User:Zzyzx11/Archive17

hi. i'm from palo alto
and i wish to contact you to ask you something. would you mind? Eyalmc 11:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your reply. Regarding my question: I might need some consulting from someone who is a "collaboration culture expert". Since you're an admin and we are both from the same neighborhood, i thought that this might be you :). would you like to consider this? if yes, how would you suggest that we'll get in touch? Eyalmc 22:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Chester Bennington
For about the last 5 minutes, myself (and some other users as well), have been reverting vandalism on Chester Bennington's page. Would you be able to put an Anti-Vandalism block on the page or something? Thanks a lot Jay 20:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In the future, you should post a message on Requests for page protection immediately like User:BANG! did, (which User:Acalamari replied too), rather than ask an admin like me who may be offline during that time. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, alright. I didn't know that was what I was supposed to do, but I'll keep that in mind in the future. Thanks for the info though. Jay 02:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

German articles
HEY HOMIE! PROVIDE SOURCES IN THE GERMANS OR ETHNIC GERMANS ARTICLE. OR THAT ARTICLE IS DELETED PER WIKIPEDIA POLICY71.208.101.188 02:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * As per Wikipedia policy, you should address your concerns on the talk page of each article rather than removing or changing large amounts of content without consensus. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It would also help your cause if you first stop from making edit summaries that are more civil than confrontational and in all caps (which does imply to many admins like me that you intend to be disruptive). And it would also help if you actually help out and provide new, properly sourced content that contradicts what is currently on those articles. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Cardinals logo
Ah, OK. It had been taken down for some time, and that was the first one I saw in the NFL logos category. Pats1 16:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

An image name
Hi! I've been updating an image name. But I can't update this one. Because you protected the page. It would be grateful if you could update the image name to The Great Wave off Kanagawa. Thank you. Oda Mari 19:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I tagged Commons:Image:Tsunami by hokusai 19th century.jpg as a duplicate of Commons:Image:The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg, but it will also need to be switched on several other wikipedias. See Commons:Commons:Deletion guidelines Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. Best regards. Oda Mari 04:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 12

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

POTD footer
Hello. I noticed you usually do most of the work on the POTD protected pages, so I thought I'd ask you about this. I was thinking of creating Template:POTDfooter and adding it to all of the existing POTD protected templates, as part of an effort to standardize how the last line of these templates is displayed (both to remove the bold around the dash and to add the noprint class that is used on the other parts of the main page). Is this okay with you? --- RockMFR 03:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Before you do anything, I think you better study WP:POTD/G and WP:POTD/G. The POTDs are generated by a complex system of templates (that is also used on Commons for their POTDs) so users can display their own custom POTD layouts, which includes a special layout for the main page. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably the main two things you really have to study is WP:POTD/G and Template:POTD row. The goal is to make your changes on Template:POTD row without needing to alter anything on WP:POTD/G, or else several other pages and templates will have to be altered as well. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

:)
Thx for warning my friend.

Kızılsungur 07:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

&mdash; Comment made in regards to and

TfD nomination of Template:Dab current
Template:Dab current 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. — — Jack · talk · 02:09, Tuesday, 4 September 2007

Unspecified source for Image:2006 NBA All-Star Game.png
Thanks for uploading Image:2006 NBA All-Star Game.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaKBOT 21:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Academy Awards Wikipedia Project
To:


 * 1) User talk:Thomas Connor
 * 2) User talk:Dl2000
 * 3) User talk:Matt Heard
 * 4) User talk:Classicaltorture
 * 5) User talk:Geewillickers
 * 6) User talk:Amynewyork4248
 * 7) User talk:LadySatine
 * 8) User talk:Jagarin
 * 9) User talk: Gr8lyknow
 * 10) User talk:Zerorules677
 * 11) User talk:Amaas120
 * 12) User talk:Zzyzx11
 * 13) User talk:Hoverfish

Hello. I noticed that your name was listed as a member of the Wikipedia Project for Academy Awards (at this page: WikiProject Academy Awards). Are you still interested in, and involved with, this project ... or, in the Academy Awards topic in general? If so, I would like to ask you a question and to solicit your input, advice, and suggestions. Here on Wikipedia, I am most interested in, frequently contribute to, and tend to monitor and edit the various Academy Award articles -- of which there are many. That topic is essentially my primary interest here on Wikipedia. One day recently (about a week ago), I was reviewing / editing / proofreading the various Academy Award articles, as I do pretty regularly. Literally, as I was working on them, an administrator was deleting many, many of the articles -- I believe, seven Academy Award articles in total. I am sure that they went through the proper AfD process. However, I was unaware that they were even being considered for deletion (since they were not on my Watch List). As a result, I was not able to participate in any of the discussion or debate ... and all seven articles were ultimately deleted. The list of articles deleted is here (if you look under Item #3 on my "To Do List"): User:Joseph A. Spadaro/Sandbox/Page09. Needless to say, I am very upset about this and I sincerely feel that these are worthwhile articles, into which a lot of work was placed (by me and by you and by others). If I had my druthers, all seven articles would be un-deleted ... however, I am certain that Wikipedia hardly works that way (i.e., letting my druthers dictate the issue). So, basically, these are my questions to you. (1) Do you agree or disagree that these articles should have been deleted? (2) What, if anything, can I (or you or others) do about all of this? (3) Is there any way to fix this, or am I barking up a wrong tree, which will only result in banging my head against the proverbial brick wall? Will I be spinning my wheels, getting nowhere ... or can this situation change? By the way, the deletion debate is here: Articles for deletion/List of actors receiving six or more Academy Award nominations -- if you can call it a debate. I am really very upset about all of this. Please advise. PS: In a subsequent post, I can offer my specific reasons to un-delete these articles and to counter-argue the consensus reached at the debate. But, initially, I wanted to ask those (above) preliminary questions of you. Please reply at My Talk Page: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro. Another PS: I initiated a preliminary conversation with the administrator who deleted the articles. You can see that conversation on my Talk Page under the "Academy Awards" heading. Before my next move with that deleting administrator, I wanted to seek your input and advice on the best way to proceed. Thanks much. Please reply at my Talk Page: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro. Many thanks! (Joseph A. Spadaro 13:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for your input and suggestions. I will consider all that you have mentioned. Furthermore, I will try to resurrect all of that deleted material in, perhaps, a more acceptable format. Thanks again. (Joseph A. Spadaro 01:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC))

Fair use rationale for Image:NHLEastConference.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:NHLEastConference.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at 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 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. ~  Wi ki her mit  02:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:NHLEastConferenceFrench.png
I have tagged Image:NHLEastConferenceFrench.png as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. ~  Wi ki her mit  02:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:NHLWestConference.png
I have tagged Image:NHLWestConference.png as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. ~  Wi ki her mit  02:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:NHLWestConferenceFrench.png
I have tagged Image:NHLWestConferenceFrench.png as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. <font color="#777">~  <font color="#888">Wi <font color="#bbb">ki <font color="#aaa">her <font color="#ccc">mit  02:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:AmericanFootballConference.png
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:AmericanFootballConference.png. 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.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 18:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Steelers
Pittsburgh Steelers had a recent bout of vandalism. Would you mind reading through the article and fix anything that needs fixing. Thanks. -- <font face="Kristen ITC"><font color="Blue">Jreferee  (Talk) 02:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

WP meetup
-- phoebe/ (talk) 06:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:California Pizza Kitchen.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:California Pizza Kitchen.png. 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 14:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks My Friend
Thanks for your explainations... :)

<font color="#4A708B">kızılsungur 17:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

11 Sep anniversaries
I chose the World Wildlife Fund to replace the hurricane as every other entry is to do with war and/or fighting and death and destruction; you have taken it out and added - wait for it - yet another battle! Please let's have some balance! What's wrong with the WWF entry? 86.153.216.17 06:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, how about some balance with non-20th century entries? There are too many that appear on the anniversaries pages. But whatever... Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Need a free alternative to Image:Current sport.svg
I left a response to your question at my talk page regarding this image: Image:Soccerball current event.svg Please respond at my talk page. --David Göthberg 05:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 13

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 19:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Weird template page
Hey, can you have a look at. I don't think he did anything wrong, but in his contribs there's a weird page related to Template:Please leave this line alone (tutorial sandbox heading) that has some odd backwards text. I've seen this backwards text bug before, but I still don't know what causes it. It looked like a test page, so I tried to speedy it, but the tag went on the main template instead. I'm not quite sure what to do about it next, or if it's even that important. Thanks. --Bongwarrior 03:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, it looks more like a copyvio of http://www.gojohnnies.com/facilities/Clemens%20Stadium.htm. I was tipped off by this edit by User:CorenSearchBot Either way, it qualifies for deletion. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Inactivity check and news report
Hello, Zzyzx11. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:
 * 1) Please update your information at WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants, our new centralized participant list. Those who have not done so by October 20th will be removed.
 * 2) There are important discussions taking place at WT:USRD relating to whether WP:USRD, WP:HWY, or the state projects should hold the "power" in the roads projects.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:San Diego Chargers helmet old.png
Thanks for uploading Image:San Diego Chargers helmet old.png. 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 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 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 03:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Today's featured picture issue
Hi Zzyzx11, FYI the reason Picaroon removed the link that you put back is explained on WP:AN. Sorry, Picaroon was being too discreet and confused you. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 06:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like the issue is fine. Don't worry about it. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 14

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O <font color="#0000C0">bot  (t • c) 01:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Can I replace?
Can I replace the old NFL infobox with my new one? -- Louis  Alberto   Guel  21:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Super Bowl officials
Just wanted to say nice job with this article! It looks really good. RyguyMN 17:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it is modeled after FA Cup Final Referees, and since there are some references, might as well create it. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

FA Cup Final Referees
Hi. Just to let you know that your addition of a "similar" list has been reverted, on the grounds that it is not strictly relevant to football (soccer), being directly related to football in the USA sense instead. The only other reason for your link would be to advertise your list, and that's not a valid exercise. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 19:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I realised that and I was going to revert myself but your edit beat me to it. My original, misguided thought was since I modeled my list after the FA Cup one that they should both link to each other. I removed that link as well. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I had no doubt that you were editing in good faith, but article linking mustn't be tenuous, as we are all safeguarding the integrity of Wikipedia as a valid online reference facility. Best wishes. Ref (chew) (do) 00:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hebrew Calendar Epoch
Thanks for removing the incorrect Hebrew Calendar epoch reference (in response to my comment on its talk page???). However, you should probably remove it from the main October 7 article and not just the selected anniversaries page. Also, I'm not sure what you meant by referring to the Julian Calendar-the epoch is on the Hebrew Calendar, and the anniversary page refers to the Gregorian Calendar, so how does the Julian Calendar play a role?? 69.104.174.245 08:27, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, the selected anniversary pages are based on the Gregorian Calendar. I was referring to a current passage on Hebrew calendar:
 * The epoch of the modern Hebrew calendar is 1 Tishrei AM 1 (AM = anno mundi = in the year of the world), which in the proleptic Julian calendar is Monday, October 7, 3761 BCE. (emphasis added)
 * Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

California State Route 91
Just to let you know if you haven't already, if you know how to make an exit list table for freeways in California, you might want to consider doing it to California State Route 91. Again, this is just to raise your awareness... :)  03:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know about it. It is on my to-do list. I do not know when I will get around to finishing it though due to my busy schedule. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Help desk
Someone at the help desk would like to know what happened to Image:Ant worker morphology corrected.svg and, frankly, I do to. It appears to have been temp uploaded from the commons, but according to FPC it got promoted in a nomination where the promoted image wasn't even being discussed. HELP!. - Mgm|(talk) 10:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

You are a nice person
This may seem strange but your comments were nice relative to my criticism of admins. Well I should have figured that they were choosen from the articles concerning the particular day. Tourskin 05:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I would rather be nice than some of those other admins out there who are more confrontational and less friendly. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:16, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 15

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —<font color="#2E82F4">O <font color="#2E82F4">bot  (t • c) 23:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Ed Hochuli
Hey Zzyzx11, I don't know if you noticed, but I've done a lot of work lately to the Ed Hochuli article. Do you think it's worthy of being a WP:GAN yet? Take care! RyguyMN 23:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:San Diego Chargers helmet old.png
Thanks for uploading Image:San Diego Chargers helmet old.png. 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 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 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 00:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Green Bay Packers helmet rightface.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Green Bay Packers helmet rightface.png. 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.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --  L A X  10:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bucs 2.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Bucs 2.gif. 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 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 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 12:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the revert on my userpage; you caught it and fixed it before I even noticed. Keep up the good work. --TeaDrinker 22:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007 Alum Rock earthquake
I have replaced your  with an AfD. I know you've cited a very valid reason with another AfD discussion, however, since it was tagged as a current events article, I thought maybe you could have eased up on the deletion process at least overnight while people can assess damages as well have seismologists confirm the 5.6 preliminary regional moment magnitude. In several occasions, the magnitude of the earthquake has been known to be underassessed until further review. I hope you understand. <font face="Calibri" size="4px" color="#000066">- Jameson L. Tai  <font face="Calibri" color="#660000">talk ♦ contribs 04:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The previous AFD was started about 13 hours after that article was started. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Question
Should the featured picture for today be protected? It is on the Main Page, and if vandalized, would mess up the whole Main Page. jj137 ( Talk ) 19:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The Main Page is under cascading protection, so any page or template that is currently transcluded onto the main page, including the FP template, is also automatically protected. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course, you do not actually know it has been automatically protected until you actually click on the "edit" link and see the  message. This is a web usability bug that has not been fixed for several months. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, I see that now. I guess I made a mistake of not actually clicking "Edit this page". Thanks for the help.   jj137  ( Talk ) 16:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Sistine Chapel AfD
If you are planning any more visual-arts related nominations, please list them on WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts. Thank you. Johnbod 21:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OliveGardenLogo3.png
Thanks for uploading Image:OliveGardenLogo3.png. 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 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 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 01:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Pill Hill, California
I noticed you expressed some doubts about the Pill Hill, California article on its talk page. So I figured you'd want to know it's been nominated for deletion, at Articles for deletion/Pill Hill, California. szyslak 11:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)