Port Hope Simpson Wild Bay and Port Hope Simpson Right to the Top

Please stop adding copies of blog pages to Wikipedia. These articles to not conform to Wikipedia's WP:OR policy. We would welcome your encyclopediac contributions. Regards, Accurizer 18:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have merged the above two at User:Llewelynpritchard/blog. I agree with Accurizer - they do not belong in the (Main) namespace. -- RHaworth 18:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, I have moved Port Hope Simpson Clues to User:Llewelynpritchard/clues. And moved Port Hope Simpson Two Unsolved Deaths to User:Llewelynpritchard/deaths. -- RHaworth 18:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Challenge

Port Hope Simpson challenge was in fact no better than the above - just longer! I have moved it to User:Llewelynpritchard. It does not belong in the (Main) namespace because it is: vanity, original research, etc. Despite the large number of edits you have made, there has been absolutely no attempt to create wikilinks from or to it. I suggest you are just using Wikipedia as a free host or webspace provider.

If you disagree with the above and feel that any of the articles that I have "userfied" has a permanent place here, then raise the matter at Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- RHaworth 18:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Please do not put "image-" at the start of image names - it is not needed. Please go through all your image uploads and:

any duplicate images should be marked {{db|duplicate of ...}}
all images should state their source precisely
supply honest license tags - {{PD-self}} is patently false for an image copied from a newspaper.

-- RHaworth 18:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded cropped versions of Image:Image-Sir John Hope Simpson much younger looking Commissioner photograph appeared in The Times p.16, 22.01.1934 of the 66 year old Commissioner of Natural Resources.jpg and Image:Image-John Osborn Williams, owner, Labrador development company limited, Port Hope Simpson.jpg but I cannot, in all conscience, leave {{PD-self}} tags in place. And sadly, I am not sure what tags to apply - even {{PD-old-50}} won't do for the John Hope Simpson image! I suggest you contact one of the people listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Members. -- RHaworth 07:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deletions, moving pages and merger context

Thank you for these comments. Firstly, I have tried to avoid copying my blog pages when I realized this was not permitted. Secondly, I would like to ask you whether or not Wikipedia's policy guidelines will permit my contributions to be merged wherever possible into the list of Newfoundland and Labrador communites? Thirdly, your editing practice, whilst undoubtably based on Wiki premises, is not at all helpful in the real world context of the small Labrador coastal communities. Sir Wilfred Thomas Grenfell a great legendary missionary worker along the coast many years ago, correctly forecast that the growth of tourism would be crucial in helping the communities to survive and prosper. Whilst I appreciate that Wikipedia and all that it stands for most probably cannot concern itself with such matters as net outward population migration, I would ask you to take the above context into your merciless editing practices so that Wikipedia is accurately and effectively responding to the real world. Llewelyn

Usual practise is to add new stuff to the end of a page. I have replied here. Please always log in before editing, especially one's own talk page. -- RHaworth 09:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No linkspam please. It is not even as though your blogs are interesting - they all start with masses of more linkspam. Please, just for a few articles, try and produce stubs without links to your blogs. -- RHaworth 10:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge

I find it mind boggling that you felt that Port Hope Simpson's history of development 1773-2002 was a better title than Port Hope Simpson, Newfoundland and Labrador. It is bad enough that you seem to think Wikilinks unneccessary, but to throw away links created by others is vandalism. Excessive use of boldening is almost as bad as writing in capitals. -- RHaworth 06:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

reply

re. title - mind boggles mistake believe it or not I would prefer Port Hope Simpson, Newfoundland and Labrador - would you be willing and able to change this for me? W-links - can't understand why you seem to think I am opposed to them unless you are on a wind up mission ! - I need a bit of time from my real world to a) learn about them and b) to see where I can include them c) when you are completely new to something and my age you need a bit more time than the youngsters; throwing away links by others - not something I would intend doing, please be specific so I may correct my mistake(s), excessive use of boldening - will change, no problem. I appreciate your help RHaworth. Do you have a first name and it can't be Rita or is it? All the best Llewelyn

User page

I have put a bio note at the top of your user page. It is contrary to Wiki etiquette to edit another user's page so you may delete/amend it and I will not object. But I think it is an helpful note which may help others understand your edits. I had missed the dates and thought you were much younger. -- RHaworth 17:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bio

Thank you for your help. Llewelyn

More on images

Please note that I have replaced your four uploads of The Times image with Image:John Hope Simpson 1934.jpg. Hints: short images names are easier! There is a tab at top right called "my contributions" - that will tell you what you have already uploaded!

Well done on wikilinks. Now you must address image tags. OK, you are older than I thought but were you even born in 1934? I thought not, therefore you could not have taken Image:Image- The late Mr. Eric Williams was with the first landing party.jpg. Therefore you cannot apply a {{PD-self}} tag to it.

Also what is {{NowCommons|pagename}} supposed to mean? The Commons is a separate depository for images. I don't think you have uploaded anything there have you? In any case, if you use {{nowcommons}}, you replace pagename with the name you have used on the commons. (Given the PD-self problems, I suggest you steer well clear of the Commons - who are fussier about licensing than Wikipedia - except for images that you have genuinely taken yourself.)

Sorry if I seem to keep "going on" but having spotted blatantly false PD-self tags, I cannot just leave them can I? Please note, I am being gentle with you, someone else has taken the harsher course and put a PUI tag on Image:Image-Olga Marie Wiseman (Williams) nee D'Anitoff b. 1915 d.08.11.04.JPG. -- RHaworth 19:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tags

Next job of correction starts again today. I want to get this right. Question: When somebody has given you a picture without any restictions regarding its use, or when it is already available in the public domain, doesn't that mean all copyright rights have been released and you are free to publish it yourself? Llewelyn

Please use ~~~~ to sign - it generates a time stamp as well.

Yes. Providing the person who gave you the image does have the rights, then of course you may publish it. But you may not use a {{PD-self}} tag because it states I, the creator of this work which in the case of most of your uploads is patently false. Also you must state the source carefully in the image description - putting it in the edit summary, as with Image:Image-Arthur Eric Williams, 21 years, Port Hope Simpson.jpg is not quite enough.

Wikipedia:Image copyright tags is a pretty daunting article but needs to be read. For images people have given you, try {{PD-release}}.

You may like to ask user:Hetar for advice on image tags - they are hot on copyright as well.

To some extent, I know I am nit-picking - the picture librarian of The Times is unlikely to chase us about image:John Hope Simpson 1934.jpg but we need to be seen to be doing things properly. (And remember to remove {{NowCommons|pagename}} !) I have placed a lsit of your images at User:Llewelynpritchard/uploads. -- RHaworth 06:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re copyright tags

Most of the photos I haven't taken myself are from the Labrador development company limited brochure or from personal photos kindly given to me as a gift by john illsely surviving grandson of the owner. When he gave them to me, after I had asked him, he did say that i could use them as I saw fit. I am endeavouring to follow your good advice to the letter.I am using {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} the creative commons share alike license because it seems the most helpful and best of purpose. LlewelynLlewelynpritchard 14:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. The ones I have looked at so far seem perfect. I was going to say that Image:The Inscription on the grave of J.O. and Ethel Kate Williams,.jpg only needs {{PD-self}} cos you took it. But, considering that a tombstone could be considered a two-dimensional work of art (see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.), then it is probably a good idea to include the other tag as well! -- RHaworth 20:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to be continued tomorrow

Thanks. Am I right to assume that those unecessary duplicate images from which I have removed all tags will be automatically deleted?Llewelynpritchard 21:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No! Such duplicates as have been deleted have been meticulously done by me. Mark your duplicates {{db|duplicate of [[image:pagename]]}} where pagename is replaced by the image name. Then they will disappear fairly quickly. -- RHaworth 21:23, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

images marked for speedy deletion - done

I apologize for all this extra work..Llewelynpritchard 13:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I'm baffled by your speedy deletion tags at Image:1 John Hope Simpson 66 years Port Hope Simpson naming ceremo.jpg and Image:Arthur Eric Williams, 21 years, Port Hope Simpson.jpg. You tagged them as duplicates of nonexistant images bearing the same name without the .jpg suffix. I've removed the speedy tags and reverted to the previous version until we can clear this up. What articles did you want to use these images in? Do you want them deleted, and if so, why? Angr (t • c) 13:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to tidy up list of images/ to work on more wikiencyclopedic content to complete my contribution for Port Hope Simpson, Newfoundland and Labrador site

re. 1. Image:1 John Hope Simpson 66 years Port Hope Simpson naming ceremo.jpg and Image:Arthur Eric Williams, 21 years, Port Hope Simpson.jpg. You tagged them as duplicates of nonexistant images bearing the same name without the .jpg suffix. - oh hells bells, that's my mistake after getting back from work - glad you spotted it - thanks 2. What articles did you want to use these images in? - Port Hope Simpson, Newfoundland and Labrador. I am assuming that I only need to keep one copy of each image for successful linkage with my various articles. Is that correct? (that's why I wanted what I thought were unecessary duplicates deleted). / I need to about double the length of my Port Hope Simpson, Newfoundland and Labrador contribution - will that be too much?Llewelynpritchard 15:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Length isn't usually a problem, but there is a problem that your contributions don't read like an encyclopedia entry. If you haven't already, please read Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view policy. Passages like Williams was only really interested in making as much money as quickly as possible. He was a deceitful, unreliable and untrustworthy businessman are simply not written from a neutral point of view. Also, please read about citing sources and what qualifies as reliable sources. The fact that you yourself seem to be the author of some of these books cited in the "Sources" section may raise eyebrows; also, without full bibliographical information it's impossible for other people to verify the information. (Try using Template:Cite book for the books in the "Sources" section; see Template talk:Cite book for instructions on how to use it.) Verifiability is established policy at Wikipedia, and it has a consequence that rubs a lot of newcomers the wrong way at first: Just because you know something to be true doesn't mean you can put it up at Wikipedia. You must provide a way for other people to verify the truthfulness of your statements.

Okay, now back to the images. Indeed, you don't need multiple copies of the same image floating around. Unwanted duplicates should be tagged {{redundant image|Whatever.jpg}} where "Whatever.jpg" is the name of the image you're keeping. Also, when you're uploading images, try to keep their names brief. I mean, is there any particular reason Image:1 John Hope Simpson 66 years Port Hope Simpson naming ceremo.jpg couldn't have been named Image:John Hope Simpson.jpg? Don't bother changing the names of existing images now, though, I just mean when you upload images in the future, try to keep their names brief. Angr (t • c) 16:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging images as duplicates

Please include the file extensions in your rationale as the red links are confusing. Royboy crashfan 18:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

enable readers to judge the reliability of the evidence and to enable them to verify it to at least the same extent as you did

[1] Tombstone a history of development meets the above with its comprehensive list of verifiable sources and established facts which caused the R.C.M.P. opened up their own investigation into what had been going on in Port Hope Simpson.

The apallingly low quality, in terms of layout, etc. of Llewelyn's Tombstone page puts me off reading it. -- RHaworth 19:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Tombstone-- I can no longer access its server because I had to change ISP provider. Nevertheless you will have has much evidence as the RCMP had to make your own judgements.llewelyn

Orphaned non-free image (Image:J._O._Williams_and_A._E._Williams.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:J._O._Williams_and_A._E._Williams.JPG. 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The_Inscription_on_the_grave_of_J.O._and_Ethel_Kate_Williams,.jpg

I have tagged Image:The_Inscription_on_the_grave_of_J.O._and_Ethel_Kate_Williams,.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 18:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Image-John Osborn Williams, owner, Labrador development company limited, Port Hope Simpson.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Image-John Osborn Williams, owner, Labrador development company limited, Port Hope Simpson.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell ^babelfish 06:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Image-Sir JHS outside Buckingham palace after receiving knighthood.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Image-Sir JHS outside Buckingham palace after receiving knighthood.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will 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. Shell ^babelfish 06:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:John Hope Simpson 1934.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:John Hope Simpson 1934.jpg. 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. Shell ^babelfish 05:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LABRADOR_HOUSE_55_MAIN_STREET_OGMORE_-_BY_-_SEA_BRIDGEND_WAL.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:LABRADOR_HOUSE_55_MAIN_STREET_OGMORE_-_BY_-_SEA_BRIDGEND_WAL.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Indian Ocean Islands:

A tag has been placed on Indian Ocean Islands:, 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 as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Computerjoe 's talk 14:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Acroterion _(talk) 14:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. Acroterion _(talk) 14:34, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed everything that I can think of might be viewed as advertising. If there is anything else I need to do please let me know. Thanks.Llewelynpritchard (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mauritius

I have moved Tourism in Mauritius: to Tourism in Mauritius and buried it in the history. There is absolutely no justification for two articles on this subject. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So where do I look to dig it up because I have been to history and there is no sign of it? The knowledge in the article needs to be accessible to all and I would like submit it to another category. Do you have a suggestion along those lines ?Llewelynpritchard (talk) 17:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you think the history is. Is this your article? You could also have found it via "my contributions". Anything useful in it should be added to Tourism in Mauritius. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:20, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Free Independent Travellers

Without any forthcoming suggestion I have contributed to this page by using Mauritius as an example of a country that is not focussed enough, if at all, in its tourism development policy towards the FITS to the detriment of people working in and for the self catering accommodation sector on the island. I hope this is not construed as advertising for personal gain because that is not my intention at all. I have only recently come back to Wikipedia and I am rusty regarding what it is all about.Llewelynpritchard (talk) 12:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anitas Affordable Apartments

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Anitas Affordable Apartments, 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, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/E Books or Paperbacks Borrow or Buy? concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/E Books or Paperbacks Borrow or Buy?, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VSO Labrador Clues concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VSO Labrador Clues, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 10:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Port Hope Simpson Diaries, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Diaries and Personal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Port Hope Simpson Airport Terminal l to r Muriel Margaret Burden Llewelyn Pritchard and Airport Gopher 2002.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Port Hope Simpson Airport Terminal l to r Muriel Margaret Burden Llewelyn Pritchard and Airport Gopher 2002.jpg, which you've attributed to http://www.amazon.co.uk/Port-Simpson-Beaten-Mysteries-ebook/dp/B0063R9T0G/ref=tmm_kin_title_0/278-7607811-7473026. 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 {{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-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. 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. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 14:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Port Hope Simpson Diaries for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Port Hope Simpson Diaries is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jevansen (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking discussions

Hello. I've reverted your blanking of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Port Hope Simpson Diaries. These discusssion should not be modified after closure. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 18:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Air Labrador passengers disembarking Port Hope Simpson Regional Airport 20 July 2002.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Air Labrador passengers disembarking Port Hope Simpson Regional Airport 20 July 2002.jpg, which you've attributed to Copied from Amazon or from inside the book shown there. 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 {{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-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. 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. Diannaa (talk) 18:56, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission E Books or Paperbacks Borrow or Buy?

Hello Llewelynpritchard. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled E Books or Paperbacks Borrow or Buy?.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/E Books or Paperbacks Borrow or Buy?}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission VSO Labrador Clues

Hello Llewelynpritchard. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled VSO Labrador Clues.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VSO Labrador Clues}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. —Darkwind (talk) 16:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Llewelynpritchard/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 (talk) 03:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Llewelynpritchard, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 (talk) 03:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Non-dropframe was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Llewelynpritchard/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

--Non-Dropframe _talk 15:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Osborn Williams

I have reverted your edits to John Osborn Williams because they created too many links to disambiguation pages. Please try again, but without linking to disambiguation pages. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Image-KEITH YOUNGE (YONGE,YOUNG) Company manager Port Hope Simpson naming ceremony.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Image-KEITH YOUNGE (YONGE,YOUNG) Company manager Port Hope Simpson naming ceremony.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 13:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Llewelynpritchard/sandbox

Hello, Llewelynpritchard. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:John Osborn Williams facing camera and Arthur Eric Williams.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:John Osborn Williams facing camera and Arthur Eric Williams.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Ernie Pritchard having a brew-up in the woods, Port Hope Simpson 1969.jpg

The file File:Ernie Pritchard having a brew-up in the woods, Port Hope Simpson 1969.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Small image without EXIF data, previously published elsewhere, no evidence of a free license.

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yann (talk) 17:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Image-Port hope simpson come home 2002 image.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Image-Port hope simpson come home 2002 image.jpg. 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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:30, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]