passages is not "encyclopaedic". Is that really a reason to block me? If you don't get it or if you're not interested, well, just skip it. There are parts which are well understandable, stick with them. The images have almost always a direct connection to the article or are frequent in medical imaging. (RSatUSZ (talk) 23:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

You certainly include lots of unnecessary breaks, but that is the least of my concerns. You add walls of text that are sometimes way too technical and in all cases seem to have only the most tenuous of connections to the topic. In fact, they seem to be there only to warrant the inclusion of images that, as far as I can tell, you or your organization have made yourself and that I therefore deem to be promotional. Then, these long, long paragraphs are typically verified by one footnote, at the beginning of the section, without proper bibliographic information, leaving us to guess whether you haven't simply literally translated (that is, lifted) an entire section from a textbook--which, if so, falls far outside of the realms of fair use, and, even if it does count as fair use, is not encyclopedic material: an encyclopedia is not a textbook. That you fail to explain your edits in edit summaries is just par for the course. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:1 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:1 MRI. Complete tear and rupture of the supraspinatus tendon. Wide transmural damage (2.4 x 2.4 cm)..jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|RSatUSZ}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MRI. Articular sided low grade partial tear of the supraspinatus tendon..jpg, which you've attributed to University Hospital Zurich. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --TheImaCow (talk) 12:43, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]