Hi and welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave me a message and I'll try my best to get back to you on this page asap. (I'm pretty busy at work sometimes!)
I'm new to Wikipedia so please be kind, everybody needs time to find their feet. :-) Biggleswiki (talk) 15:55, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.
Thanks for uploading File:Ivor Ichikowitz.png. 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.
Thanks for uploading File:Ivor Ichikowitz.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 {{OTRS 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-enwikimedia.org.
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. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf.☼16:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The last intact revision of this article was (cur | prev) 09:46, 1 April 2011 FrescoBot (talk | contribs) m (56,182 bytes) (Bot: links syntax) (undo). However, 62.212.66.131 disrupted the reference links with "%2F" and you was mislead into deleting all the disrupted references without checking the article history and the article references against the article sentences in "Controversies" section. Then, you claimed that all the sentences are completely unreferenced and will delete them if they are not referenced. I regret that I have not reverted them in time and it will be troublesome to add all the references back again. Therefore, I hope that if I can ask somebody for help to rollback the recent changes to last revision by Frescobot. Anyway, thanks for your interest in Abdul Taib Mahmud article! Cerevisae (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have perfected this article and references are added back again. Do feel free to check the controversial statements against its sources. Remember that there can be 2 or 3 sentences taken out from only one source, so the source is only added after those 2 or 3 sentences. About deleting dead links, I have a quote below from this wikipage: "Wikipedia:Link rot"
"Do not delete factual information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. WP:Verifiability does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published on-line.
Except for URLs in the External links section that have not been used to support any article content, do not delete a URL solely because the URL does not work any longer. Recovery and repair options and tools are available."
I'm going to paste the exact warning that was generated when you uploaded the image:
The use of this file is permitted only on Wikipedia.
Dear uploader: This media file, which you just uploaded, has been listed for speedy deletion because you indicated that only Wikipedia has permission to use this file. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, since explicit permission to use it was given, this is in fact not the case. [1][2] Please do not upload any more files with this restriction on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it. See our non-free content guidelines for more information.
If you created this media file and want it to be kept on Wikipedia, remove this message and replace this with {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file but want it to be used on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may replace this message with one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
I assume the reason they have it is because some users will be looking for that option, and they assume the user will see the warning. So instead of an image being uploaded with bogus licensing, it is marked as a problem. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:53, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 1945 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 good 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:00, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Actually, it's you who should have discussed your changes and first sought consensus since they were quite substantial. The civil war is not an integral part of Dahabshiil's history; only the fact that it benefited from a larger Somali diaspora is, and that was already mentioned as was much of what you added, only without peacock terms. Please refer to the manual of style for how to write in a neutral encyclopedic register. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 08:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have gone ahead and re-added the same material without bothering to first obtain consensus. This is not helpful and a clear violation of Wikipedia's bold-revert-discuss policy. You actually first need to discuss the changes you would like to make, try and obtain consensus for them, then add them only after they have been obtained. That is how Wikipedia works. I have therefore reverted your edit until we reach an agreement on what is admissible and not undue weight and what isn't. Kindly meet me on the article's talk page and let's discuss. Middayexpress (talk) 10:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The way we assess a WP:CONSENSUS is to look at the strength of arguments against policy. Our inclusion criteria requires multiple reliable secondary sources which the sources you provided did not match. So, although there were only 4 votes, the two delete votes were grounded in policy and your defence of the sourcing was refuted by the detailed exposition of the sources against policy by the AFD niminator. The remaining vote was a assertion by a very new editor and per arguments to avoid and giving much less weight to new users' votes the vote was thrown out. That left two editors who had carefully considered the sourcing and found it wanting and another who said that they were OK but their argument had been refuted by a detailed analysis. Accordingly the delete arguments were found to be grounded in policy and won the discussion over the keep arguments which were either weak, invalid or refuted. SpartazHumbug!18:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Abdirashid Duale picture nominated for speedy deletion
Thanks for uploading File:Abdirashid Duale.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 {{OTRS 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-enwikimedia.org.
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. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones (Talk)23:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Biggleswiki. I just noticed the new edits to the Dahabshiil article and your discussion with Bot3skfjs on his/her talk page. As no consensus has been agreed to yet for such a major change, I reverted the edits and left some remarks and proposals here. Your thoughts would be appreciated. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. I've left a brief note on Bot3skfjs's talk page. The user has asked both of us to stop posting on his userspace (which is, after all, his prerogative per WP:BLANKING). However, per WP:CONSENSUS, that doesn't mean a rough consensus still can't be formed. I've also had a chance to re-read your initial post and follow the links you supplied there. And indeed, according to the Washington Post [3], the allegations against the firm were later dropped from the U.S. government's summary of evidence. If these allegations are to be mentioned at all, then the passage at the very least needs to be completely re-structured to reflect this as well as the apparent release of both Barre and Arale. I've left some suggestions to this end on the article's talk page; see you there. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Biggleswiki. I've left a response on the article's talk page, with direct quotes in support. The user is basically repeating the same arguments as before i.e. s/he seems to have trouble differentiating between firms being actively complicit in terror financing and firms whose services are abused by people for such purposes despite company safeguards. I've directed him to the scam industry section of the Western Union article [4] as an instructive example of the difference between the two. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 22:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Biggleswiki. So I just got word back from the editor I said on the article's discussion page that I would be contacting. He broadly agrees with what we've indicated. Here's what he wrote: "I think you stated it clearly with regard to WP:BURDEN. I agree with you the sources don't exist to support what he is saying. But I also don't see that conversation is going anywhere". I believe we have a consensus at this point. Let me know what you think. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 17:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Biggleswiki. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Fibrecity Holdings, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Fibrecity. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Fibrecity a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Fibrecity Holdings. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please note, the same applies to the redirect you created from H2O Networks to H20 Networks. In the latter case, however, I have reverted your edits, because it seems very obvious from the logo and domain name, among other things, that the "O" is correct and should not be a "zero". --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:SCORE Sarawak.png
Thanks for uploading File:SCORE Sarawak.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 {{OTRS 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-enwikimedia.org.
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. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 21:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Wikipedia has a rule specifically precluding putting honorifics such as "Professor" in the article title. The article must stay at its present title; there is no real reason why the word Professor "must" be in the title. If he needs to be disambiguated from another Roger Kirby, then our naming conventions permit Roger Kirby (professor), but not "Professor Roger Kirby". Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 01:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Biggleswiki! 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
Thanks for uploading File:CanadianAffair 4c.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.canadianaffair.com/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 {{OTRS 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-enwikimedia.org.
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. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones (Talk)01:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Biggleswiki, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!
I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aspire Drinks whether the article Aspire Drinks should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.
The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Aspire Drinks, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.
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.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Aspire Drinks, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Bulwersator (talk) 17:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thresher & Glenny 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 good 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. Sandstein 16:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
A tag has been placed on File talk:FHemi Logo.png, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. KC9TV13:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File talk:FHemi Logo.png has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[6][7]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Wikipedia need to be compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike or another free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. Note, if you did create this file, you may want to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the image to be accessed by all Wikimedia Foundation projects (which include the various localized versions of Wikipedia)
If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:FHemi 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).
Thanks for uploading File:FHemi Logo.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created 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-enwikimedia.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 {{OTRS 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-enwikimedia.org.
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. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. KC9TV13:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
