Jump to content

User talk:Random user 8384993

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


User talk:Random user 8384993

Home • Forum+ • Gallery • Technical


Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
Archive

Archives


Wikipedia e-mails
Archive 1   June '06 → Jan '07 (26 art.)
Archive 2   Feb '07 → Nov '07 (25 art.)
Archive 3   Nov '07 → Aug '08 (23 art.)
Archive 4   Aug '08 → Jul '09 (32 art.)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Tour Down Under
Saint Vincent
Java
Gitane
Team pursuit
Bandung
United States Bicycling Hall of Fame
Crans-Montana
Orpheus
GP Wolber
King of the Mountain
Alexandria, Romania
Saeco (cycling team)
Ans
Individual pursuit
Dunkirk
Chamois
Ndebele people (South Africa)
Altitude tent
Cleanup
Tom Boonen
Jan Ullrich
Cycling
Merge
Criterium
Variational principle
Computer Sciences Corporation
Add Sources
Felice Gimondi
Andrea Tafi (cyclist)
Grand Prix des Nations
Wikify
Bobby Layne
Bernardino Rivadavia
Mobile game
Expand
Roberto Heras
Team Gerolsteiner
Erythropoietin

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What else?

[edit]

So Pietersburg and Warmbaths are definate english names, but what about the rest of SA? Butterworth in the EC has been changed to Gcuwa (thats real life and wikipedia), does that need to change back? And this is also the case with Stanger in KZN (now KwaDukuza)? But there is a whole list! I am not for change Mafiking to Mafekeng, or chaning Phutnaditjaba back to Witsieshoek, but I am for some name changes. Other names are that have been renamed since 1994:

  • Ellisras
  • Potgietersrus
  • Nylstroom
  • Naboomspruit (hasn't been moved yet)
  • Messina

Should we change these too? --Bezuidenhout (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map

[edit]

Salut ! I wrote 90% of the article on francoprovençal language over the years, and originally created almost all of the images. (Some Wikipédians have recopied my maps and images, and now have their names on the files, but I don't really care ... I put them in public domain, but for the record, I made them first.) However, the point is, please do not put that map I made with francoprovençal place names with historical duchies and provinces back on the francoprovençal page. The article in in English, and maps should show place names used on English maps. (Wikipédia does not show maps of India in Hindi, nor does it show maps of Russia in Russian language on English Wikipédia, either.) -- If you like my francoprovençal place name map, put it in the Vouiquipèdia in the arpitan language. Note: I encourage you to write more articles for this encyclopedia as well. It needs your additions, since you are an expert. Bien amicalement, Charvex (talk) 08:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move

[edit]

Salut ! Thank you for your message. Regarding your proposed move of the Franco-Provençal language article, personally, I am strongly opposed to it. I do not know of any scholarly or serious books on linguistics or language history in English (or Italian, where most speakers live) that uses anything except « francoprovençal », « Franco-Provençal », or « Romand ». The only things I have seen in our French language with the neologism « arpitan » are published by passionate small groups, not by Stendhal University where most serious academic study is conducted on the language now in France. (I do not know what has been published at University of Neuchâtel. Perhaps you know?) -- When I first started working on the article, there were passionate speakers who thought the article should be called « Burgundian language » (in English). Horrible. This was a 1960s fad.

There also seems to be disagreement, even on Wikipédia, about whether the spelling of the neogoligism should be « arpitan » or « arpetan » ! (I notice that someone forced through the spelling with the « e » for the InterWiki links on the left side of all Wikipédia articles. -- A horrible decision. I have never seen this spelling used anywhere - even the so named « arpitan » blogs. Who makes these decisions?) --- If you can provide some good scholarly English language books with that use the name « arpitan » rather than « franco-provençal » (even Italian or French), PLEASE let me know about them. (I will order them at Amazon.com, of course.) -- So, no change for now. -- Thank you! Bien amicalement, Charvex (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

[edit]

Thank you for your well researched response! If I might reply: The book by Hervé Abalain (published by Gisserot) is a skinny little paperback book - very nice to become acquainted with subjects the first time. The one and only reference in it to « arpitan » reads: « Le francoprovençal est quelquefois appelé arpitan aujourd'hui » is not a strong endorsement of the name, you must agree. --- The book by Lodge published by Routeledge - a nice popular work for students - does not make any mention of the word « arpitan » at all via the Google search inside. --- The book by Kloss published by Université Laval in Québec is an excellent quality source. (Thanks! I had not seen this work.) I am certain that the sections about our francoprovençal language were written by Manuel Meune, who is originally from Ain. (You may know him. He and his mother Josine are the ones who translated the Lucky Luke and Tintin books into Bressan.) I believe Manuel is still a professor there now. The format of the book is similar to the one produced by Observatoire Linguistique in 2000 under the direction of Mr. Dalby, don't you think? --- The book « Geneva » published by ICON uses the term « Arpitans » with an « S » at the end. FYI: In response to your question: "now where did they get that from?": The word Harpitania (or Harpitanya) was the very first form of the name « arpitan » (or WikiLink spelling « arpetan »). It was originated by a group of political organizers and protesters (I have heard they followed Chairman Mao's Little Red Book for their principals) in the Valle-d'Aoste in Italy during the 1980s, rightfully seeking more recognition for our language. (I very briefly mentioned this in the Franco-Provençal language article under the section « Origin of the Name ».)

Again, thank you for your links to 2 of 4 books in English that use the name « Arpitan », and one that uses « Arpitans » with an « S ». It is nice to know they exist, but they are not convincing. There are 130 years of scholarly journals and books that use the term « Franco-Provençal ». I do not think we should throw-away the traditional name in English which has a such solid basis for the Wikipédia article title, for a term that has not reached any consensus to its orthography, is not used in scholarly journals (except the single one you identified), and was born in the 1980s. With my best regards to you, Charvex (talk) 22:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the changes you made to the Franco-Provençal language article. I must undo it. You did not, and cannot, identify one credible source that confirms your spelling of the name « arpetan » (period.) It has no basis in scholarly literature (period.) --- Also, more daily speakers call the language « valdôtain » (or « valdoten ») than anything else -- almost 70,000 in Val d'Outa. The other two names most common are simply dialetto, or francoprovenzale. Why do you ignore these speakers? Why do you ignore all facts in print? Charvex (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, look at this map, posted by it.Wikipédia by the « aliance culturèla arpitanna » (notice no "E" in the adjectival spelling at the bottom left), and look at the orthography of « arpitan » (with an I) in the red boxes! (This image was uploaded on 1 September 2009 !) Everyone is spelling this « nouveau » name the way she or he likes it. --- The only acceptable orthography for the name is found in reliable sources on languages and linguistics. Please leave the article and Wikipedia alone with your personal favorite spellings. Thank you. Charvex (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do not want to "own" the article. I want people to add to it with great information from reliables sources! Unsourced information will be reversed. Charvex (talk) 23:17, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BSicon CONT mess you made: either revert ot bot fix

[edit]

I see several people in the page warning your renaming has disrupted diagrams in non-en articles — have you noticed it? You must either revert your renamings or do them properly — by renaming exCONTl to exCONTr etc. in all articles of all language versions of Wikipedia. And quickly, because this is messed up for 3 months now. Tuvalkin (talk) 02:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talk#OK|Okay, I’ll be glad when it goes back to normal. Tuvalkin (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Champagne-Ardenne to Champagne-Ardennes

[edit]

Hello Christopher- I nominated your redirect for deletion. While we write "Ardennes" in English for the geographic region, and French does the same for the department name, the correct name for the region is "Champagne-Ardenne". See here: the article on the French Wikipedia. Eric talk 14:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC) Hi again Christopher- I started moving the page back to its original name, but had to ask an admin for help (see here). You might want to look at Wikipedia:Move, especially the second section, before you move another. Eric talk 15:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To me it seems logic that it's called "Champagne-Ardennes" since the forest is called the Ardennes exclusively in English. In the mean time I have asked them for their opinion and am waiting for a reply. ChrisDHDR 19:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Christopher- What seems logical to you and me doesn't necessarily enter into the decision-making process of the French government when they're naming their administrative regions. In any case, those are long-standing articles worked on by many editors over the years. To save yourself and others time and headache in the future, you may want to consult with your fellow editors before unilaterally inventing new titles for established articles. A suggestion: if you happen upon an article whose name you feel needs changing, look over its revision history and see who the major contributors are. Then contact them with your ideas so that you are bringing others into the decision on any big changes. Eric talk 13:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They've replied and the answer is no: it stays "Champagne-Ardenne". Oh well, just being bold. ChrisDHDR 17:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A bit Brittanic bold, if you ask me. Sorry, I couldn't resist an awful typography pun. Eric talk 19:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:32, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AWB on nl:

[edit]

Hi, I do not recollect not allowing you to use AWB... Please just reapply. Note though: as a bot without bot status on nl.wikipedia you are only allowed 1 edit every 60 seconds. Niels? en | nl 17:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a fade railmap icon for another use?

[edit]

Hello Chris. I was using some of the railline icons on Wikipedia for a project on Wookieepedia. They seem to work well with trade routes. Upon searching around, I found one you had designed and wondered if you had this going straight up-down instead of left-right. We could use it for the ends of routes that do not terminate at planets. Your help is greatly appreciated and you will receive credit for the new icon. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 (talk) 12:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SVG

[edit]

Hi Chris,

You may not remember me we had some fum with railway icons earlier in the year, and made WP:OWNFEET. I am wondering if you know anything about SVG format, or anyone who does.

My basic problem is this. I have traced maps of Hungary for the counties, which are NUTS-3 in the NUTS of Hungary, as vector graphics in SVG. I traced one for each segment of a border as a path, that is, for each line between triangular vertices where three counties join, so for example Pest County is made up of border sections with each of the counties it borders (Nograd, Budapest, etc).

This is at quite a good resolution for WP, i.e. about 8 to 10 times the resolution of any likely rendering device, but not of geographical quality.

I realised early on that there was a small problem because, er, a border has two sides, so how to name those two sides. I hit on naming them using a "winding" algorithm so that if the border would make up part of a polygon (e.g. county) if it were drawn clockwise, the name of the county comes first, the bordering county (or other element e.g. country) comes second. So I am tickety-boo for nomenclature.

Now, my intent was this. I can grab a load of borders and whack them together into a polygon, and ta-da I have a county that I can fill or title or whatever. I can take the borders a different way and whack them into, say, NUTS-2 categories, or indeed the whole country. All nicely in vector graphics. So far so good.

BUT, here is the crux, seems simple: I don't know how to combine paths into a polygon. I know I can do it by editing the XML and copy-paste, but that is not what I want. I want it to use the same data and then join it together. I appreciate that because some kinda go anticlockwise (cos they are clockwise in the bordering county) I have to reverse the order of lines. I know I can do this with a bit of script. I was hoping, though, that I could, within the SVG grammar, tell it to stick a pile of paths together and treat it as a polygon, where the endpoint of one path would join up with the startpoint of the next.

Any ideas? If you don't know, can you suggest who to turn to?

Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian NUTS map as SVG
As someone in Alice in Wonderland said, the simplest way to explain it is to do it. Si Trew (talk) 01:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly enough, The Kingdom of Hungary counties map is already in SVG. What the author seems to have done here is make the border segments, then ALSO make the polygons for the counties. So, if that is anything to go by, that's the way to do it. Unfortunately there are groups within groups within groups so it's not too clear right now by studying the XML how this was put together, though it seems to have been done in Inkscape. Either a clone or cut-and-paste job I suspect. My first task, after ungrouping, is to name the border segments sensibly so I can get a better idea of the document structure: I can put the groups back later if it makes sense, but it is hard to select the objects without ungrouping them. I'll let you know my progress.
I notice, aside, that the borders use curved paths whereas I used straight-line paths. To me the curved paths are a bit too curvy, as really except when borders are at natural features such as rivers, they tend to be defined by straight line paths between points. It probably also places a bit more strain on the rendering engine.
Kingdom of Hungary as SVG
It does seem a pity that one can't make a polygone (polyline) out of multiple paths, just specifying them in order and, ideally, being able to reverse the drawing order implicitly in the command e.g. that the polyline element could take by reference the paths as subelements, using <svg:path> either inline or referenced by ID to an element outside the polyline element, with e.g. a reverse= attribute to reverse the drawing direction. This would all seem pretty elementary stuff (pardon the pun) to me. It also seems a pity the text can't be associated with the object very directly, well I guess the groups kinda do that. The IDs here could get cumbersome, whereas for the NUTS diagram it will be quite concise as I will use the NUTS 3 codes (haven't done that yet) so the IDs of the paths will just be four-letter codes and for the polylines two-letter codes. I can't do that for Kingdom of Hungary as it predates the NUTS codes. I'll probably just use mnemonics. Especially for editors without Hungarian keyboards/layouts, it can be difficult otherwise for them to type the accents (I use a Hungarian keyboard so no problem for me.)
Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Budapest is the capital of Hungary
Budapest is the capital of Hungary
Budapest
Budapest (Kingdom of Hungary)
I've done quite a lot with the Kingdom of Hungary. I used a combination of Inkscape to find the items and text editing to change them. I've now got a four-colour map that you can use as a location map. Unfortunately the text labels are currently awful, but just to let you know what I've done in case it is useful to you (not this map of course, but in general):
  • I took the image into Inkscape and divined that the counties and the border segments are defined separately, i.e. essemtially duplicated. None had sensible IDs.
  • I selected each ID, saw where it came up on the map, and named it. For borders I named it for each side of the border, in no particular order. For counties I just named it for the county. External borders I prefixed with X (cos otherwise the ID would be the same as the county it is the border on). Some county borders are made of more than one path, probably erroneously, so I suffixed them with 2, 3, 4 etc in no particular order. I named the text in the same way, for the county, but for I named it T1Coun_ty, T2Coun_ty etc where the _ indicates the split and T1, T2 indicate which part of the text it includes ("Coun" and "ty" in this case). There's no county name with spaces in, so I didn't have to consider that.
  • In a text editor with some find-and-replace I then put them into separate layers.
  • I then removed all the colouring styles and specified it using CSS styles.
  • I printed a copy and coloured it in using coloured pencils to be a four-colour map. I just found this easier to do than e.g. use Inkscape to do it, just because Inkscape seems to love to select everything except the object you want to select.
  • I manually changed the styles of the counties to have class of one of the four styles. The suffixes of the styles are Y, R, G, K I think (as my pencils were yellow, red, green and black), but of course could be anything. Actually Lake Balaton has style water, so it is in practice a five-colour map, but it is not really cheating because it could be the purple/blue colour so in theory it's still a four-colour map.
  • I similarly set styles for internal and external borders. I deliberately changed these styles to be less-than-desirable so that it's easy to see the effects of changing the style, i.e. if anything had been missed.
  • I looked into how to create a location map (at {{Location map Kingdom of Hungary}}), it is quite easy one simply specifies the coordinates top bottom left and right. This assumes an equirectangular projection. I've not got the coordinates quite right yet for this map, e.g. Budapest is in the wrong place on the example at right, but it's not too too far off that some fiddling will sort it out — my difficulty is I don't have access to a decent atlas that shows the historic counties in large scale so I can take a measure directly, so I have to guess by nearby places.
  • Next job is to sort out the text.
It was not particularly difficult, but tedious, especially naming about 300 IDs. I omitted to say I did a kinda edit-debug cycle round each of these stages MANY MANY times, e.g. finding a few IDs misspelt or not renamed, duplicate borders and counties (probably previous cut-and-paste errors), and so on. The main problem (text awfulness aside) is that Inkscape understands the styles but loves to add stuff into each object when you change it, and not just individual style settings you may have changed but the entire possible set of style attributes, so you have to take it back out again if you want it to pick up any values from the style. There may be a setting to change this e.g. under Document Properties but I've not found it yet.
Well, it probably took me about 10 to 15 hours to do all that, so not too bad considering it is my first attempt. The text is the next battle, not so much because it is difficult to do but I haven't decided how I want it. I rather hate the way some things are crammed in and yet others are at bizarre angles when they need not be, etc. Trew's law of sesquipedalian cartography: The longer a place name is, the smaller will be the place on the map.
I am still somewhat peeved one has to duplicate the geodata for open and closed polygons, and can't just kind "transclude" existing paths into a longer path, but it seems the only way.
Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Random user 8384993. You have new messages at SimonTrew's talk page.
Message added 19:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

You are quite right in all respects about the SVG Si Trew (talk) 19:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Warmbaths logo.png

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Warmbaths logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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) 04:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hillsong TOC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. RL0919 (talk) 20:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch Prince Flag was not used at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet Boer Republics.

[edit]

The Orange White & Blue Dutch Prince Flag was not used at the short lived Boer Republics of Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet but rather the Red White & Blue horizontal tri colour flag. This is noted in the book: National Symbols of the Republic of South Africa by South African State Herald Frederick Brownell published in 1995. The Boers of those towns / republics specifically chose the red bar to symbolize their break with the Dutch East India Co. which was using the orange bar / Prince flag. Numerous later Boer Republic flags featured the Red White & Blue motif & the Orange White & Blue colours did not make a comeback until 1927 when those colours were adopted as the backdrop for the then new South African national flag. Ron7 (talk) 07:19, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your Dutch flag edit on the Boer Republics page.

[edit]

I did not know about your subpage as I noticed the flag edit from within the Boer Republics articles as it uses a Navbox at the end of the page in which the Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet horizontal red / white & blue flags were used while your edit placed the inaccurate orange / white & blue flag. The original book which noted this was: National and Provincial Symbols of the Republic of South Africa by former South African State Herald Frederick Brownell published in 1993. I am not sure about the later book I cited prior but got them confused in the previous post. Furthermore the use of the red white & blue flag at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet in 1795 was confirmed to me in an e-mail by an Afrikaans person who knows about the history of the region. I think the flag used at those early Boer Republics was probably derived from the Batavian Republic flag as 1795 was the first time the Netherlands [ then as the Batavian Republic governed in an alliance with France ] officially adopted a red / white & blue horizontal tri colour. The Boers chose the flag to symbolize their break with VOC rule & perhaps as a link to the nation which initially brought their ancestors out to the Cape a century & a half prior. Ron7 (talk) 07:26, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might be interested...

[edit]

I left a new request here, as I was very happy with the magpie map :) Not sure if you're around...Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merano

[edit]

The name of this article has been the subject of much discussion in the past (it's been generally agreed that it should be at Merano since that's the most familiar name to English speakers even though there's a slight German-speaking majority). I don't think it can just be moved by one person without new discussion.--Kotniski (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent an email to the city to see what official policy is. I'll post a copy online as soon as I get a reply. ChrisDHDR 16:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the official position is for Merano-Meran. Check out User talk:ChrisDHDR/e-mail#Official position on the name of Meran/Merano. ChrisDHDR 15:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Summation of elohim

[edit]

Hello ChrisDHDR. I am just letting you know that I deleted Summation of elohim, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SNCF

[edit]

After closing the TFD for SNCF, I was basically able to figure out a way to connect most of them through a navbox, but I wasn't sure what to do with the following

  1. Réseau Nord
  2. Réseau Montparnasse
  3. Réseau Saint-Lazare
  4. Réseau Est
  5. Réseau Gare de Lyon

None of these have a corresponding French article, so I am wondering why they have a page here, or if they should just be merged with other articles. In any event, if you think they should be connected by a navbox, it would be great if you could help out with that. Otherwise, I suppose I will just leave them disconnected. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Key press/Switch

[edit]

Template:Key press/Switch has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.--The Evil IP address (talk) 21:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About your Admin Coaching request

[edit]
User talk

Your submission at Admin Coaching has been removed from the request list, as requests where the submitter has not visited the page for at least 6 months (or been inactive for at least 4 months) are removed.

You are welcome to re-submit a request should you wish to, but please note that you are expected to regularly check the page (and to update the "last visited" field of your request) to show your continued interest in the project. If you do re-submit, please carefully re-read the instructions for submission as they may have changed since you last visited!

As noted on the project page, there is an on-going backlog with the project, as so few admins are currently coaching. This means that you may have a long wait for a response (if you receive one at all).

If you no longer require admin coaching, I hope that you continue to enjoy editing Wikipedia!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 06:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chrisbot - railway icons

[edit]

Hello. Is User:Chrisbot still working.? eg Template:York Junction, Leeds and Selby Railway, 1840, Template:Hull & Barnsley Railway, Template:Cawood, Wistow and Selby Light Railway need fixing?

It's due to a swap of File:BSicon_CONTl.svg and File:BSicon_CONTl.svg. I assume you can use a list based on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/File:BSicon_CONTl.svg ? and http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/File:BSicon_CONTr.svg

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains#Railway_icons for more details.Sf5xeplus (talk) 11:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012

[edit]

ICHTHUS

January 2012

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom

File permission problem with File:Barraux2.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Barraux2.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-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 in|article name}} 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. Kelly hi! 17:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Réseau Ferré de France.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.   JaJaWa |talk  21:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day

[edit]
Happy First Edit Day, Random user 8384993, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

Possibly unfree File:Demoisel.jpg

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Demoisel.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Kelly hi! 08:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Chapelle-Barraux.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Chapelle-Barraux.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 {{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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 13:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Floor plan, Fort Barraux (1999).jpg listed for deletion

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Floor plan, Fort Barraux (1999).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! 12:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SNCF.svg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SNCF.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Map of Fort Bartolomeo, Barraux (by Ercole Negro - 1597).jpg listed for discussion

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Map of Fort Bartolomeo, Barraux (by Ercole Negro - 1597).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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! 02:28, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your inactive bot(s)

[edit]

Hello Random user 8384993. We currently show that you are the operator on file for at least one bot account that appears to be inactive. Please see the discussion and list of bots here: Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#Inactive bots over 5 years. If you are no longer operating your bot, no action is required - your bot will be marked as retired and have the bot flag removed. Should your bot be retired and you wish to revive it in the future, please request bot authorization at WP:BRFA. If you are still in control of your bot (including knowing its hopefully strong password) and wish to maintain the bot flag, please sign the table on the linked discussion. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 14:40, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:SDT line

[edit]

Template:SDT line has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Grenoble-tram-future.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Grenoble-tram-future.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 {{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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Grenoble-tram-future2.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Grenoble-tram-future2.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 {{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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Grenoble-tram-future3.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Grenoble-tram-future3.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 {{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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Territorial evolution South Africa

[edit]

Template:Territorial evolution South Africa has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India)] Discussion on selection criteria

[edit]

Greetings, Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India) is proposed workshop funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, to equip users from the Indian community with the skills to illustrate using Inkscape and similar tools. This is basically the first of its kind workshop. So we've opened up an open discussion on Meta-Wiki about the selection criteria for participants. As you've a quite decent experience in this area, your opinion will be very helpful. Please given your comments at m:Talk:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018_India)#Ideal participation. The discussion will be open until the end of 25 May 2018. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo-perpignan.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo-perpignan.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) 17:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]