User talk:PAustin4thApril1980/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:PAustin4thApril1980. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Malcolm.fraser.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Malcolm.fraser.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. BetacommandBot 15:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Herald Sun
What difference does it matter what John Pilger saids about him on this page? If you want it, move the section to a different page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.180.74 (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:3kzilm.jpg
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:3kzilm.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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:Non-free content, 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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 10:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Double redirects
Can you refresh my memory on these and how to fix them. I haven't done a page move in a while. Cheers --maxrspct ping me 20:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Done, I think. Grateful if you can give it a sanity check. —Moondyne 00:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shelly print ad.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Shelly print ad.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Thames1989.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Thames1989.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. Mr Senseless (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Johnbgamblingwor.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Johnbgamblingwor.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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:Non-free content, 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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 01:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Finis Valorum
An editor has nominated Finis Valorum, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finis Valorum and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kzfm.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Kzfm.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Johnbgamblingwor.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Johnbgamblingwor.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. After Midnight 0001 02:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Lone Islands
An editor has nominated Lone Islands, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lone Islands and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Troughton2doctors.jpg
I have tagged Image:Troughton2doctors.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Violet-1971.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Violet-1971.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia e-mail
You wanted to talk to me? -- Denelson83 15:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Then meet me on IRC, irc.freenode.net. -- Denelson83 00:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
nettle
Who said she was an economic liberal? Not I. Timeshift (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- She along with the other Greens Senators are the left-most in either house. They are certainly economically and socially left. This doesn't necessarily make them socialists. All's good though. Timeshift (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Speaking of nationalisation! Timeshift (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Samantha Smith FAR
Samantha Smith has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. J Milburn (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi PMA. Thanks for your support and help in the recent work on Samantha Smith. I think this a great article. Lately, in looking for sources, I found 3 or 4 web pages that have referenced or literally copied older versions of the wikipedia article. Even SamanthaSmith.info sources wikipedia on the tributes page if you click on the asteriod link found on http://www.samanthasmith.info/testimonials.htm
Anyway, this all shows that this page is highly regarded, much to the credit of you and the other authors that have been working on it for the last few years.
Thanks for the link on the KGB rumor. It seems that there was a lot of negative sentiment in the US that Smith was just serving as a tool for Russian propoganda. I think this was briefly included in an early version of the article during FA nomination, but was ultimately removed because it lacked sourcing. The HistoryChannel.com has a page and video about Smith. They mention the negative US reaction to Smith in the page and go as far as to say Ronald Reagan didn't endorse Smith for this reason in the video. I'm trying to find a way to include this somewhere in the article as I think it's important and also balances the NPOV. I'm attempting to only include 'FA quality' sources like the NY times or Time magazine, so I'm not sure it would be a good include newgroups chats like the link that you sent, but I'll keep poking around and see if I can find sometime similar along those lines. I found the accusation that the CIA killed her in a NY Times clip which you discussed in /Talk page, so I think I'll tack that onto the death/funeral section, maybe as just a reference for the foul play without mentioning the CIA just yet.
Anyway, I'm very interested in your opinion on all the edits that I'm making and would definately be open to rolling back any changes that dont work or go to far. Please feel free to share your thoughts on the Smith/talk or my talk page. I wouldnt normally BB and make so many edits to an FA page, but I think this one needs some help to get through the FA review. After I'm done with the source searching, there may need to be a few more 'significant' reworks of some of the sections, particluarly the early life section' and it would really help to have your input. Also, just for you info, I'll be away from editing next week, but back the following week...
Thanks again. Dspark76 (talk) 11:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I definately believe you about the CIA/KGB theories. I think we need to be careful here because unsourced 'speculation' tends to get torn apart in FA reviews. However, If we can find a couple of really good sources, we shouldn't hesitate to add a line about this.
Also, one minor thing. The 'Early Years' section title has been kinda bothering me. I know having a section with this title is common on many biography pages, however, in this case it seems that since she was only 13 they were all early years. Still I can't think of a better title. Any ideas? Dspark76 (talk) 13:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Early years. The Anne Frank article has a similar "Early Life" section, so I guess this probably fine. Just a thought anyway... Dspark76 (talk) 14:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Re: Elementary School: I was thinking the same thing. Then again, I guess schools aren't built that often, so maybe there just havent been enough schools in the last ~20 years. Dspark76 (talk) 12:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi PMA, I've found your coversation about the Samantha Smith burial vs cremation on User_talk:Cmapm/Archive1. When checking for references, I've only come across: http://www.rj-wagner.com/85people.htm and http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=6161505. Could you fill me in on what's going on here? Thanks, Dspark76 (talk) 11:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Doctor Who fandom help
Hey, I noticed you contributed to the Doctor Who fandom article. I was wondering, because of that, if you might be willing to help edit the page on Fan History about the Doctor Who fandom? It is intended to be a bit more comprehensive and all encompassing. It could really use some one familiar with wiki editing and Doctor Who fandom knowledge to make it better. :) If you can help, it would very much be appreciated. --FanHistory (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter, March 2008
|
The Space-Time Telegraph |
| ||||
| The WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter | ||||||
| Issue 1 | March 2008 | |||||
For the Doctor Who project, Sceptre (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC) | ||||||
I wonder why you removed the flag icons today when you made this edit and this one previously. Seems inconsistent to me, so why remove them now, when they were ok to you before. ww2censor (talk) 15:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
please do not continue to abuse non-free content as you are doing at Samantha Smith, I would encourage you to read WP:NFCC and m:mission Fasach Nua (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is your opinion, one that is not shared by many, however the reality is that all Wikimedia projects are able to set their own non-free content policies within the scope of foundation principles. --Dragon695 (talk) 16:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Image:Bob.hawke.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bob.hawke.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. Damiens.rf 04:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
United Fruit Company
I saw that you added the NPOV and Undue tags to the United Fruit Company page. Please let folks know what you're concerned about on the talk page. Thanks. Notmyrealname (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sympathetic to your point, but you need to put a comment on the UFC talk page. Otherwise it could be seen as someone who thinks the page is too biased towards UFC critics. Notmyrealname (talk) 15:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
CHU
Done. You might want to edit some of the links to your userspace stuff, like at the top of this page. --Dweller (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Melanie and Ashley
An article that you have been involved in editing, Melanie and Ashley, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melanie and Ashley. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Schuym1 (talk) 19:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Eelogo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Eelogo.gif. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 12:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Granada ITV1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Granada ITV1.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Holtage.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Holtage.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tyne Tees ITV1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tyne Tees ITV1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Hi
Thanks for the clarification in the Jessica Jacobs article. Do you have a source handy that Sound of Music was in production in 1999, cause I haven't found one.
Thanks & Cheers, AmaltheaTalk 13:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- No, it's good, it mentions a successful audition in 1999, that's pretty explicit. I added it to the article. Thanks & Cheers, AmaltheaTalk 19:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Image:Douganthony.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Douganthony.png, 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. Damiens.rf 16:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Tennant-david.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Tennant-david.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. Damiens.rf 16:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:GrandDuchessTatianaformal.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:GrandDuchessTatianaformal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Damiens.rf 16:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Holtage.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Holtage.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. Damiens.rf 16:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Kebeaz.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kebeaz.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Damiens.rf 17:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Samantha Smith portrait.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Samantha Smith portrait.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. Damiens.rf 17:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Removing ifd tags from images
Hi, PabsP. Please, do not remove {{ifd}} tags from images as you did here. This is not the proper way to contest the image deletion.
If you oppose the nomination for deletion, read the instructions on the tag to know how to properly express your concerns. --Damiens.rf 20:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Mullauna Card.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mullauna Card.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. Damiens.rf 20:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how to use OTRS and I *did* get permission to use that portrait - i don't know why your singling out me. Paul Austin (talk) 00:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:PERMISSION#When_permission_is_confirmed for the relevant info. --Damiens.rf 12:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Damiens.rf
I certainly would. The stuff of his I've come across in the last couple of days is uh, interesting - with his continually screwing up due to not even having done the most basic of checks, going off half-cocked and insisting that it wasn't until confronted with the obvious, and then just trying to dismiss the latest screwup as a "mistake".
This guy is erratic and a mess - there's no way he should be going anywhere near these issues. Rebecca (talk) 22:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
October 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Samantha Smith. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Why remove details of birth and death without any reason or discussion? These details have been there since before it was on Featured Article Review. ww2censor (talk) 16:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ww2censor (talk) 18:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
There is no doubt that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia, but a question remains about whether she was Franziska Schanzkowska. Some commentators have noted that Schanzkowska had a different hair color, wore a different shoe size, was a different height, etc. Schanzkowska's brother also denied that Anderson was his sister. Hence the "possibly" instead of the "probably." I do not agree to changing it. Incidentally, what you are describing on the incident board is an editing dispute which would be better discussed on the talk page of the article. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Ejward.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ejward.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Damiens.rf 20:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Yorkshire ITV1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Yorkshire ITV1.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 12:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Friendly note regarding talk page messages
Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:Defender Of Justice, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors- from deleting messages from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 03:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
List of longest-serving soap opera actors
Thanks for your recent update to List of longest-serving soap opera actors. The text of the Eileen Fulton article seems to slightly conflict regarding her ATWT dates; assuming your info is correct, can you update the article? I would but I really know nothing about the dates/reasons for her coming and going. Thanks. — TAnthonyTalk 17:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Notability of Edda Göring
A tag has been placed on Edda Göring requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 06:16, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Fatcatcard.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Fatcatcard.JPG. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Notability of Simon Austin
Pabs, I see that you've stripped the unencyclopedic tag off your brother's page. Didn't find anything on the History or Talk pages saying why, so a question: "Is your brother REALLY NOTABLE or should his page be folded into the Frente page?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.214.194 (talk) 12:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Pabs, thanks for this reply as well: "My brother and the rest of Frente were famous here in Australia in the early '90s with hits like "Ordinary Angels" and "Accidentially Kelly Street" - just because he wasnt famous in America doesn't make it un noteable."
Still strikes me as un-notable, and a vanity page at that. I might look at submitting an AfD for it, as the subject doesn't seem to have done anything else which might be classed as notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.214.194 (talk) 13:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Constitution of Australia - POV language.
"(so, in practical effect, a non-Labor Senator)"
At the time of being appointed, Albert Field, was a member of the Labor Party. So in effect, a Labor Senator.
It's POV to suggest that "(so, in practical effect, a non-Labor Senator)".
So I've reverted your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.214.194 (talk) 12:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Pabs, thanks for your reply: "Field was anti-Whitlam government and he was expelled immediately from the ALP upon his appointment - that is in no way a "Labor Senator"."
I disagree. Member of the Labor party when he was appointed senator = Labor Senator. Your comment is POV, as you don't know his feelings on the Labor Party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.214.194 (talk) 13:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Talk
Sure, just edit my talk page. Is it about Natasha Richardson or Liam Neeson? Fences and windows (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Fathers of the House/Senate and Longest-serving Members etc
Thanks, Paul. Could you provide the Hansard ref that shows we have joint Fathers of the House? And does that also apply in the Senate? Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Sure, why not. On the talk page or skarebo @ freenode Skarebo (talk) 06:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Do you have any WP:RS evidence that Samantha lived in Amity, Maine? I already questioned the previous editor who added this but he has no evidence either. I have been unable to find any; all the source I see show her birth and later living in Manchester. ww2censor (talk) 14:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I was born in Houlton too but I didn't live there. I did, however, live in Amity in the 1970s when the Smiths lived there. You might try checking some local records or ask some folks from the area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarafire (talk • contribs) 10:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Why you undid my contribution to this article? The source listed says nothing about public opinion in CCCP. It says "The Soviet leader's letter, which was released by the Soviet news agency TASS last week, appeared to be part of a broader effort by the Kremlin to undercut the Reagan Administration's plans to launch an extensive research and development effort to produce new weapons aimed at destroying offensive warheads and enemy satellites in space." Thus Wikipedia entry is misleading. It was public opinion in US which contributed. Russia simply had already problems keeping up arms race, and this was a god opportunity to start talking about reducing nuclear arsenals. In fact public opinion as such never existed in communistic block before 1989. Such statements printed in press has been carefully crafted and never been published unless there was political will to do so. Public opinion has nothing to do with this. I know what i'm saying, i'm from Poland. Rekrutacja (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I received your e-mail. What do you want to talk about?--Britannicus (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
User pma
Do you know that there's a user going around signing his posts with "pma", even thought user:PMA seems to link to yourself? I'm not sure if you'd be happy about this, so I thought I'd let you know. ~~Dr Dec (Talk)~~ 22:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- This is what I would refer to as impolite and a mere creation of noise. What do you expect to achieve with the above post, and what do you think would be the consequences of this? Do you think that it would cause inconvenience to other editors, perhaps? --PST 11:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Kim Beazley (disambiguation)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Kim Beazley (disambiguation). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Beazley (disambiguation). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:25, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Chronology of Star Wars
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Chronology of Star Wars. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronology of Star Wars (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Paul1999.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Paul1999.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 20:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Name change
Your contradictory edits to WP:CHU are confusing.
Please make a new request there, bearing in mind the response to the one that's currently visible there. --Dweller (talk) 14:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, there! I am sorry to notify you that a bureaucrat has declined your request to change or take over a username. The reason for the decline of your request can be found at the appropriate requests page (depending on whether your requested to change your username or usurp someone else's). Please consider the advice provided by the clerk(s) or bureaucrat(s) that worked on your request before making another request. If you have any questions, please let me or the closing bureaucrat know. Thank you for your request, and thanks for using Wikipedia! —Mr. E. Sánchez (that's me!)What I Do / What I Say 01:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Please consider archiving
Hello. Just a reminder that your user talk page is rather large and users with slower or older machines (like myself) have trouble reading and loading your talk page. Not only that, but it gets rather difficult navigating through the more than 100 threads here. Instructions can be found at WP:ARCHIVE on how to do this. If your talk page is rather popular, you may want to consider asking an operator of an archiving bot (like the MisaBot line) to help you set up automatic archiving. Thanks. —Mr. E. Sánchez (that's me!)What I Do / What I Say 01:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Soap Opera Rapid Aging Syndrome
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Soap Opera Rapid Aging Syndrome. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soap Opera Rapid Aging Syndrome (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Davisonpeter.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Davisonpeter.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Service awards proposal
|
Hello, PAustin4thApril1980/Archive 5! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.
If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 01:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC) |
Service award update
 |
Hello, Paul Benjamin Austin! The requirements for the service awards have been updated, and you may no longer be eligible for the award you currently display. Don't worry! Since you have already earned your award, you are free to keep displaying it. However, you may also wish to update to the current system.
Sorry for any inconvenience. — the Man in Question (in question) 10:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion nomination of Hoyden About Town
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 Hoyden About Town requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. AlexHOUSE (talk) 23:03, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Still getting them
I received another of the "Can I talk to you?" e-mails today. Whoever was impersonating you a year ago still is. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 11:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Not only emails, but IRC, and journal sites as well. --Neskaya kanetsv? 21:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Jessica Jacobs.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Jessica Jacobs.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
