User talk:Camptown/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Camptown/Archive 1, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Melchoir 22:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination for Alexander Korzhakov was successful

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Alexander Korzhakov, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 04:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:MarcusWallenberg1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MarcusWallenberg1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Licensing for Image:Birgit-Nilsson.jpg

Smithsonion may explicitly consider an image to be fair use if the following occurs:

The author and source of the content is clearly cited.
Any additional copyright information about the photograph from the Smithsonian Institution website is included.
None of the content is modified or altered.

Could you provide the first two from where on the smithsonion website you obtained the picture, Birgit-Nilsson.jpg, and put them on the description page? If not, the image will be deleted in no less than 7 days. Please remove the warning tag on the image page when you are finished providing the source information. Try to link to to a page that has the image, rather than directly to the image, so information is readily available about the image. Thank you. Kevin_b_er 05:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Tjorven.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tjorven.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 12:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 27 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hitler's Cross, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 28 August, 2006, a fact from the article Kullen Lighthouse, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Nice one! --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 19:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Håkan Syrén image

How is Image:Hakan Syren.jpg a "historical political poster, button, flier or banner"? While IANAL, I guess the image could be considered fair use in Håkan Syrén, at least if the resolution is lowered, but it should be tagged correctly, and it seems to me to be a photograph. (And yes, it needs to be fair use, as non-commercial licensing is not enough for Wikipedia.) -- Jao 19:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fredrik Reinfeldt

According to what I've herd in the media, his trem stars at 12:00 the 6:th of October. _→AzaToth 08:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture Hitler

You keep changing the picture on the Hitler article without explaining yourself on the talkpage ignoring the discussion there. Agathoclea 08:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I don't think either picture is particularly "good" but we have got not much freeuse images available to choose from. The issue was that this picture had been choosen after a fashion when the "prefered" image got deleted due to copyright issues. I will copy your comment to the Hitler talkpage and feel that the discussion (if needed) should continue there. Agathoclea 09:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yunus/Grameen Bank

Your paragraphing is unnecessary. ☆ CieloEstrellado 09:39, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PersonData templates

Why are you adding all these empty Wikipedia:Persondata templates? Do you intend to actually put in the data later? --Rajah 06:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I usually add the templates to new articles hoping more people will understand the need of this particular metadata. Cheers, Camptown 11:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's cool. If you'd like a list of some "important" people without Persondata added, here's one: User:Rajah/persondata. Please don't remove names from the list though until they have the data added and not just the template. Thanks. --Rajah 11:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that if you're going to put the template in you should fill in the data. Not doing so is ..... Rlevse 22:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll do my part. But since you are the Lead Coordinator of the Scouting WikiProject, maybe you could fill in the data for Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden? Cheers ;) Camptown 22:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly a valid comparison. If I put a template in an article, I fill it in. Rlevse 22:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've rethought my position, and I agree with Rlevse. I think that templates should only be added with the data filled in. --Rajah 06:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't my intention to cause you guys so much headache. And since Rajah rethought his position, most articles in this experiment now have metadata. I'll probably fix the rest myself in due course. Have a great day! :) Camptown 09:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you made progress filling in the data in all those templates you added? --Rajah 00:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 31 October, 2006, a fact from the article Pontus Hultén, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 16:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Core bios

Please do not list articles as Core biographies unless they actually are. It makes things confusing for the people working on that project. Thanks. Kaldari 00:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Swedbank-logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Swedbank-logo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 13:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

Did you know? was updated. On 8 December, 2006, a fact from the article Gustaf Tenggren, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Good catch, it made the lead for the latest update. --GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? was updated. On December 22, 2006, a fact from the article First Engineer Bridge, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Hello Camptown. Keep up the great work. Regards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rationale

It was empty when I looked at it. Anyway Bhai Gurdas was the fast scribe of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the holy book of Sikhism. Sikhism is a major world religion, and Bhai Gurdas a prominent figure in the early development of Sikhi and related matters. I also added noms which I thought would bring diversity to the mix. You do know from the december 8,7,6 noms, most are questionable length and are controversial noms.Baka man 02:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are perfectly right and of course the question is not about your article, but the fact that you immediately put the article you had started yourself on at the DYK-trial for the next update. A debate is currently dealing with that issue at DYK talk. Cheers and keep up your excellent work! -- Camptown 17:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Know

Just wanted to let ya know that I think you are doing a great job on the did you know next update section! Keep up the great work. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 23:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish Arms

Hi! I see that you have nominated the version of the Swedish Arms which I created for deletion. As I made and inserted the new arms into Wikipedia in good faith, the changes were not Vandalism but rather an attempt to be bold and improve these illustrations. Having SVG versions of coats of arms is advantageous because they render better in different sizes. A problem with the old versions of these coats of arms is that they look very bad in large sizes.

Another advantage of the SVG format is that changes to colours, proportions and details are very easy to make. As you obviously have an interest in this topic, perhaps therefore you would be willing to assist me in modifying the images to improve them by saying what should be changed? As they are quite large and complex, perhaps we could start with something simple like the Arms of Bernadotte which are an inescutcheon in the Swedish arms (and presumably less inaccurate as you did not nominated them for deletion) or even the three crowns which could then be worked back into the main shield. In this way we could create something which is more accurate and also assist the transition to SVG project. Best wishes, Arcjgh 12:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for your kind words! I'm sure that you did all this work in good faith and you surely did some hard work! The problem, however, is that all edits articles shall improve the articles. And I would actually regard this as a kind of vandalism (albeit in good faith!), a kind of vandalism that is not so easily detected by all editors of Wikipdia, and in the long run might jeopardize this project. If we actually have official versions of the Swedish National CoAs, only better illustrations (such as vectorized copies of the official version) can be accepted. I know that the Swedes accept some margin of appreciation when it comes to the national arms - thay are only briefly layed out in the legislation for example, and what the "Riksheraldiker" thinks are only soft guidelines - and your arms may very well be within this margin! Yet, people who go to Wikipedia to be informed most probably want prefer the offical versions rather than a home made version that in this case actually uses parts from a foreign (here: the Serbian) emblem. So let's make vectorized images of the official version (the present one is from around 2000) with the prescribed colors. That would be such a great improvment! I'll write to you later about this, best regards, Camptown 13:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this issue. There indeed seem to be some errors in the files (for instance 2 and 3 includes three bends sinister wavy not three bends sinsiter as now (actually I'm not entirely certain a bend sinister is said to be wavy in english, what I'm referring to is the equivalent of the french trois barres ondées). The supporters' tails don't look good either (bad image manipulation) and might include an error, there is a distinction between a split tail and a split tail passed in saltire (which is the case for the supporters in the svg). But these errors do not justify deletion, though the images should be corrected quickly. Likewise, the currently used png images seem to include other errors (the lions being crowned or... instead of gules).

I don't read or understand Swedish, so I cannot judge the images by their official blazoning, only by translations from various sources. In general, the text describing a coat of arms is binding, not the graphic representing it. That is to say, blazonning in a law would supersede any image that might be used, even officially. And it should be noted that even in official heraldry mistakes in graphical representations are pretty common.

Lastly if there is a problem it might be good to ask for advice at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Heraldry_and_vexillology on english wikipedia or fr:Projet:Blasons on french wikipedia (which plans to vectorise all its coats of arms).--Caranorn 18:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Birger Dahlerus

Hi there; I note that you have marked this article as Start Class. OK, no problem, but I am not sure that all that much more information is available. He came, and he went.--Anthony.bradbury 22:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, he came and he went.... Well, I'll guess the article will make it to the DYK anyway (that seems to depend more on how lazy our administrators are...) Do you think you can find a photo of the man? --Camptown 22:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links and sister projects

See Wikipedia:Guide to layout: "Links to Sister projects should be under the last appendix section." Normally, "external links" is the latest appendix, though it is sometimes absent. Personally, I believe that it makes far more sense to add them in this way (with an inline link) than to leave them in a "references" section (if only because these templates are rarely used otherwise). I also believes it generally looks better, at least while there are no other external links. Circeus 02:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination for Monument to Peter I (St Michael's Castle) was successful

Did you know? was updated. On December 23, 2006, a fact from the article Monument to Peter I (St Michael's Castle), which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 23:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answered your oppose on DYK

Hi! I've answered your oppose on För tapperhet i fält on the DYK suggestions page. I hope that I've answered your concerns regarding the article. God Jul! – Elisson • T • C • 13:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Camptown. I don't know if you remember that you were surprised that an administrator like me could use such condescending language that I used. Anyway, I am surprised that such a fine user as yourself can forget such a remark so quickly and use a snotty edit summary like "valor in the filed"[sic] - is this an ecological award?, correcting the hook. I am certain that you speak and write in English better than me, but judging by the search results for the expression "valor in the field", at least a few other native English speakers use the term in the same sense as I did. And I doubt that the following texts describe ecology.

[...]by 1872 they had formed one of the most celebrated fighting units in western American history, the Seminole Negro Indian Scouts. Scouts won four Congressional medals of honor for valor in the field[...][1]
And their valor in the field gave glorious proof how men will fight when they know that their all is at stake.[2]
He saw action during the campaign against France, where he earned decorations for valor in the field.[3]

Since a word for word translation of the actual name of the medal was possible, I used it. If that is a problem to you, then please tell me so. And if you feel that I've done something wrong, then please tell me so as well. – Elisson • T • C • 13:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do remember... and I'm still surprised... And Valor in the filed is absolutely OK with me! -- Camptown 14:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bryncelyn Brewery DYK

I've expanded the article a bit. Is there anything in particular that needs more treatment? --Stlemur 09:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

small = ?

yes → no - so, too minimalistic? :D Picaroon 22:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:Sweden lesser arms3.jpg, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 07:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Why did you remove the small image I posted on the DYK talk page? House of Scandal 17:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What image did I remove? When...? Camptown 17:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

If you don't know you did it, it was either an accident or I am reading the revision history wrong. No big deal. HNY. House of Scandal 17:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeltsin

Do you have a problem with the picture you reverted? I think it's a better picture of him. Crud3w4re 01:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted because of pending copyright concerns. Nice picture, though... Camptown 01:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

There are two intelligence agency facts on the next DYK update. Think maybe hold one for another day? House of Scandal 17:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Can we use the Ichikawa Danjūrō I picture instead of the Siege of Jasna Góra image? It's much more colorful and looks much better at a small size. Also, the Roscoe Mitchell "hook" fact is confusing...if you look here the dates don't match. I will try to figure it out so we can run that article too. Sound okay? House of Scandal 22:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the quotes from around the sentence. Also, in the interview sourced, he was in the Heidelberg Symphony of Germany. The Heidelberg Symphony Orchestra of Melbourne is the one that was established in 1978. -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 22:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was going to go and figure everything out. It was just the strange quotes that sent up a red flag for me. Roscoe Mitchell is back on DYK. I hope my attentiveness doesn't seem excessive. House of Scandal 22:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hearthstone House

The Hearthstone House picture looked much better than the rune stone does. Also, as much as I hold NishKid in high regard, let's PLEASE not have another article about a minor, basically undistinguished California or New Jersey politician. We have had many lately. House of Scandal 20:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For a wider audience, I think Runamo might be more interesting and fun than the Historic House. That's why I think it should have the picture slot. If you disagree, you may always change the order. When it comes to Californian politicians, I couldn't agree more. From now, I'd suggest to include politician bios only if the politician has at least accomplished something worth mentioning. Camptown 20:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the runestone article is more interesting, but the runestone image looks bad at that size. Re: California and NJ politicians, we've had Allan O. Hunter, Frederick R. Lehlbach, Henry Helstoski, Edward J. Patten, George N. Seger and Charles S. Joelson in the last week. I left a good-natured message for NishKid and think he will understand my concern. House of Scandal 20:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me, Runamo is pretty much how DYK used to be. How about increasing the size of the picture slightly? - The shape of the picture would probably allow a size up to 200x100px. Camptown 20:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let you tinker with it alone so we don't have an edit conflict. If you can get it big enough to look like something and still fit in the column, I have no objections at all. House of Scandal 20:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nikki Haley

This is the second time in as many days as Nikki Haley has been removed from the next udate DYK page. Haley is the first Indian American to hold state wide elected office in South Carolina and the first Republican Indian American State legislator in the country. What is the issue here? House of Scandal 00:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~The issue is your problem with my well-referenced and encyclopedic page going on mainpage~~Sorry Houes of Scandal, little mixup. Camptown I trust you know what a good DYK article is, considering you're a good NU editor.Baka man 01:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there was a big mix-up. There's nothing to it, it seems new update seems to be running along.Baka man 02:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 6 January, 2007, a fact from the article Vladimir Shainsky, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--savid @n 19:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stanisław Wojciech Wielgus

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

Feel free to re-submit a new version of the article. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page. --F. Cosoleto 17:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-sense? Removed text is '22:34, 5 January 2007' dated, New York Times' article 'January 5, 2007'. How to do you to explain that? New York Times copyviol? --F. Cosoleto 18:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe to you, sorry. Then you should accuse New York Times. --F. Cosoleto 18:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Letter to The New York Times

Due to the plagiarism concern at Stanisław Wojciech Wielgus, I am writing a letter (or rather have already written a letter) to The New York Times. However, I would like you to confirm (by e-mail) that you stand by your story that you never looked at the New York Times when adding the alleged copyrighted information to the article. I don't want to be sending the letter only to find out you were not telling the truth. I obviously trust you, given that I wrote the letter pending your response, but I just want to make sure. Regardless of whether you state that you told the truth or that you lied, I will not reveal your response to anyone (that's why it's by e-mail); I just want to know to save myself unnecessary trouble.

Please also include whether you're male or female (I don't want to use the wrong gender pronoun) as well as, optionally, a detailed account of your research for the article and sources. If you want to co-sign the letter, you are free to do so (I'll send you a copy of the letter at your request). However, if you decide to do that, please be advised that you may have to reveal your real name, as well as your address and phone number; most newspapers want that information to verify the author and the content of the letter. Most people would not be willing to reveal that personal information to someone they do not know (that someone being me), so instead of co-signing, perhaps you should consider writing a letter on your own (so I wouldn't see that personal info, but a New York Times editor would see it). Alternatively, I'll just send my letter with just my signature and personal information. I await your response, by e-mail. -- tariqabjotu 03:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Hassmyra Stone

If an entry is disputed, don't add it to the template until the problem is resolved. Or there wont be any meaningful nomination process, etc. Cheers, Camptown 15:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I grabbed that one because it had a picture and had no other options left for that day. I knew it wasn't awful...just a little skimpy. I should have gone forward a day to find a suitable one and will remember to do so in the future. Thanks for your good work on DYK. Shaundakulbara 23:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox church (building)

See Template_talk:Did_you_know#January_10. `'mikka 19:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

I'm not sure if you're aware, but I am asking him why he replaced a DYK with his own entry. I had originally placed an undisputed entry, but then Violetriga replaced it with his own expired one. Nishkid 64 23:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it needs actual references (not just external links). I mean, anyone could have added material in random places, but proper referencing would help show why people are saying certain things on the particular subject. Nishkid 64 00:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 23 January, 2007, a fact from the article 51 Birch Street, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani ^talk 18:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stub Categories

Hi, I noticed that you've tagged a number of articles recently with an uncategorised stub tag. It'd be helpful if you could try to use categorised stub tags where possible, such as {{election-stub}} - a full list can be found here. Thanks, Jeodesic 00:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Military.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Military.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

DYK Question

I'm wondering why you returned Walter Galenson in favor of Akhurian River which was mostly written on Jan 19 and I think it was commented what river hasn't said to have run red after a battle next to it? Please consider this a curious inquiry rather than an objection. Thanks. Shaundakulbara 11:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read some notes you left about Walter Galenson. Nevermind, thank! Shaundakulbara 11:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I'll make a point to examine the goods a little closer before approaching the register. Shaundakulbara 12:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Smolensk-city.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Smolensk-city.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]