User talk:Mqduck
Welcome[edit]
Hello, Mqduck, welcome to Wikipedia.
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
- If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
- You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
- If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
Again, welcome! —Plato
Image copyrights[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Papaver alpinum.JPG. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, — Edwin Stearns | Talk 20:48, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Civility and Alan Dershowitz[edit]
Whilst I agree with your edit to the Alan Dershowitz page, and I am sure many others do too, please refrain from using swear words in your edit summaries. Some people find them offensive, and there are always polite ways to get your point across. Here at Wikipedia, we believe that you should always assume good faith and be civil. It would be appreciated if you could follow these guidelines as well. Thanks a lot, and if you want anything please do not hesitate to reply on my talk page. Batmanand | Talk 10:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Personally, I don't care about "swear words" as long as they aren't used to insult somebody else, and Wikipedia isn't censored. But saying things like "anyone who doesnt see the sentance i changed as a literal contradiction of the previous paragraph is insane" isn't okay because Wikipedia expects its contributors to be civil to one another. I don't mean to seem like I'm ganging up on you, but please be more civil in your interactions here going forward. Thanks and if I can help you somehow don't hesitate to leave me a message. · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 17:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- To anyone who reads this: The points were well taken and I agree with them. I should and shall remain civil in the future.
==Regarding your edits - May 2006== Thank you for experimenting with the page Emo (slang) on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. — ßottesiηi (talk) 20:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Broken chains.gif[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Broken chains.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Karl_Marx_small.png[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Karl_Marx_small.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Broken chains.gif)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Broken chains.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Karl Marx small.png)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Karl Marx small.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Introducing typos into other people's comments[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Square root of 2. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —David Eppstein 14:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry for my quick assumption that these were deliberate. It looks like I should have assumed better faith. —David Eppstein 15:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Communist?[edit]
Hey, I was just wondering why you live in the United States, a country founded on laissez-faire capitalism, and not Russia or Eastern Europe. Chenzo23 (talk) 20:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- You may want to update your references, but you get your point across. Anyhow, the reason is that a) I love this land, and b) it'd be pretty cowardly of me to run away instead of fighting to end exploitation here. And I suppose you want me to leave then, but you can just forget about it. ;)
userbox[edit]
I have deleted User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist. This is disruptive, liable to cause drama, and unhelpful to the project. Please do not recreate it. Thanks.--Docg 10:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have not found _any_ reason for deletion of this userbox besides this creator's userpage. It's liable to cause drama on a user's talk page. Can you provide any wikilink for discussion on this deletion, or was this of your own devising? Xavexgoem (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oops, hadn't seen that you were an admin. I still don't find this justifiable. Xavexgoem (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist[edit]
User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist, a page you created, 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:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist[edit]
A tag has been placed on User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the template appears to be divisive and inflammatory. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Equazcion •✗/C • 10:23, 12 Jan 2008 (UTC) 10:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion[edit]
I have put a suggestion for a different link in your userbox on this page please comment on this suggestion there. --ChetblongTalkSign 06:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Right to resist[edit]
If you're looking to engage editors on this issue, I think the best place to start would be at the ongoing RFC [1]. The MFD is closed as you know so no commenting there. If you want to suggest changes to the guideline, maybe start up a discussion on the guideline page. This whole debate made a lot of folks unhappy, I think it'd be a very good thing for you to start up a dialog about these issues. At the very least it would reduce the polarization that's happened over the deletion debate. I think the question to keep foremost in your mind is how to keep the focus on building a free, NPOV encyclopedia. That's the only, only reason we're here...and that's mostly why free speech isn't a core value here. If something is disruptive, some honest thought should be put into whether it could be modified or could be done without. Engage thoughtfully with those that disagree with you on this issue, work together to find a solution that satisfies everyone and furthers the goal of producing the best encyclopedia in the world...RxS (talk) 16:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
userboxes[edit]
based on that and your comments about blink 182 THIS USER IS AWESOME —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.151.180 (talk) 06:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. You wouldn't believe what a battle it was to keep the Right to Resist userbox from being deleted. It was quite emotionally draining, in fact. --MQDuck 11:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Tags[edit]
Did you just update a tag on my own talk page? Uh, thanks. ;)
- You're welcome, I suppose. Though it was merely a "helpful link" in someone else's comment. Anyway, hope you're having a good day : ) - jc37 23:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
regarding Template:User Pro-Cuba[edit]
Hi!
in your template you state that the user that uses it is "Pro Cuba" and i wanted to know what you mean:
- is that to say that he is pro communist & dictatorial rule in Cuba?
- or is that he wishes free and capitalist kind of Cuba?
- or maybe he just hopes for the well being of Cuba, regardless of its sort of regime?
I hope you'll anser me as quickly as possible. --Oren neu dag (talk) 07:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Actually i'm asking cause i honestly have no idea what mean by "Pro Cuba".
- The three point i've written above are all presumtions, not rulings. so if u can just tell me what stands behing this template i'll be very happy with whatever your answer may be. --Oren neu dag (talk) 01:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted your moving of this article and the talk page conversation is irrelavent. Policy is very clear about all caps trademarked names, please read Wikipedia:NAMING#Use standard English for titles even if trademarks encourage otherwise. Regards, — Κaiba 22:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, you're obviously right and I'm glad the case has been settled. I just want to point out that "the talk page conversation" is always relevant. Wikipedia has policies, not rules. Don't forget Wikipedia:Be bold. --MQDuck 01:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Request for admin[edit]
I saw your post on the help desk. As it had been closed, I thought I should post this here. If you haven't already done so, have think about getting admin coaching. I'm currently going through it, and it really has proved very helpful. Had I gone straight to RFA a few months ago, I would have crashed and burned. I'm almost through my coaching, and I stand a sporting chance. If you have any questions about it, please drop me a line! StephenBuxton (talk) 12:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip! --MQDuck 02:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I thought you handled it pretty well. You explained your reason for creation, and didn't heat up when being opposed by other editors. There were moments where the discussion looked like it was getting to hot, but your arguments were relatively neutral and not attacking. The only objection is that you got held up, with other editors, in talking about real world events and politics, which may look like soapbox-ing. But you weren't alone in that discussion, and the circumstances surrounding the userbox were understandably contentious so such talk is reasonable, but should be avoided. But again, you didn't attack other editors and inflame the discussion. Overall, you did good. :)
But as a side note, I see you only have 569 edits to your name, and quite frankly the RFA crowd are a bit picky about edit counts. Consider editing more articles and Wikipedia pages to get more knowledge about the community; let yourself be heard on XfD and policy discussions. This would help the community judge you better in an RFA. And I'm telling you, it can be rough if you're unprepared. I hope this helps. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 13:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
re: Kenefick Ranch Winery AfD[edit]
You have a valid point about letting the AfD run, though it was closed early due to copyvio issues, and because of that I'm not sure that taking it to deletion review will overturn anything. In general, just because a company produces a product doesn't make that company notable, there has to be some form of notability proven beyond mere existance. In any event, maybe the winery is more notable than the sources presented suggest, if you can find some references (online or print) proving notability I'd be more than happy to help re-write something that's non-infringing. :) Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 15:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Admin coaching request status[edit]
|
You have expressed interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. However, after reviewing your edit history, I feel you may need more experience editing (i.e., >1,750 edits & 4 months of activity) on Wikipedia before you can know for certain your ready to begin the process of becoming an administrator. Therefore, at this time, your application for Admin Coaching has been declined.
My suggestion would be to seek adoption from a more experienced user who can help you experience all of the various components of editing an encyclopedia. If you decide adoption is not for you, there is also the editor review process that may help you find areas to improve upon in our editing. If you would like to talk more about this, please feel free to leave me a note at my talk page. Malinaccier (talk) 23:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
If you'd like to get more involved with Wikipedia in a way other than being an admin, go ahead and edit more :)! Happy editing, Malinaccier (talk) 23:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Modern in Stonewall riots[edit]
Hi. I wrote Stonewall riots, and discussed describing them as the (modern) defining event of the gay rights movement with some editors before it went to FAC. Eventually, I decided not to include "modern". While the decades of Homophile activism is described in as much detail as possible in an article of that length, "modern" suggests an ancient somewhere in the past. Or at least...old. Or "before". The sentence now reads they have become the defining event that marked the start of the modern gay rights movement in the United States and around the world. While other countries have had significant advances in equal rights for homosexuality in their histories (Berlin in the 1920s, for example), prior to Stonewall, the US has not. The article makes the case that although the Mattachine Society had been active, the change brought by the Stonewall riots was so significant that what happened before them paled in comparison. How strongly do you feel about the inclusion of this word? --Moni3 (talk) 22:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
VU[edit]
The Velvet Underground aren't alternative rock. Alternative rock didn't emerge until the 1980s. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Uh, I'm not trying to be immature. I'm stating something that's a fact. The Velvet Underground preceeded the developement of alternative rock by nearly two decades. They preceeded punk rock (from which alt-rock emerged) by a decade. In particular, note that the Velvet Underground Wikipedia article doesn't even call them alternative rock. There's no reason to include them in the timeline. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Homosexual[edit]
I am concerned that you are apparently not aware that usage of the word homosexual particularly as an adjective or description term outside of a medical or scientific context is usually offensive in English including in the US. Please take a read of the many sources [2] [3] or even our own article Gay#Terminology Nil Einne (talk) 09:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not denying there are people who prefer the term homosexual and even people who are offended by the word gay. They are however in a minority. On average, people are much more likely to be offended by the word homosexual then they are gay, and the word gay is used nearly universally in a professional setting. Outside of certain medical and other contexts, homosexual is mostly used by those who are at least mildly homophobic. So even those who prefer homosexual have had to accept the term gay as likely to be used by most others. Therefore, we can resonably conclude the homosexual is usually an offensive word and should be avoided in most contexts in a wikipedia article and that gay should usually be used, as with other sources which is something some other people are for whatever reason not willing to accept. The origins and reason for that offense are not particularly important for us as wikipedians. Sure it's good for us to know, but it doesn't matter whether you know or not, you don't have to, you just have to accept that it is the case (unfortunately some people aren't which doesn't surprise me, we get people unwilling to accept other words are found offensive too which I've never really understood). I may have misunderstood but your specific commentary "In Icelandic, "homosexual" may be an offensive word" and "thee problem here, from what I gather, is that in other languages, their translation of "homosexual" has a negative connotation, something unfamiliar to English speakers (at least in the US)." seemed to suggest you were under the impression homosexual at the time it does not usually carry a negative connotation in the US but that it may have been offensive in Iceland whereas it's much more likely it's the opposite which was what I was attempting to clarify. From what I gather from the discussion, in certain languages, the translation for homosexual is the prefered word and is not offensive which is part of the reason for the confusion. This may be Icelandic I don't know. It doesn't matter however since this is an English encylopaedia as you pointed out and the fact homosexual in Icelandic or whatever is not offensive doesn't concern us since it is often offensive in English particularly in the US. If anything it may mean there is less reason to avoid homosexual in her article but there is more reason to exclude it in any article about someone from the US since if anything that's where it appears to be most offensive probably because of the prevalence of homophobic nutcases there. I do think it is important that people understand this since it's important that people don't try argue homosexual should be used in US related argues since it's not offensive there when in fact the reality is far from it which is why I felt the need to raise the issue with you privately, issues concerning Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir are of course usually best left on her talk page. P.S. Don't be offended by this but I admit, I'm still rather surprised by the way so many people are unaware of the common way homosexual is perceived. I've only ever known one gay person in my life (friend of a friend, relatively recently too) that I'm aware of and was raised in Malaysia, as with many Asian and Muslim countries hardly a gay friendly place or for that matter, one with any real level of political correctness but I've been aware of the general preference for gay for a long time. Nil Einne (talk) 17:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron[edit]
|
Hello, Mqduck. Based on the templates on your talk page, please consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. You can join >> here <<. |
RE:Afghan Right to Resist[edit]
Sure, change the image as you see fit. I personally had not given it such a large amount of though. =) Kind Regards, --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd Talk 16:30, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Talkback[edit]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Happy Editing! — 71.166.147.78 (talk · contribs) 03:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
LGBT and Islam[edit]
Hi - thought I'd post something on your page in a friendly spirit in the hope that we can sort out something with regards to the LGBT and Islam article without counter-revertions. I hadn't intended my edits to be "right wing" in any way. It's possible that the tone of some it isn't quite right so would be willing to consider which passages you see as particularly problematic and see if we can do anything about them. I agree there is no point in overplaying the state of same-sex activity in some muslim societies, but we also don't want to underplay it either.Contaldo80 (talk) 14:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
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) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Mqduck/foo[edit]
User:Mqduck/foo, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mqduck/foo and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Mqduck/foo 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:03, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Mqduck. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, Mqduck. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Mqduck. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Mqduck. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist[edit]
User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:MQDuck/userboxes/Right To Resist 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. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)