User talk:Clercfan

Image copyright problem with Image:Laurent clerc 1869.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Laurent clerc 1869.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Amos Kendall3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Amos Kendall3.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

Your recent edit to Laurent Clerc (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding either test edits, vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! // VoABot II (talk) 07:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Laurent Clerc (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding either test edits, vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! // VoABot II (talk) 10:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Laurent Clerc

Your edits to this article appear to be extracts from a book, thus copyright violations. They also don't adhere to the manual of style. I have reverted them. — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 08:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information is good, valuble, and appreciated, but it should be written in your own words rather than copy pasted out of a book to ensure it's relevant. I also noted that some of it was in the first person, which isn't appropriate for our articles. By the way, I moved your message to the bottom of my talk page, if you want to reply. Cheers, — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 08:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not common in Wikipedia because we don't accept autobiographical material, see WP:AUTO. You are welcome to rewrite it in your own words and cite the autobiography as a source, see WP:CITE. And please reply to the comment at the bottom of my talk page, where your other comments are (use Ctrl + F to search for your username if you can't find them). — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 08:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you re-read Wikipedia:Autobiography, specifically ""The problem with autobiographies", before accusing me of jumping the gun etc. I also point out that if, indeed, we do allow autobiographies in some cases (and as far as I know we don't), you'll need a much stronger justification than "Others will want to read it, and it is proper to add it." I can't think of a proper justification, because to the best of my knowledge we just don't do this sort of thing. — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 08:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the section and see nothing directly justifying your edits. Please point me or quote something that does. Thanks, — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 09:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you refer to the paragraph starting with "Finally one should also make considerations of time and effort upon the Wikipedia community..." - I don't think your edits were completely neutral or verifiable. If you disagree, so be it, you can re-add them and see what others who review the article think, if you like. Otherwise, this discussion isn't really going anywhere...it's up to you. — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 09:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot, VoABot II (talk · contribs), is run by Voice of All (talk · contribs), not me - talk to him. — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 22:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 10:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Edward miner gallaudet 1893.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Edward miner gallaudet 1893.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Columbia institution for the deaf circa 1893.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Columbia institution for the deaf circa 1893.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:George veditz 1898.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:George veditz 1898.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Amos kendall by mathew brady.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Amos kendall by matthew brady.jpg. The copy called Image:Amos kendall by matthew brady.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Sophia Fowler Gallaudet

A tag has been placed on Sophia Fowler Gallaudet requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 06:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Edward miner gallaudet at his desk 1900 taken by student.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Edward miner gallaudet at his desk 1900 taken by student.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 06:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Radiant chains (talk) 06:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Leonard M. Elstad

A tag has been placed on Leonard M. Elstad requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. 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. Basket of Puppies 07:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unity for Gallaudet

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Unity for Gallaudet, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Gallaudet United Now Movement. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Gallaudet United Now Movement a different title by copying its content and pasting it into Unity for Gallaudet. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:W_lloyd_johns.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:W_lloyd_johns.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 02:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deaf culture

I would appreciate your comments at Talk:Deaf culture#Disability template. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 01:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Animals' use of sign language

I would appreciate comments from editors knowledgeable about sign language at Talk:Sign language#Animals' use of LANGUAGE, where an editor is trying to make an argument that animals such as apes, dogs, and horses use language. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 17:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Alan Hurwitz

You seem to be intent on classifying the presidency of the National Association of the Deaf (United States) as a "cultural office", however:

The article National Association of the Deaf (United States) clearly states that it is "a non-profit organization"--specifically a nonprofit advocacy organization, so {{s-npo}} absolutely applies.
A survey of Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:S-culture&limit=500 shows that its use is limited to positions in government-run (or at least government-funded) organizations that preserve or promote a particular nation's culture (e.g., like the Taiwanese Cultural Office), so {{s-culture}} seems wholly inappropriate.

This leaves the question: Can you cite a reliable source that states that the National Association of the Deaf is a "cultural institution" or that its presidency is a "cultural office"? Or is that a WP:SYNTHESIS that you WP:MADEUP?

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answer:

See:

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Succession_Box_Standardization/Guidelines#Cultural_offices_.28s-culture.29

Quoting that page:

Cultural offices (s-culture)

These are important positions in prestigious cultural institutions, including:

Chairmen and curators of major museums
Managers of famous theatres
Heads of important organisations, institutions, unions, and companies related to culture
- President of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences

Unquote

Clercfan (talk) 20:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You lost me—could you break that one down, please?

Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a chairman of a major museum."
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a curator of a major museum."
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a manager of a famous theater."
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a head of an important organization related to culture."
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a head of an important institution related to culture.
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a head of an important union related to culture."
Yes ___ No ___ "T. Alan Hurwitz was a head of an important company related to culture."

Thanks.

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's your interpretation that "culture" should only mean "the arts". Obviously, the NAD is an organization related to culture, in the broader sense. See the book: Culture : a critical review of concepts and definitions by A. L. Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn Clercfan (talk) 05:07, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It ain't obvious to me and it appears that you are not able to cite a reliable source that explicitly states that it is so (viz., that the National Association of the Deaf is a "cultural institution" or that its presidency is a "cultural office"). To quote WP:SYNTHESIS:

Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources. This would be a synthesis of published material to advance a new position, which is original research.

Congratulations, you've failed both WP:NOR and WP:V. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 15:14, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a controversial issue at all. It's enough to look on this webpage of the NAD:

http://www.nad.org/about-us

Quote:

Core Values

◦Language. We value the acquisition, usage, and preservation of American Sign Language.

◦Culture. We value the right of deaf and hard of hearing Americans to share similar beliefs, sense of belonging, and experiences as a signing community.

Unquote

It follows that the presidency is a cultural office. That's not a logical inference on my part. It's simply a fact borne out by the meanings of words. The "president" of an organization presides over the organization to accomplish the purposes of the organization.

Clercfan (talk) 07:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement	My response
"It follows that the presidency is a cultural office."	This is the inference. If you don't know what an inference is, look at the dictionary definition.
"That's not a logical inference on my part."	In the very next sentence following your admission that you're making an inference, you claim that you're not making an inference. Incredible.
"It's simply a fact borne out by the meanings of words."	The snippet that you offer from the "About Us" section of the organization's website does not explicitly state that they're a "cultural institution", nor does it state that their presidency is a "cultural office". It's almost as if you think that simply putting the word "culture" on one's website makes one's organization a "cultural institution". IBM claims it has a "culture of trust". Does that mean you're going to change {{S-bus}} to {{S-culture}} in the succession box in the article on Thomas J. Watson?

Finally, let me point out that you still can't seem to cite a reliable source that explicitly states that the National Association of the Deaf is a "cultural institution" or that its presidency is a "cultural office".

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a logical inference. It might be a judgment of some kind, as you point out, but this is besides the point. Wikipedia articles cannot be written without making some kind of judgments. All language use involves making judgments, since every instance of using language involves people interpreting what others are attempt to communicate to them. Also, which rule in Wikipedia mandates that an explicit reference to "cultural office" and "cultural institution" must be located in order to include such information in a Wikipedia article?

Clercfan (talk) 04:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More information needed about File:Edson Fessenden Gallaudet.jpg

Hello, Clercfan!

It was really helpful of you to you to upload File:Edson Fessenden Gallaudet.jpg. However, we need to properly format the image license information in order to keep and use new images.

If you can edit the description and add one of these templates, that would be great. If you're not sure how or would like some help, please ask us at the media copyright questions page and we'll be happy to assist you.

Thanks again! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 10:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edson Fessenden Gallaudet.jpg needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Edson Fessenden Gallaudet.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Clercfan}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Laurent Clerc

Wikisource has this autobiographical text about Laurent Clerc. It may be appropriate there but not really on Wikipedia because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. So I deleted that text from the Laurent Clerc page. That text could however be a good source for details that you could comb out of it and write into the Laurent Clerc page, encyclopedic detail if you find any in it, not the whole text. If you do, you could cite that text and link to the Wikisource page the text can be found on or this Google books page. Hope this helps. Cheers, --Rogerhc (talk) 06:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Laurent clerc 1869.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:Laurent clerc 1869.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:01, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Clercfan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Thomas hopkins gallaudet painted portrait.jpg

The file File:Thomas hopkins gallaudet painted portrait.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Sophia fowler gallaudet early 1850s.jpg

The file File:Sophia fowler gallaudet early 1850s.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Alice cogswell circa 1822.jpg

The file File:Alice cogswell circa 1822.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]