User talk:Archf 1

Welcome!

Hello, Archf 1, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:RonCBigelow.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:RonCBigelow.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:RonCBigelow.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:RonCBigelow.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 18:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I've reverted your change to the Proposition 8 article changing 'Mormon temple' to 'Mormon church'. The source says 'temple', and the Wikipedia article on Mormon temples indicates that this is the correct usage.

Happy editing-- Nevard 13:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, 'places of worship' might be a good alternative. -- Nevard 13:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Cherilyn-Combo3.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cherilyn-Combo3.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

File copyright problem with File:CherilynEagar4July09.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:CherilynEagar4July09.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ) 00:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created the 1st combo image, with permission of both sources to post on wikipedia. That got flagged.

I put up a photo I took myself and that got flagged. I even used the wiki form designed for that purpose. The file was too big and I uploaded smaller cropped versions. I have added the additional info.

There was a description there. You could have fixed it instead of flagging it.

are you happy now?--Archf 1 (talk) 01:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cherilyn Eagar[edit]

A tag has been placed on Cherilyn Eagar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to have a look at the policy found at WP:POLITICIAN, which lays out the guidelines for biographical articles about politicians. Essentially Ms. Eager won't be eligible until she wins that election. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cherily Eagar is a Candidate for the U.S. Senate. Other Candidates in this race are listed in Wikipedia, whether or not they have been in office. --Archf 1 (talk) 06:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". Ms. Eagar is a women running for U.S. Senate from Utah. To the best of my information, we haven't done that before, and even though there are quite a few women senators in Washington, there are only 4 republicans, and none are conservative. Give me some time to finish this.--Archf 1 (talk) 07:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Cherilyn Eagar article[edit]

Greetings! It is apparent from this edit that you have a conflict of interest with the Cherilyn Eagar article. As I noted at the talk page, I have suspicions that parties with conflicts of interest on both sides of the election have been editing the article. (However, I have no proof regarding edits from Eagar's opponents.)

Please note that I think you are doing the right thing by looking for "accurate public source"s for the claims in the article. Please feel free to continue editing the article in that fashion—and yes, that is me speaking in my capacity as an administrator. The COI tag I applied to the article is not to target your edits but to call in wider scrutiny of the entire article, since I think both sides have been editing the article, and it may be out of overall neutrality. —C.Fred (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There has been attempts to vandalize the page I created. Thank you for helping. The most recent attempt was by (according to Eagar) someone that has a grudge, was the initial author of one of the articles quoted, and was replaced by Eagar for a position at an organization.

Instead of just deleting the two recently added paragraphs (Micon and Connecticut), I went to the sources quoted, modified them to be fair, and when I couldn't find any other sources, contacted the candidate for more information. The candidate claims the remaining bits are libelous even still. You can delete them if you feel they are not relevant as well.

For all the information, I have gone to public sources where available, other non-campaign sources afterwords, and only if not available, directly from the campaign. In some cases, the campaign has used what was posted here directly.

I have fought attempts by the candidate to dictate exact wording or deletions. I have also fought attempts to introduce false or misleading information by others. I have left edits by others, unless it wasn't verified or vandalism.

The two recent paragraphs, being placed where they are, do not make sense. Perhaps a new category 'Controversy' should be created near the bottom. With research, those two resent issues are not really relevant, and were only partly verifiable and not accurate, and posted by someone called Sunpoppi with a reported personal grudge for 10 years.

I may not be without any conflict of interest, (I live in Utah, met Eagar just before she announced her candidacy), but I have tried to follow the wiki rules and be fair. You can look through the last 6 months of edits as reference. My other edits have been rare, I feel have been accurate as well. I have researched this race for almost a year, and have interviewed all known candidates as often as I can. I may not be neutral, but have fought to keep this article such. You can contact the incumbent's son for reference. Archf 1 (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cherilyn Eagar problems[edit]

Hi Archf, I saw that you undid my addition of a couple of damage-control templates to the article on U.S. Senate candidate Cherilyn Eagar. You said in your edit summary that you did so because my summary indicated I was not neutral because I think that the candidate is flawed. I understand that your edit was in good faith, and I apologize for the terseness of my comment in the edit summary, but I will remind you that while editors strive to make Wikipedia neutral, as it should be, none of those individual editors are themselves neutral on every issue and our political convictions have nothing to do with the edits we make. The two templates I added represented legitimate concerns about the quality of the article and had nothing to do with the character, policy positions, or other aspects of the candidate herself. Neutrality is not even an issue here: the article is objectively not up to standard for the reasons I mentioned.

Again, I'm sorry that I brought politics into the edit summary, but my edit was not political in nature (it didn't even change the content) but rather made out of my commitment to improve Wikipedia. I see that you have been active on this article and I hope we can work together to improve it. The Sartorialist (talk) 08:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Cherilyn Eagar[edit]

I have nominated Cherilyn Eagar, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cherilyn Eagar. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Frank | talk 18:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mia Love photo[edit]

Please explain your rationale for restoring the grainy photo of her rather than using the new one on the article's talk page rather than simply "restoring photo" in an edit summary. Thanks! Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 11:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cherilyn-Combo3.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cherilyn-Combo3.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 18:10, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Archf 1. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Archf 1. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:CherilynEagar4July09.jpg[edit]

The file File:CherilynEagar4July09.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) 01:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]