User talk:Covalent

Welcome!

Hello, Covalent, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Tone 15:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

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

Air pollution

Nice work on air pollution related issues :-). Wikipedia still needs a lot of work in this regard. Please consider improving emission standards, which is in need of more attention. Jens Nielsen 09:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Noise mitigation

A few tips on linking:

Wikipedia headers are generally kept devoid of links. It shouldn't be difficult to rework these sections in order to move the link within the first line.
"See also" links are specifically articles that were not previously linked in the article.

Hoping to see more great articles from you. Circeus 16:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not refer to my edits as vandalism. I find it offensive. All my edits are made in good faith. If you have a problem with them, please discuss on article talk or my talk. Thanks!--Light current 21:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!

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

Thanks for a great article! ++Lar: t/c 21:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment about Red bellied Lemur

has been replied to on my talk page, as is my wont, I like to keep conversations together. Please comment further there if necessary, and I will reply there. I won't notify you here again. ++Lar: t/c 14:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shifting cultivation is incorrectly identified as bush fallowing

Note you edited that Shifting cultivation is incorrectly identified as bush fallowing or Slash and burn. Could you clarify your point, please? Specifically:

Is shifting cultivation broader than slash and burn so use of slash and burn is a subset of the larger shifting cultivation discussion?
Or is something fundamentally wrong with the term slash and burn. If so, what?

Thanks - Williamborg 03:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

as to your first question, first of all i am open to a better statement of that key sentence. i was merely doing my best to correct a bad sentence that existed. shifting cultivation, i believe, is a broader term than slash and burn. i think we need several different authors to piece this whole thing together, because i believe shifting cultivation properly embraces many centuries of somewhat differing practices (including conversion of temperate forest land into sustainable grazing land and in some cases proper crop rotation), whereas slash and burn generally refers to the tropics and subtropics in present day subsistent farming. in short i think slash and burn is a small subset (in time and location) of slash and burn.

your second question seems easier. there is nothing at all wrong with the term "slash and burn". it is descriptive, specific and the very people that practice it use the term unabashedly. best regards Covalent 04:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments make sense. I think slash and burn is also an accepted term for some practices in northern climes (Russia, Finland, Sweden & part of Norway use (the term Svedjebruk (no:Svedjebruk))). Now we need just someone to restructure these articles; unfortunately not an area I’m knowledgeable enough to take a shot at… Williamborg 04:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shifting cultivation

i didnt create this article, but am trying to improve it in small ways. i wikified intro. will get back to other parts later in the summer. by the way with your knowledge, i hope you will assist with ethanol fuel, an important article that needs some help. best regards Covalent 12:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that ethanol fuel is an important topic. Thanks for pointing me to it! I'd be happy to see if I can help. Waitak 14:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say that I think you're doing a good job of keeping a level head with the discussion of merging Slash and burn and Shifting cultivation. Illigitimi non carborundum and all that... :-) (not that anybody involved is an illigitim... um.. whatever the singular of illigitimi is...) Waitak 05:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(smile)Covalent 05:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreeing without being disagreeable

I failed at that. I still disagree with you, but I need to apologise for being disagreeable while disagreeing. Guettarda 16:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i failed too. ill try to make a fresh start and perhaps together we can improve this subject matter under discussion at slash and burn and shifting cultivation Covalent 18:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And I agree, any cat person has got to be a good person ;) Guettarda 16:36, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diatom

Hi there. Thanks for adding that bit about the use of diatoms in sedimentary records - that was a bit of an omission. I'm not quite sure your text is entirely correct however. It may depend on the analysis technique, but I thought that the inorganic (silicic acid) component of deposited diatoms was the more useful part (which isn't to say that the organic part's not useful). It's not something I'm au fait with (I'm more interested in their surface ecology), so please correct me if I'm wrong. Cheers, --Plumbago 08:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i have amended the text to take into account your correct assertion that the inorganic material is the important part for biota records, cheers Covalent 12:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On June 2, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Black-necked Stilt, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 11:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And another DYK

On June 4, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bay mud, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Rockage, another good one... ++Lar: t/c 22:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On June 7, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cui-ui, which you converted to complete article status. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Cui-ui ref

I fail to see anything not working with the references. If you happen to refer to the fact the first ref of the intro has the number "2" insteadof "1", that is because there is another reference before it in the source: in the taxobox template, for the IUCN status. Circeus 23:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On June 15, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Blue Wildebeest, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 11:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image attributions in articles

Howdy! Per your comment on my talk page, the relevant policy is located at Wikipedia:Image use policy (Rule of thumb N^o 2 and 3). It's generally believed that it is sufficient to fulfil the conditions of use (in this case attribution) on a page clearly and directly linked from the inclusion of the image. The main motivation for this policy was probably the use of GFDL images. If the license was followed to the letter, every article using an image would have to include the full text of the license with it. This is the primary reason that images on the Main Page link to the image description pages rather than the relevant article (which many, many people have requested on Talk:Main Page in the past. If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Happy editing! GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 22:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bay Mud

Bay Mud is called Boston Blue Clay and London Blue Clay in those areas. My understanding is that the properties are basically the same as SF Bay Mud, but there may be different approaches to dealing with it in those cities. Argyriou 00:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

do you have a citation for these terms? Covalent 02:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CZCS

I could try digging up some of the info you suggest adding, at some point, but just so you know it's not really my field. My connection to CZCS was really only with the data archiving folks. Thanks for the feedback, nonetheless. --Davepape 05:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On July 5, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charles Neaves, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--BRIAN0918 04:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dyk

On 24 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fowlsheugh, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Blnguyen | rant-line 00:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Black-winged Stilt

You appear to have had a major input to this stilt article, so I wondered if you could clarify. My book gives the southern breeding limit of Black-necked Stilt as southern Chile, S Argentina and the West Indies. Is there a split I don't know about, or is the range just wrong? If the latter, the "where to see bit becomes very parochial". I'll put this on the talk page for the article too. jimfbleak 06:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, my stupidity, I meant Black-necked. I've sorted it out now as far as I can, but it looks unbalanced still. jimfbleak 14:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 28 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Haraldskaer Woman, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Highly interesting read. Almost forgot about updating DYK while reading this :P Thanks! --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 19:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haraldskaer Woman

Since Wikitravel is not a Wikimedia project, I've answered you question over at Wikitravel on your user talk page. Cheers! -- Cjensen 05:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 22 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boston Transportation Planning Review, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Featured list candidate

I thought you'd like to know that List of United States federal legislation has been nominated to be a Featured List. It needs 4 votes by October 2 2006.

As I have labored hard on the article, I would appreciate your looking it over. You can find a discussion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States federal legislation.

Thank you!

—Markles 23:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have supported this list becoming a featured list Covalent 17:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On October 19, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tamworth Pig, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason why there is a Tamworth pig and Tamworth Pigs page?--Moonlight Mile 11:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No reason for separate articles. I will merge pigs into pig Covalent 15:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Wildabeest et al.

Thanks for your reply. I didn't want to go and screw up a properly named page. --tjstrf Now on editor review! 21:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mandø (Island)

Greetings Covalent

It is great that you've begun writing about a one of my country's relatively unknown islands, thumbs up for that. The ecology is interesting, and many Danes probably can't even locate it on a map. Unfortunately, Mandø already has an article (see: Mandø), and I believe that the shorter name is better than Mandø Island since the Danish ending "-ø" in itself means "island". Using the short form would also make this article correspond more closely to other similar material. Could I possibly persuade you to integrate the two articles? Btw, the island's name can traditionally be spelled with or without the "D". I haven't got a dictionary at handbut the Danish Wikipedia sticks very closely to the standard dictonary and it uses the spelling "Mandø" and so does the Great Danish Encyclopedia. The Danish Wikipedia has a few additional images you might find interesing, see: da:Mandø. I might be able to find a little history about the island if you are interested. Regards and happy editing. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 19:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in the new article Mandø Island. Yes i think the two articles should be integrated and i shall be glad to carry that out. ( I hadnt noticed the other article til you mentioned it to me. I would welcome some history information you might have. I am working on an ecology section and uploading some images of Mandø Island. Regarding the name, i prefer Mandø Island, mainly because i think it is a more descriptive title for the English Wikipedia. by the way i am planning a series of articles on Denmark's history and geography. Covalent 21:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such a series sounds very interesting. May I ask which topics you plan to include? I just read the article again and I've removed the entry about the "bus" to Rømø further south. Fanø to the north is linked to Esbjerg on the mainland by a ferry and Mandø uses the so-called Mandøbus. However the more populous Rømø to the south is linked to the mainland by a causeway with an asphalt road. Since use of this road is free of charge and the waters between Rømø and Manø are rather deep, I strongly doubt the existance of a second "bus". Furthermore, the three islands are very often referred to in connection with the three different means of transport. I've tried searching a bit on the Danish part of the web and I can't find any reference to a "colleague" to the Mandø bus. The only colleague people mention is Sandormen in Skagen connecting Skagen with the nothermost point in Jutland where the North Sea / Skagerrak meets the Baltic Sea and Kattegat. I visited Rømø and the West Coast some years ago, and I remember the guide books mentioning the uniqueness of the Mandø Bus. However the public bus service Sydbus operates a bus line over the causeway[1], so I think this must be the reason for this misunderstanding. The bus service to Rømø is hardly used at all.

The naming of the article might seem a trivial point, but the double "island" reference keeps nagging me. I checked Category:Islands of Denmark and no other entries use "Island" as part of the article name. The only three oddly named entries are Fur, Anholt and Mors which is quite understandible since these names all have multiple meanings. The same standard seems to be followed for the material on Sweden, Norway, Germany and the Netherlands. The articles about Danish towns are very similarly named so you would do me a great favour by letting this article follow the same convention as well. Google is very far from perfect, but it gives a very low number of entries for "Mandø Island" but considerably more for plain "Mandø". In Danish "Ø" simply means "island" so both for this reason and due to the practice used elsewhere, you would make my day by letting this article be named consistently with the other material. It would also decrease the risk of getting a new duplicate article.

While digging for more information about the island, I found a little information on the meaning of the name. It seems that the origin of is word is somewhat uncertain but it is known from the 13th century. Nudansk Ordbog (The New Danish Dictionary, Politiken, 1992) interprets the name as derived from ancient Danish: Mann which would normally mean a "man". In this particular context the name is interpreted as having a rather rare meaning referring to a burial site for shipwrecked people. Some of the waters of the West Coast are tricky to this day so it seems quite possible that ships were lost here. A few islands in Sweden have names derived from a similar meaning. Btw, have you considered this article for DYK? Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 23:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am willing to change the name to your choice, but only if we can preserve the edit history of the longer article, which is substantive and helps me (and others) track the succession of stages. i will try to do this. yes it would make a good DYK now that it has images and ecology section. as far as other topics, i am writing on a number of historical manors, churches etc. Covalent 23:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator should be able to fix the issue with the article history. Btw, since you're thinking in terms of DYK, I have no problem if you want this process to be completed first. I'll try to dig up a bit of historical background tomorrow. Regards. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 00:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i have now completed the merge and the new article sits at Mandø Island. i am now trying to move the article and its edit history to Mandø, but i am having technical difficulty doing so and the warning notice says an admin must assist with this move. i have no idea how to get admin attention. if you are able to facilitate i would be grateful. the warning says "do not cut and paste to move", which i respect since edit history would be lost.Covalent 00:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are trying to move the article Mandø Island to Mandø along with the edit history. need admin help to make the move, since destination page was an article originally before the merge. this move is uncontested. i shall take care of double redirects after admin move the article. thank you. Covalent 00:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will make the request at WP:RM. Peter O. (Talk) 00:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the {helpme}... I have merged the page histories. Next time you can use ask at Wikipedia:Requested moves, specifically for this action Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. By the way, nice work on the article :-) --Commander Keane 00:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed the move, thanks for your understanding. I've fixed the redirects. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 09:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Know?

On 6 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mandø, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations with the DYK! May there be many more. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 22:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 13, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Northern Red-legged Frog, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thankyou for your many contributions. You're keeping the natural sciences well covered on DYK.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 23:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red-bellied Lemur

No problem. Happy to oblige. In fact, you could have simply asked me or any other admin personally to do it, instead of posting the history in the open. Let me know if there's anything else I can assist you with. Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 01:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:SFGS_FWS.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SFGS_FWS.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then you need to specify who owns the copyright, please. If you got it from a website, then a link to the website where it was taken from 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 then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as 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:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been 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 23:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 23:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest

Answered on bees and toxic chemicals talk page.--Filll 00:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Swidden

heh, sorry for opening a can of worms. I agree that there is far too much effort expended on the names of article on wikipedia rather than the content, with name debates often going on for far too long. Mea culpa. Pfly 05:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Del monte forest.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Del monte forest.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image 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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:SFGS_FWS.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SFGS_FWS.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, then 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, then 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:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been 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 21:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 21:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haraldskær Woman

As you are a significant contributor to this article I wanted to make certain that you were of its GA Sweeps review, which can be found here. The article has been placed on hold pending some attention to citations. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sfgshabitatmillbrae.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sfgshabitatmillbrae.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. Skier Dude (talk) 08:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Potentilla hickmanii

Hello

In 2006 you made an article about Potentilla hickmanii I'm very interested in finding a source to the claims in the conservation section that connect the Environmental Impact Assessment process to the discovery and endangered species listing of the plant. The external links provided only list the endangered species aspect, but not any direct connection to an EIA. Do you have any source for this information? The article has been changed dramatically since it was first created, but I am very interesting in any information you can provide.

Fast reply would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You!

Jesus On Wheels (talk) 13:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Blue wildebeest lapalala.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Blue wildebeest lapalala.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-enwikimedia.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-enwikimedia.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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 20:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lake-tahoecrop.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lake-tahoecrop.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Ranaaurorawilliamflaxington.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Ranaaurorawilliamflaxington.jpeg. 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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2012 (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) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Cui-ui spawn (USFWS).jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Cui-ui spawn (USFWS).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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Upperreachsonomacreek.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Upperreachsonomacreek.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:28, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sonomacreekwaterfall.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Sonomacreekwaterfall.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pyramid lake contrast enhanced.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pyramid lake contrast enhanced.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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Molleharbourfromkullaberg.jpg

The file File:Molleharbourfromkullaberg.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Low quality. Can be replaced with File:Molleharbour.jpg.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Molleharbourfromkullaberg2.jpg

The file File:Molleharbourfromkullaberg2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Low quality. Can be replaced with File:Molleharbour.jpg.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mollepanoramafinal.jpg

The file File:Mollepanoramafinal.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Low quality. Can be replaced with File:Molleharbour.jpg.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]