User talk:Ajuk/Arive 1

This is just a notice that I've nominated {{templates}}, which you created, for deletion.I've also included a welcome message for you below. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 20:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Ajuk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, 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!

Chyclist[edit]

A tag has been placed on Chyclist, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wodup 07:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mustang, Texas[edit]

OK, it is time for your joking to end. You are potentially offending people, both here in the Wikipedia community and the wider readership. What you are doing could be seen as vandalism or disruption and you could get blocked from editing Wikipedia for it. You might not get another warning before having a block imposed, so be careful and be serious from now on.

Wodup 07:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ur edit[edit]

As NPWatcher is not configured to do that, no. But, thanks for bringing that to my attention. Maybe we can implement that in a future version. —P ilotguy (ptt) 19:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Vandlised[edit]

Template:Vandlised has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- Renesis (talk) 00:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Jokes[edit]

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Good Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Orderinchaos78 01:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Graffiti[edit]

Dear participant of Wikipedia: WikiProject Graffiti, your assistance is needed and input required at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Graffiti. The project has become inactive and unfocused and I'm calling meeting to address these issues, and find a resolution. There is work to be done, and we are the ones to do it. Regards, Dfrg.msc 01:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bad license[edit]

You'll need to re-upload the image with a more appropriate license, then. We can't accept images that are licensed only for use on Wikipedia. --Core desat 21:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So why is that an option then? Ajuk 16:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because people get permission to use images on Wikipedia believing that they can be used. If there was no option, then people would upload the image with a different licence and images with such permission would be difficult to locate as it might not be mentioned and/or the image is tagged with the incorrect licence. Once uploaded, the description page states that such images are not permitted and warn the uploader that it will soon be deleted. The admin who comes along to delete the image will likely re-tag the image with an appropriate tag if it can be kept. matt br 17:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Redscale1.jpg[edit]

Dear Ajuk, I have nominated Image:Redscale1.jpg for speedy deletion as the source says that the image is licensed for non-commercial use only. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

On the description page, you mentioned you have been in contact with the creator of the image. Please ask the creator to release the image under a compatible licence ({{cc-by-2.0}} would be OK), which will then be permissible for Wikipedia, and please consider uploading the image to Wikimedia Commons, which allows the image to be used on any Wikimedia project including the English Wikipedia. Please ask if you have any questions. Thanks, matt br 14:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot claim {{GFDL-self}} as you are not the creator of the work. The licence on Flickr is still a non-commercial licence and still cannot be used on Wikipedia, so I have re-tagged the image. matt br 17:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your vandalism of Ken Rockwell[edit]

Thanks for your contribution to Ken Rockwell, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember, millions of people read Wikipedia, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the Sandbox to get started. Thank you. Rhobite 00:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above message should also apply to Church of Modern Day Firefox Users, which I have deleted. If you continue to add jokes to Wikipedia you could lose your editing privileges. Rhobite 00:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cokinxxx.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cokinxxx.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Rhobite 01:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 1st[edit]

April 1st is not an excuse to vandalize Wikipedia. The goal is for Wikipedia to be a good information source all 365 days of the year. Please consider joining Uncyclopedia if you're interested in adding humor to articles. Rhobite 00:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Bethnal[edit]

A tag has been placed on Bethnal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --VS ^talk 06:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rating sites[edit]

I note you've added a {{splitsection}} to Rating sites#Hot or Not - while I personally agree with this, if you check the edit histories and talk pages for Rating sites and Hot or Not you'll see that they were only merged two months ago - iridescenti (talk to me!) 20:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Muse to Muse (Greek mythology)[edit]

Now that you have created the dozens of redirects for Muse links that intend Muse (Greek mythology), you might help rectify this disservice to the Wikipedia reader and the trouble caused for other Wikipedians by helping revise the double redirects that you have created. You will find them at Muse by selecting "What links here" in the left-hand table. This is part-and-parcel of a page title move. I have also posted this note at Talk:Muse (Greek mythology). Thank you. --Wetman 18:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes, some things have to be done one at a time, by hand. I can manage to fix the relevant ones among the ca. 600 double redirects from Muse to Muse (Greek mythology), if I can have some help. Let's work out what to do at Talk:Muse (Greek mythology) --Wetman 21:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington (inventor)[edit]

May I ask why you added the {{humor}} tag to George Washington (inventor)? A ecis^Brievenbus 21:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was a Featured Article on April 1st? A ecis^Brievenbus 21:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It fooled me as well, don't worry. The April Fools' Day joke was that it wasn't an April Fools' Day joke. The thought behind it is that people would come to Wikipedia expecting to be fooled. They were fooled in that expectation, in the sense that what at first glance seemed to be a joke was not a joke. A ecis^Brievenbus 10:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

‎I Hate Myself and Want to Die: The 52 Most Depressing Songs You've Ever Heard[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as I Hate Myself and Want to Die: The 52 Most Depressing Songs You've Ever Heard) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Jazznutuva 12:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Dumbmap.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dumbmap.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jochen Miller[edit]

A tag has been placed on Jochen Miller, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Vgranucci 02:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George H. W. Bush and Template:Fct[edit]

Have you talked with people about whether this "is a good thing", replacing the 'Fact' with 'Fct' templates? The only place it said 'why' was on the talk page. And please please use the edit summary. What your changes to the article looked like was some sort of vandalism. Some vandals just delete one or two characters and run away laughing. Using an edit summary of "Changing template Fact to shorter Fct" would have been reassuring. Shenme 02:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fujifilm Superia[edit]

Thanks for the additions to the Fujifilm Superia article. I'm having trouble finding information about this 'fuji press' film you mention. It's also listed as a product in the Fujifilm article and I'm sure I've seen it for sale online. But I can't find anything about it on the Fujifilm website. Has this film been discontinued or renamed? Any help would be appreciated, thanks. --Imroy 02:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fox News Channel[edit]

You and I both know your edit to Fox News Channel was inappropriate. Please try to keep your opinions to yourself. - auburnpilot talk 15:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PIN versus pin[edit]

Hello Ajuk, please be more careful when you do automatic or semi-automatic edits. Recently you wrongly changed electrical pin for a PIN in several articles. These groupings of letters do not have anything in common except that they use the same letters in the same order. I reverted your mistake in the SCART article. Please revert your changes in other articles too. Thank you. --pabouk 06:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Reggae-single-stub}}[edit]

Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 00:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm not thick"[edit]

I didn't say you were thick.
Please sign your talk page posts.
I stand by my edit summary. Your edit summary was "Ob my till the screnn that shows the weights is hanging off by its wire and the bit that shows the customer the price is leaning at 15 degrees and has a massive crack in it." I say again - how does that qualify you to talk about every other ASDA store. Have you visited a representative sample? For example some ASDA stores are older than others; I doubt a new one is suffering such a problem.
The content I removed included "also the checkout they use are much older than the checkouts used by other supermarkets, Why it seems economical for most other supermarkets to upgrade and not ASDA is unknown" - How are you qualified to talk about other supermarket's equipment?
Your whole approach seems to be "because I say so" - please read Wikipedia:Verifiability to see why citations need to be provided. Thanks Mark83 17:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, I understand where you are coming from. The problem is we cannot add or own thoughts/opinions - that would border on original research. If your saying ASDA has underinvested in its POS systems it needs to have a reference to a reliable source. Sure, you can pop into Tesco or Sainsbury's and see they're using relatively new equipment, but that doesn't qualify you to provide a full analysis of the merits (or otherwise) of ASDA's, Sainsbury's or Tesco's capital spending on POS systems. Mark83 17:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Parkstreetnight.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Parkstreetnight.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Graffiti Newsletter[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Graffiti, you are part of a dedicated group of people working to better Wikipedia's coverage of topics relating to Graffiti. Latest News:

We now have a Graffiti Portal.
Banksy became a Good-Article. Help to make more!

If you are looking for something to do:

We still have a To Do list.
You can help spread important templates.
You can improve these pages.
You can also help but uploading pictures or images of Graffiti and Street art.

And remember you can add some input at our talk page. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 09:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just checkin'[edit]

Is there something I can do for you, Ajuk, or are you just scattering Template:Seriously on my user page for no reason? -- Randall00 ^Talk 18:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Dawnb.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawnb.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crank Brothers[edit]

A tag has been placed on Crank Brothers, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Chris 20:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liberapedia[edit]

A tag has been placed on Liberapedia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Liberapedia. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. Mel sa ran 19:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Newlogo op.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Newlogo op.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Newlogo op.png[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Newlogo op.png. 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. nat^tang 12:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

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 13:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== banksy == Hiya. Comment left on Banksy talk :) 3tmx 14:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FPC[edit]

You appear to have made your nomination at the wrong page. I have moved it to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Shaftesbury Avenue and transcluded it at WP:FPC. thegreen J Are you green? 01:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Myths of the Near Future (album)[edit]

Thank you for your recent edits to the above article. Unfortunately, although the source you provided does show "clipping" on a number of tracks from the album, the source does not confirm anywhere that people have "complained" about the clipping on the tracks. This is why the edits have been removed, as it seems unlikely that people would complain about this. --SteelersFan UK06 23:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack[edit]

Please do not attack User:Alkivar. If you do it again, you will be blocked for violation of our rule on no personal attacks. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 21:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Hardsource[edit]

Template:Hardsource has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 23:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Celtic Alliance[edit]

A tag has been placed on Celtic Alliance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Pekaje 23:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to George W. Bush. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gscshoyru 23:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it was a user/Twinkle error, but you removed a large chunk of George W. Bush, and tagged it for speedy deletion. Not very likely that the President of the United States' article is going to get speedied. - Crockspot 23:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bush[edit]

It was a mistake, using Twinkle, Tried to revert it myself.

Ah, lol. No problem then. That is hilarious though, 'cause it's oddly fitting... But it felt and looked like a vandal edit. Gscshoyru 23:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Labour Party[edit]

Thank you for your contribution to the article Labour Party. I have reverted your edit which changed the party's stated political position to 'centre right'. There has been a lengthy discussion on the talk page about what their stated position should be, with consensus largely forming around 'centre left' or some alternative wording to this effect. I suggest that if you feel strongly about this issue that you refer to the talk page and contribute to the discussion. Newartriot 23:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Audicity[edit]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Audicity, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Y4kk 12:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks in the article Bush and Cheney

Please do not make personal attacks as you did at Bush and Cheney. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images, especially those in violation of our Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Corvus cornix 23:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Ridiculous quotes from Conservapedia[edit]

A tag has been placed on Ridiculous quotes from Conservapedia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD G2.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. AJUK ^Talk!! 11:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rational Wiki

A tag has been placed on Rational Wiki, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Rational Wiki. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. Hawaiian717 22:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short term block[edit]

Blocked
You have been blocked for vandalism for 24 hours. To contest this block, add the text {{unblock|your reason here}} on this page, replacing your reason here with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.

If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia after the block has expired, you will be blocked for longer and longer periods of time.Infrogmation 23:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No pranks please; See Help:Edit summary

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ajuk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn't really vandalize anything.

Decline reason:

Congratulations, your prank worked. You tricked us into thinking you were vandalizing. You were so successful that you even got blocked for 24 hours, which makes your joke even funnier. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ajuk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn't really vandalize anything.

Decline reason:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ajuk&diff=prev&oldid=166062143 I don't think you really learned your lesson. MaxSem 15:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Just because you don't like what the reviewing admin says, doesn't mean you can call it vandalism, revert it, and try for a different admin. Doing so doesn't show that you're ready to edit responsibly. Don't do that again. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of FisherQueen was another inappropriate edit summary. Please don't be a brat and deliberately annoy other users. (If that's your idea of fun, there are plenty of other places on the internet to indulge in being bratty and annoying.) Perhaps you can make use of your time out to review some of the policy pages linked in the welcome message near the top of this page. I hope that I'll be seeing constructive edits from you after this short block expires. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 16:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bouncers video game cover art.jpg[edit]

Hi. I see you placed a request for speedy deletion on Image:Bouncers video game cover art.jpg for reason of it being a duplicate, but you neglected to provide a link or image name showing what it is a duplicate of. -- Infrogmation 23:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandalism"[edit]

Regarding this edit you made: this was most certainly not vandalism. I was archiving the talk page, and as part of that I had to copy the project banners etc. and the still-active discussion back to the main talk page. Please take care where using tools such as WP:TW. --RFBailey (talk) 14:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist Republic of Scouseland[edit]

Please note that a redirect you created, Socialist Republic of Scouseland, has been listed at Redirects for discussion. --RFBailey 20:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vasblackwoodlstock.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Vasblackwoodlstock.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg[edit]

I replied to your message at BetacommandBot's talk page. You must add a rationale to your image noted above, and I tell you how there. Jack?! 22:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if you take a picture and upload it onto Wikipedia, add {{PD-self}} and you won't need a fair-use rationale. If it comes from a website or other source other than yourself, then you will need a fair-use rationale.

For the Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg image, I have added {{PD-self}} as it requires no rationale.

If you have any further problems or just need some help, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 00:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Stirlingfakeandreal.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 03:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out since it is an image is of a British unit of currency, regardless of who took it, it is automatically copyrighted by the British Crown Act to be in the possession of the British government. (You figure that one out) I added a Fair-Use Rationale (giving credit to you as the uploader) which should cover it and cleared the tags on the Coin counterfeiting page. I have this on my watchlist, so if there is any further problems (and you aren't online) I can take care of it for ya. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment at MFD[edit]

Please don't refer to other editors as Nazis. Even if you were just joking it could be seen as offensive and if you weren't joking it was a personal attack. Mr.Z-man 05:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POTD notification[edit]

Hi Ajuk,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:London , Kodachrome by Chalmers Butterfield edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 27, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-12-27. howcheng {chat} 00:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Fake-and-real.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fake-and-real.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rough Dreams.JPEG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Rough Dreams.JPEG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Category:Style Council[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Style Council, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Category:Style Council|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. AJUK ^Talk!! 18:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Ub40.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on Image:Ub40.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Ub40.jpg|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. AJUK ^Talk!! 14:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Talk:Virginia Tech massacre[edit]

Your comments were poorly formatted and appeared to clip the comments of others that made it difficult to determine the context of those comments. I reverted, but please feel free to re-insert your comments as appropriate. Ronnotel (talk) 19:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All I did was fix the spacing. AJUK ^Talk!! 19:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit removed parts of the comments of others...and adds nothing related to the improvement of the article. Please revert yourself...and please consider getting rid of the <big> signature... --Onorem ♠Dil 19:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]