Your recent editing history at Liberal Party of Canada shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Mr. Funny Nickname (talk)
Thanks for uploading Image:Busu.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Chym1.gif. 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:
Thanks for uploading Image:Ckgl4.gif. 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:
Thank you for uploading Image:ASC.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. GreenJoe 15:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. GreenJoe 15:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I've been through the entire category twice. Doing the same thing. Your article wasn't the first, nor the last. However, I can't monitor them all, and just because something happens on one page, doesn't mean it should happen on another. See WP:WAX. I suggest putting something notable on the page, like for example if the President was ever fired, or if the board ever resigned en-masse. GreenJoe 03:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:BOC.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:FootPatrol.jpg)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:FootPatrol.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In case you weren’t aware, I protected Warren Kinsella a few days ago until the dispute is worked out. A BLP violation may also be an issue here, so if you could explain your side of things at the discussion on Talk:Warren Kinsella, we could hopefully get things settled as soon as possible. Thanks. Okiefromoklaquestions? 00:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Liberal Party candidates, 40th Canadian federal election[edit]
I am aware of the fact that Heather Carter's information has been redirected to Bearcat's little project. I deleted the information completely to avoid any further confrontation with this bully -- for now. I am preparing an appeal to higher ups as soon as I figure out how to do that. Bearcat is a self-professed die hard NDP supporter and as such his reasons for redirecting Heather Carter's page to his little project is suspect to say the least. His argument goes something like "unelected candidates are not entitled to have their own page". I plan on making the argument that Heather Carter is known in the Niagara Region for far more than her candidacy in the past election and in the forthcoming election. He redirects, yet provides essentially the same information sans photograph and links. If I could reason with this bully, my argument would be why not just provide a link in his project to Heather's page that way we are both satisfied. Any help would very much be appreciated. johncaron.ca (Talk) johncaron.ca 22:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:K945.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to John Maloney. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.Deconstructhis (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any sources for the claim that the Liberals are center-left? I remember Bob Rae saying that the Liberals and Conservatives are "two right wings of the same turkey". The Four Deuces (talk) 14:35, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The recent edit you made to Ontario Young Liberals has been reverted, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. original link: http://www.oyl.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=61Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay it's time to discuss rather than revert warring. I beleive theat the current wording refelects a blatant liberal POV, and as per WP:NPOV should be changed to be neutral. "Abortion rights" is pro-abortion POV. Abortion is not a right. The unborn child is a person and has a right to life. While Mr. McGuinty is certainly entitled to his opinions on this subject, the article needs to be neutral. It should state he supports abortion, not "abortion rights", as this wording suggests that those who are pro-life are trying to deny a basic right. Additionnally, "equal marriage" is incredibly biaised in favor of same-sex marriage. Sure McGuinty is allowed his opinion, but there is no such thing as marriage "equality" for gay or lesbian couples. Same-sex relationships are not marriages. No liberal social agenda can ever change that. Homosexual individuals have the same equal right to marry as everyone - the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. The expression "equal marriage" suggests that preserving the definition of marriage as a man and a woman violates social "equality" but it's not the case. The article needs to say he supports "same-sex marriage", not so-called "equal marriage".
Yes you both need to end the edit war and discuss the issue. This should have happened well before the multiple reverts, but better late than never. The edits seem ridiculous to me, ie why does 'rights' needed added after abortion (ie is 'rights' really that important?) and secondly same-sex marriage is the term I usually have known it referred to, though if the alternative wording is becoming of more use then it should likely be used.
Essentially I think you're both being a little stubborn as the difference between the edits is rather trivial and I hope you both can compromise a little by possibly allowing 'rights' after abortion and keep same-sex marriage, or vice versa, or alternatively something al together different. If there are reliable sources that refer to it as 'rights' or 'equal marriage' then go by the sources. Nja247 07:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would compromise by leaving "abortion rights", as it is a slightly different concept than "abortion" (i.e. one can be against abortion but support leaving it legal), or that could be worded as "access to abortion". But I still want to get rid of the expression "equal marriage", as it is obviously biaised, and the expression "same-sex marriage" is both more neutral and precise to describe this concept. Thanks.
Just a note: from the admittedly limited searching I've done, it seems Canadian officials refer to it as same-sex marriage. For example that's the wording used in the Civil Marriage Act and the case law of the Canadian courts. Thus the sources seem to support that wording. Nja247 13:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you do not say your opinion here or suggest another compromise within the next few days, I will put forward my compromise suggestion with or without further discussion. I think you have had plenty of time to answer and try to reach a compromise, especially since I've even suggested one. I would never seek to include conservative POV such as "murder of unborn children" or "destruction of marriage" into articles, so you shouldn't insert liberal POV either. Thanks in advance.
As an uninvolved 3rd party I think your suggestion above was appropriate and inline with sources and guidelines. Cheers. Nja247 07:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I made the Ontario Young Liberals article into a stub due to copyright concerns (which I warned you of above). You reverted that change, reintroducing the copyright violations. Please read WP:COPYVIO and join the discussion at Talk:Ontario_Young_Liberals#Stubbed_due_to_copyright_concerns. Regardless of the copyright situation, the long lists in the article are not appropriate, per discussions at Talk:Brock_University_Students'_Union#Cleanup which you might remember. They will be removed (you can do it yourself) but I didn't want to distract anyone from the copyviolations issue until it is resolved. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's my understanding that we're gradually phasing out the succession boxes for all elected politicians in favour of more comprehensive info-boxes. I don't really have a strong opinion on this myself, however, and I take your point about clutter. You might want to talk to User:Bearcat for a more definitive position, as I believe he's been fairly active on this file. CJCurrie (talk) 22:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of Liberal Party candidates, 41st Canadian federal election[edit]
It is unconstructive to remove tags from articles prior to addressing the concerns raised by the tag. Abductive (reasoning) 23:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I was in the process of adding secondary sources when I removed the tag. Probably would have been prudent to remove the tag afterward.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 23:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Dykstrabb.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The examples you've given (Bradley, Phillips, Pupatello) were all created some time ago. There's been a general trend in recent times to remove the standalone infoboxes at the bottom of the article page in favour of consolidated information at the top. I don't really have a strong preference, though I've been making use of the latter option in the last year or so. CJCurrie (talk) 00:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ontarioliberalvotepro.png, 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.
Noticed you removed the link which is ok with me. Would you mind taking a look at the Harmonized Sales Tax article? Thanks! --Pdelongchamp (talk) 18:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's your problem with the replacement of the Ontario Legislature link with a template? It make sense especially for future updates if the legislature changes its URL which has already happened. Better to change one template than hundreds of links. Please explain. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 02:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was due to formatting and consistency with the majority of MPP pages which listed the links in that order. However, placing that link last fixes the formating issue.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 01:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:LogoRIVER FINAL.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend that you cease vandalising the article on Rick Dykstra with that picture. Wikipedia is a neutral site, and your use of an out-of-context photograph of Dykstra is an obvious attempt at presenting him in a negative light. Furthermore, on a physical level, the picture does not fit harmoniously with the article in the location you are attempting to place it. Rest assured that if you continue to replace the picture, I will contact Wikipedia Administration with the news article concerning the controversy regarding the photograph, along with your declared party affiliation, all of which add up to a blatant political attack.
The difference is that you are attempting to portray Mr. Dykstra in a negative light due to your conflicting political interest. Although I am indeed a supporter of the Conservative Party, I do not believe in using pictures to show politicians from any party in either a negative or positive way. I would just as soon remove such an attack from an article on a Liberal politician as I would a Conservative. Since you will not cease with this slanderous vandalism, I will be forwarding the matter to an administrator. Manticore126 (talk) 03:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've initiated an RFC (request for comment) at WP:CWNB for additional input on the Rick Dykstra photo. I'd ask both of you guys to let the process work for now and don't get into too much of a row over this in the meantime. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 04:07, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:Dykstrabb.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Dykstrabb.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 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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. Bearcat (talk) 04:15, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Oyllogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Please do everyone a favour and stop making unexplained reverts on Harmonized Sales Tax. While it's not necessary to use edit summaries, the fact that you have only used it once is not a good sign. Thanks, R.J.Hexter (talk) 02:22, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My edits were not to cast the HST in a negative light, but to reduce some of the clear pro-gov't bias present in the article. Further I have not reverted edits by multiple ppl, just yours.
In addition, the sources for the statement about "reducing the burdens on the poorÈ (paraphrasing) are not accurate b/c:
A: The gov't site is the chief source. This is a clear unproven bias and cannot be viewed as a reliable source (nor balanced by an opposing one).
B: There are newspapers that are essentially pointing to the government's view and saying that it's why low income families benefit. Again, this is not good enough to balance the government's source.
So as you can see, this is not in the least bit neutral. If you were to add a neutral source that doesn't blindly indicate that low-income ppl will benefit w/out detailed evidence, I would not even think for a second to remove it. Until then, I see no point in repeating why those sources should not remain. IHMO, the answer is obvious. R.J.Hexter (talk) 03:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes, I KNOW what an edit war is. In case you forgot, you're edit warring too *rolls eyes* Use the talk page if you insist. I was the one who removed the unreliable ref first. R.J.Hexter (talk) 03:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Further, you were the only one who reverted 3 times within 24 hours and still you gave me the warning even though I did no such thing. I'm afraid I'll have to report you for this. R.J.Hexter (talk) 03:57, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Torontowardresults2010.PNG is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Judging from your proximity to the Liberal Party (of whom the CFS is critical) and non-CFS student governments, it's hard to see how you would be a neutral author on the CFS page. I recommend limiting your role on the CFS page. It has enough NPOV issues as it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.153.29 (talk) 02:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing how an anonymous ip address can know so much about me. Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 15:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Ontario general election, 2011 (candidates) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mo ainm~Talk 17:21, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I declined to delete, but I would advise that you immediately get referencess in, and a statement on top of the page explaining the intent of the article. DGG ( talk ) 21:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. No Funny Nickname re biography of Reza Moridi, Liberal MPP, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada.[edit]
Dear user Mr No Funny Nickname. The topic that you deleted from Reza Moridi Liberal MPP, Richmond Hill, Ontario is a very important to over one hundred thousand Iranian-Canadians in Ontario. In addtion, it is an emotional issue to another 80 million Iranians worldwide. There are others who are monitoring reza moridi Canadian politicians Wikipedia biography page as we speak. The addition to this biography was removed by you. Your contributions and thoughts are always respected and welcome respected. However, please present a source and solid argument to debate the issue before removing this important addition. The addition to the biography of Reza Moridi Canadian politician is replaced. Please only discuss this on the talk page, or expand the article using credible inline citation. Please do not remove the addition. respectfully, starback. February 2nd, 2011.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Starback (talk • contribs) 16:29, February 2, 2011 (UTC)
Mr. No Funny Nickname re biography of Reza Moridi, Liberal MPP, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada[edit]
Dear Mr. No Funny Nickname. First, I would like to thank you for your warm welcome. As you advised, to honour the neutrality of Wikipedia encyclopaedia I simply added the following section by including the facts without including any personal analysis: Reza Moridi Liberal MPP, Richmond Hill, Ontario is the first Iranian-Canadian MPP who has stated “All Hail Republic of Azerbaijan” in Azeri-Turkish language at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Respectfully. (Starback (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]
74.12.102.194 (talk) have expressed some valid and were duly noted. Modiri’s birth place is correct. However, his ethnicity is what had been misrepresented before the corrections made. Although he was born in Urumiah, Iran but he is an Azerbaijani. I have done some research, and included some of the most credible inline citations as you could find in the biography of the living person, Reza Moridi Liberal MPP, Canadian politician. Starback (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I also noticed where the IP edits were coming from with those edits. I wouldn't want to specualte whose office there coming from because there appears to be number of similar IPs that are making the same type of edits in a number of different MP articles, some crossing political lines, some being edited by more than one IP. It's frustrating trying to get through to these people, it doesn't matter how many times they are told not to copy and paste online bios, they keep doing it. The odd time they do make legitimate edits, but its mostly the copy and paste or for some reason they like to insist that the MP be refered to by first name, against wikipedia policy. I have begun to wonder if its posible that one person is making the edits using multiple IPs. Take a look at the history on this article [1]. The edits are coming from different IPs, editing back and forth, only minutes apart. I have also noticed times where one IP leaves a message on a talk page, and after a response is made, a different IP posts a message like "thank's I didn't know that", almost sounding like it was the same person who posted the question. The talk pages of the IPs involved show a lengthy history of warnings and such for various things, so I don't expect them to stop anytime soon. Whenever I pick up on the copy and paste, I add the article to my watchlist and now have a large number of MP articles on it. Is this all that can really be done or can action be taken on the IPs? I'm not really sure how to react when dealing with IPs in this manner. Cmr08 (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I see our IP friend has struck again in this article. It's interesting to note that it was a different IP this time, but one that I had reverted for making the same types of edits in other edits. You may be interested in reading the comments made about us on User talk:Hocstaffer. This HOC staffer as the name suggest thinks we have other reason behind reverting the edits, inlucuding belonging to a different party. I have responded, trying to get my point accross about copying and pasting online bios, but I doubt it will help any. I don't know where the editor came from, it's only new with a few edits, but I wonder if the IP just logged in this time? It's interesting that the user complaining about the removal is not even the ediotr who keeps adding the copy and paste job.Cmr08 (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File source problem with File:Dykstrablackberry.jpg[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:Dykstrablackberry.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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf.☼ 15:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An e-mail was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, where the copywright holder released the image into the public domain and authorized used on Wikipedia. Please let me know if there are any other requirements to be met.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 15:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I'll admit to being new and could use the guidence. If you can explain what parts of my edits you believe to be untrue or unfair I'll be happy to change them. Thanks for your concern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsjustme991 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re Ontario general election, 2011 (candidates)[edit]
Oakville independent candidate Mike Harris. With a name like that, the guy needs a link to a biography or to his website! Which? He probably doesn't rate the biography according to the guidelines. His website is at http://www.harris4oakville.ca/. I would very much appreciate your taking care of this since I am an inexperienced contributor.
Harveybrown51 (talk) 03:48, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also do not think that the article about Randall Denley should have been re-directed to Ontario general election, 2011 (candidates), but unfortunately this was the decision made by a wikipedia admin when this article was notminated for deletion (AFD) just recently. As it stands now anyone googling "Randall Denley", and choosing the Wikipedia item on the google results, gets to the candidates page, and not to Randall Denley. I am just trying to mitigate some of the damage from this, imo, faulty decision.
The Ontario general election, 2011 (candidates) page is just meant to be a list of all candidates (after the election the page will be converted to a results page, listing each riding's result, which is why it is formatted the way it is). Biographical information on candidates does not belong on this page. Biographical information on candidates belongs on 1 of 2 pages. Either their own page (which seeing that the subject of the article went through AfD & was deemed not to meet notability guidelines), or, on a page with information on each party's candidates. In 2007 the PC party had this page : Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario candidates, 2007 Ontario provincial election, however, I don't see one for this election. If there is a page for the PC's this election, the biographical information should go there, and you can link his name on the candidate page to redirect to his section on the candidate page, if there isn't a page, I would suggest that you create one and list candidates accordingly. Hope I was helpful.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 13:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There was a consensus reached at least a year ago to transition all of the election candidate lists to the table format, for a couple of reasons: firstly, they're supposed to be complete reference lists of all of the party's candidates, winning and losing, and secondly, they're not supposed to turn into giant collections of mostly-unsourced campaign brochures, which is more or less what they did under the old format. The whole point of the lists in the first place was to prevent unelected candidates feeling entitled to post an unsourced campaign brochure as an independent article — but instead, we just ended up with giant lists of unsourced campaign brochures smooshed together into one page that still poses just as much of a WP:BLP problem as separate articles did.
You say there was consensus: can you point us to the discussion please. It would greatly help those who are not as versed in elections wiki-editing. Ottawahitech (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll acknowledge that not all of the older lists have actually been updated to the table format yet, but what I did yesterday (and I did it for all four of the major party candidate lists, not just for the Liberals) is the format that all of the lists are supposed to be following now. Bearcat (talk) 18:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bearcat: I know what you did was done with good intentions (I can see you put a tremendous effort into this). Howewver, if I may, I would like to say that what you did translates into wikipedia article ownership behavior, something that I undersdtand is against wiki principles. Your taking charge conduct effectively intimidated other wikipedians, and participation in any Ontario elections article editing by other wikipedians has diminished since you arrived on the scene. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, St. Catharines municipal election, 2014, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page
Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.
Disambiguation link notification for April 28[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Niagara Region municipal elections, 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Gill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have started a discussion about the Libertarians in the candidate section of the Ontario election article, I thought you might want to join in. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Z101 Logo new.gif[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Z101 Logo new.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Z101 Logo new.gif[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Z101 Logo new.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Ontario Liberal Party logo from 2014.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Ontario Liberal Party logo from 2014.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. 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.
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. 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.
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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.
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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:NewBlueOntario.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
An article you recently created, 2022 Niagara Region municipal elections, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ...discospinstertalk 17:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ontario Liberal Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, 2022 Ontario municipal elections, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969TT me 00:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2022 Niagara Region municipal elections, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2022 Ontario municipal elections, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:02, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Devonian Wombat was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:2022 Niagara Region municipal elections, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Mr. No Funny Nickname!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at 2022 Niagara Region municipal elections instead.
The comment the reviewer left was:
This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:2022 Niagara Region municipal elections, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 2018 Ontario general election into 44th Ontario general election. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 02:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am adding an important event in Municipal Politics to Jim Bradley's page, which I have cited with sources, can I ask why you keep on reverting it? People need to know his stance on issues come election time. Keeping it shallow is misinforming others Chaialhurriya (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:BOC.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to John Maloney. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.Deconstructhis (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
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.
wikimedia.org.
