User talk:A Knight Who Says Ni/Archive 3: January 2010 to December 2021

Previous archive: January to December 2009

Thanks
Knight, I am glad you appreciate the MUSTARD work, and thanks for the star! By the way, when do you become the "Knight who 'til recently said Ni"?  — John Cardinal (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Move
Rationale Naming conventions (music) recommends the dab "(song)", not "(single)"; consequently, I moved the page. There are literally thousands of articles ending in (song) and only about 180 that had (single) until I moved them to conform. Please respond on my talk if you so desire. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Non Free Images in your User Space
Hey there A Knight Who Says Ni, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:A Knight Who Says Ni/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Great username!
Great username! It was the best laugh I've had all day =). Ni! Ks0stm  If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 05:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Music of Minnesota FAR
Hi A Knight... :) I see that you are one of the more active editors on the WP Music talk page, and so I thought you might a good person to talk to regarding this FAR, since I didn't get any response on the project talk page itself. Would you be interested in taking a run through the Music of Minnesota page to check for comprehensiveness? If not, or if you don't have much experience in this area of music, could you recommend an active editor that I could talk to? The FAR really needs a music expert to comment on comprehensiveness, and I'm trying to do as much as I can to get that expert to talk! The FAR page is at Featured article review/Music of Minnesota/archive1, if you are interested. Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 23:41, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. Would you have any suggestions on editors who would be interested in this field, or who might have experience with FA reviews? Dana boomer (talk) 15:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, I'll drop him a note. Dana boomer (talk) 15:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorting
WP:SORTKEY In Wikimedia software, "FM" is sorted before "Fa" and any letter with diacritics would be after "Fz". Consequently, Category:FM (Canadian band) needs to be sorted "Fm" to make sure that it actually appears in alphabetical order. As to why the Canadian or British one comes first, I honestly don't know&mdash;it might sort based on which one was created first if they have identical sortkeys. They should possibly be further sorted, but 1.) I don't know that much about sortkeys and 2.) since there are only ever going to be a handful of "FM" bands, it won't be hard for users to find the one they want. (Whereas, if "FM" comes before "Fa" that will actually be confusing.) I hope that clarifies; if you need to respond, please do so on my talk. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks a lot. I will follow your suggestions! Besides, I am film scholar and lecturer and should know about the things I am reading. Anyway, the site I found the stuff is recognized by the French university. But I fear I a have to improve my wiki-knowledge and therefore : thank you again!!! Draiocht50 (talk) 14:42, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank You So Much
I appreciate very much your feedback and suggestions. You have given me many things to get working on in order to improve the Billie Jean black sequin jacket article. I thank you for your time and and your sincere help. I read other discussion pages where people where very abrasive and rude, and that is the last thing I wanted to do, but it really did seem as if the article was getting kicked under the rug for reasons they were not exactly making clear. I personally cannot believe that Michael's attire for Billie Jean is not notable enough for their own separate pages or a Billie Jean song attire article. They honestly are way more notable than any other fashions Michael wore. But if the end result is merging the article into Michael Jackson's Fashion article, I will still be satisfied and grateful for everyone's help, as I learn more about wiki. Thank you so much again!!DinhoGauch10 (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The Slits
Regarding your recent edit, did you by chance read the article's talk page concerning whether 'all female' was justified. Frankly, I am not really bothered one way or the other, but someone somewhere might challenge your presumption. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Not only did I read it, I wrote the "last word" paragraph! But you couldn't see that, because I didn't sign it.  (Just fixed that now!)  Regarding the category, it's not the word "female", but the word "all" (in the category name) that led me to remove it.  If it just said "female bands" I would be in favour of leaving it in.  There does not appear to be an appropriate category for the Slits. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:War Live.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:War Live.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).

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  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.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 03:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

one of your 'corrections' is wrong
I certainly thank you for pointing out my error(s). FYI you are wrong on one count.

Cheech and Chong's track is "Testimonial by R. Zimmerman", not Irv. That is a typo at Amazon mp3. You can see an earlier post for the CD there which spells the song title correctly: http://www.amazon.com/Cheech-Chongs-Wedding-Album-Chong/dp/B000002KJF/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1270696325&sr=8-7

or if you like I can scan my CD back cover and CD which clearly show the track as "R." and not "Irv" and you can see for yourself. R. Zimmerman is a reference to Bob Dylan.

The Beach Boys. Murry Wilson may have been in the studio and pestering the engineers in the control booth but the album in question is credited to being produced by Nick Venet. That's why Murry's name was removed.

You can revert Cheech and Chong back if you like. 98.148.253.58 (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to All Day Music, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. F-22 Raptör Aces High ♠ 23:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Responded on your talk page. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Reply to discussion at new contributors' page
Yo, I read your reply to my post of having a Wiki article and thought I'd reply to it. The reason I'd rather have a Wiki article about myself over preforming on TV, etc. Is sense then you'll go down in history, you'll be immortal, as long as Wikipedia is alive, which it always will be. Just knowing that people will be linked to my face for countless years in the future makes me want that. It's the easiest, and imo, best way to be recorded in history, for now.NexCarnifex (talk) 23:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:War ADN tracklist.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:War ADN tracklist.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).

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  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.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

your "uploading an image" project
Hi, dunno if this works because despite your very kind and complete instruction about how to upload an image (I think I understand that, now), I don't really understand this whole talk-message thing. I hope this goes to a page only you see and that you understand that the conversation started on another more public place. New users questions, or something likr that. Frankly, I find the whole message situation impossibly obfuscatory. I wrote an entry once. Now I want to supply a photo of the subject. That's all I plan to do because Wiki makes me cry. I don't want to program a user talk page because I don't understand what it's asking. But just in case I DID put this in the right place, I will try to "un-red" that link right now in the hope you reply, and that's where I see it. Sheesh. I love Wikipedia. I hate contributing/editing on it :-). Thanks. Santa27 (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * hi, dunno if i clicked the right link to answer your very kind response to my user talk page confusion. frankly, there are too many ways people on wikipedia communicate. at least 3 that i can tell, and that's 2 too many. (see: "twitter, facebook, linkedin, texting, etc."). so, in response to your comment about what kind of person a user is, classify me as "troublemaker."
 * thanks for the compliment on my entry. but, really, that was dead easy--i'm a professional writer. it would be like you writing a song. the hard part for me is the posting. the technology interferes with the communication. (see: "troublemaker.")
 * after the person who owns the photo i want to embed in the story i wrote files the paperwork and sends it to wikipedia, i will attempt to take it from commons, i assume, and put it in. if i have problems or questions, do i message "user talk: a knight who says ni"?
 * thanks Santa27 (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you re-read my message. It's filled with sarcasm (see: "Troublemaker) and, yes, my allusion to songwriting was because I read your profile. I'm a writer. You're a musician. Wikipedia entries are easy for me (well. the only one i've done was easy) because I read the editing rules, and as a journalist I understand objectivity and the need for solid research. So that's what I rendered. As you would a tune.
 * Shortly after I posted the entry, however, someone edited it, and made it inaccurate. I had to go back and un-do it. But I didn't really get that you're supposed to explain what you did and why in a certain place, so I explained on the only page I was familiar with. I don't even remember what that was. Anyway, the entry remains accurate, so it's all good.
 * My allusion to social media was an attempt to relate the unwholesome need by many people to never shut up and for to the myriad ways to indulge that compulsion to Wikipedia's seemingly endless ways of messaging. That's just me. I don't need to know every time someone burps, nor do I care to impart such information. And I like simplicity. The world ain't simple. Nor is contributing to Wikipedia. Hey, at least I know how to talk to you. Sorta.Santa27 (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Bedford
I saw it onDYK first. I've played several of the wind orchestra pieces in the past, but that's about as far as my knowledge goes. Notice though that rocehtral works and similar, as opposed to individual pop songs are usually gievn in italics as indicated in WP:MOSTITLE and WP:ITALICS, however, I'm not really familar enough with the rest of his works to decide which pieces this should apply to. David Underdown (talk) 15:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

beginner again
thanks for the recent message. i know you're trying to help, but this just gets increasingly complicated. to me, this is the least intuitive process ever, and let's not forget i'm a Word user...:-) i don't understand why there isn't just a way to click "reply here" if i want to respond to you in the same manner/place/page/topic of your message. but that's just me. i don't plan on posting additional wikipedia entries, or at least not soon or without a compelling reason, so i can't really take the time to become an expert messager/editor. but i will post that photo when it's available and probably will come crawling on my digital knees for help at that time. thanks.Santa27 (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * (copied all posts to Santa27's page and will continue conversation over there) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Feedback?
Just a head's up, I'm soliciting feedback on the VHEMT article in the talk section for the current revision, I've made a substantial revision in the effort to meet WP policy guidelines. Please take a look and let's discuss how to improve the article. -- Nuujinn (talk) 01:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Love that handle
When do you become the knight who no longer says NI??? - 207.112.58.173


 * I get asked that a lot. And asked about shrubberies, African and European swallows, etc.  I once got well into a discussion about Suffragan bishops (a subject I know nothing about) when it was pointed out that they are mentioned in Monty Python's "Bishop on the Landing" sketch. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:54, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I smell baking
Hi, Knight! I just started posting at WP:EAR as well. I discovered it by accident and find it's a great way to contribute and make some human contact with other users. In my short time on wiki I have edited articles on a fairly large number of different topics and am familiar with wiki policies from reading WP:ANI when I tire of editing for the day, so I am in a position to comment on a wide range of stuff. Your responses are very good, especially in your specialty areas. Thanks for your suggestion and the positive feedback. Have a cookie! Diannaa TALK 23:24, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note
You are receiving this note because of your participation in WT:Revision deletion, which is referred to in VPR. – xeno talk  14:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment
I really don't appreciate comments like this. Rather than slinging mud around, you might want to point out that every single one of the Pink Floyd studio albums I have worked on is now much better than it once was, and that's almost entirely because nobody else was willing to kick them into shape—including the Pink Floyd Wikiproject. Parrot of Doom 14:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, that's your point of view. Everyone at that time had problems with the way you were working, and we tried to tell you, but it all fell on deaf ears.  I have not said anything about the quality of your work, and as I said back in early 2009, I actually have no problems with the content of your changes.  The problem had to do with how you went about it.  The assertion that nobody was willing to work on improving articles back then, is rubbish.  Working with you, at that time, proved impossible, but that's kind of a separate issue.  Maybe you just don't remember the way you edited back then.  As for mudslinging, the incivility I saw in recent discussions is appalling, and everyone involved should take another look at themselves. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 14:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think my assertion is at all incorrect. Its a simple fact that the Floyd studio albums were generally of a very poor quality, and I make no apology for the speed at which I work.  Were I to have waited for the comments of others, I don't think any of them would even be a GA, given the amount of work I've done since.  WebHamster, one of the more vocal of my critics, was gracious enough to change his mind and give me his full support once he saw what I did with those articles.


 * That's really not the issue at hand though. I don't think its at all fair to say " because another user (whom you're battling with now) wanted to do an enormous overhaul without help from any of the regulars" because I most certainly wanted help.  The problem then was that the editors from whom I wanted that help wanted me to work at their pace.  A pace which had, over the course of several years, achieved little significant progress on those articles.  I saw no indication that would ever change.  "In order to resist any efforts to help with or oversee his work, he insisted on making hundreds of changes each day, over a period of at least three weeks" - this is not true.  I have no ulterior motives.  I work at my own pace, and I work at that pace not to create problems for others, but because I'm a fast typist and enjoy what I do.  That comment is quite hurtful, but this "A few months later, I looked at the Pink Floyd talk page, and found it to be a ghost town. All the regular watchers and maintainers had left. It looks like it's still in that state" - you're implying that somehow, by working to improve the Floyd studio albums, I've made an entire project a ghost town.  That isn't just hurtful, its downright offensive.  That project was dead long before I ever got involved. Parrot of Doom 15:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Live Bell
I can try. SJ(talk) 19:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I find it
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=zwsEAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=it&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

the error was only the name of the album. It's Pulse and not Live Bell. SJ(talk) 20:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:Blood, Sweat and Tears, and "dead piping"

 * Although I respect your perspective; I'm disinclined to leave such great swathes of "red ink" on a page. It's great to leave these links to encourage people to whip up a new article on a relevant subject/item, but I think you'll agree that it's highly unlikely anybody is going to be creating, researching, and maintaining an article on Bobby Economou or many of the dozens of other names listed in the article. Thanks for your message, though; I always welcome constructive criticism. bwmcmaste (talk) 08:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Legal threats, etc.
I agree that the legal threat wasn't that awful but that subject seems to have a very sensitive tripwire hereabouts and I also figured that the editor might get the message a little more clearly if someone removed his little display of petulance. In the future I'll let them go if they seem essentially ridiculous, as this one did. As for drawing attention to it in the same place - I suppose that's a problem but no worse to my mind, really, than removal of information that needs to be removed routinely accompanied by an edit summary that more or less invites the insatiably curious to look at the diff (i.e., "removed personal information", "removed legal threat", "removed libel"). If it's considered better practice to remove in one place and comment or warn in another, then I'll be happy to conform I don't see much of a difference. Thanks in any case for speaking your mind. I'm always happy to chat with a sensible person. JohnInDC (talk) 02:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I meant it when I said I'm always happy to chat with a sensible person -  JohnInDC (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Official Nash the Slash Facebook Group
This latest Wikepedia edit attempt of mine is, as always, a rather frustrating and depressing experience to say the least. I only included this link because it has been officially sanctioned by Nash himself. I'm not going to embark on a lengthy, and ultimately futile, argument with you over this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poppet34 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Poppet34 Thank you for your message. Please may I correct you on a few points?

1. My Facebook group existed for a long time before it became official - and it became official because Nash himself sanctioned this. I am a truthful person, and your comment "because (believe it or not) virtually ALL OF THEM call themselves "official", and 99% of the time this is nonsense" offends me.

2. The MySpace page is also official, as is Nash's official UK site - because Nash himself sanctioned this (I know these facts because I take the time to talk to actual people). I am more than happy to run the Gloriously Unofficial UK Nash site (which, incidentally, holds probably the largest collection of Nash-related internet links going) and have never passed it off as anything other than 'un'official.

As a supposedly historically 'accurate' record of Nash the Slash this Wikipedia page is actually depressingly 'hollow'; for instance no mention is made about the 'Not So Silent Film Collection'. In fact you are quoted as saying "If it were ever available, it should be available now" - apart from the fact that this statement doesn't actually make much sense, it's like disbelieving the existence of one's own internal organs just because you can't see them! The CD was a very limited edition and advertised on Nash's site for a while - I'm very surprised that you never saw it..... I even have a pdf of the front cover!

Poppet34 (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The statement that offends you, was not directed at you personally. It was a general explanation of why a website with the word "official" in its name gains no extra credibility because of it, and addresses what appears to be a common misconception.


 * Your claim that the Facebook and Myspace sites are sanctioned, is not demonstrated anywhere that I can see, and who is to say what "sactioned" means anyway. "Official" and "sanctioned" aren't the same thing.  For some, either term could mean that Nash once sent an email to the creator acknowledging he is aware the site exists, and said he likes it, without making a request for it to be taken down.  If you wanted to demonstarte that Nash is not opposed to the site, and is in continual contact with the site's creators, you could ask him to put a link a "notice of approval" on his website, as he has done for some Youtube videos and fan sites.  But as I said, external links aren't put in Wikipedia just because the subject of the article appears to endorse them, or even authors them.  They actually have to serve a purpose.  If it's just there to inform readers that they exist, that is advertising.


 * Regarding the state of the article, the example you gave is a classic example of the wrong way to approach criteria for content at Wikipedia: to want to put in things you know to be true (and I'm not doubting it's true), but can't provide a reference. The article is "depressingly hollow" because we haven't done enough research to find reliable sources supporting better history.  Up to a point, we can add things we know to be true, but haven't found the necessary citations, but we go against the rules when we do so, and what we put in has a greater likelihood of being sloppy and inaccurate.  I'd love to see it improved, so anything you can do to reference and recheck the article's existing information would be great.


 * Regarding what you quoted above, that was my first reaction, and I call your attention to my follow-up post which I'm certain you've seen. If you follow the recommendation / request I made, I of course have no objection.  But please don't add a graphic of the artwork to "prove" it exists; that isn't a valid method of citation. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 18:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I could gnaw my own leg off in frustration! There seems very little point in continuing this. I won't be returning. Poppet34 (talk) 19:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Picture Music tracklist
Please keep the tracklist as is, since I've put a lot of time into making them uniform throughout all of Klaus Schulze's album articles. I think this format works out best. Jmj713 (talk) 01:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Marooned
As you were kind enough to help me find the article for "What Do You Want From Me", I was wondering if you could help me with "Marooned", which I can't seem to find, either. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 04:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Need your Help
Hey i need your help !!! Can you help me protect my article "Amén" from delete or editing ?? I did my best to fulfill the policy and changed a lot of things !! Now I need your help please! --Needsexperts (talk) 12:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! I know that your are not an admin but I know that you konow more than me!I know also that you can not exactly protect a page but I meant improve it. Now I think the article is really better (it also has references since yesterday)! You will control that?? --Needsexperts (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC) --Needsexperts (talk) 12:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You
You crack me up! Someone beat me in offering you a shrubbery, but no-one has yet attacked you with the word "it"! ;)

Don't worry, I won't be to terroristic with my "it"s. Just wanted to say, you, your username and your edit summaries (especially the edit summaries) are some of the funnies things I've seen on Wikipedia in a loooong time. cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 04:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Biography banners
Hello again. I note you are listed as an active member participant at WikiProject Musicians. Can I ask you why the following musicians have no biography banner on their talk pages ? - The Pearls, The Lemon Pipers, The Headboys, The Dale Sisters, Players Association, Clarence Edwards (blues musician), Bern Elliott and the Fenmen, Barkin' Bill Smith and/or even Slade discography and Billy Idol discography. It is not a big deal, and I am only aware of these because they are on my watchlist. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:07, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

BLP, ethnicity, gender
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons

Wikilawyers have been trying to drive through a wording loophole in BLP, saying ethnicity and gender of EGRS doesn't apply to living persons, simply because the two words aren't in the policy. (Apparently, they think it should only apply to dead people.) I remember you as having been very involved in years past.

They also are trying to remove the notability and relevance criteria for EGRS, but that's another fight for another day, I'm simply too busy to watch two fronts at the same time. --William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Bill Dwyre
Folks, I am an infrequent Wiki contributor who finds the process of both editing and messaging to be hopelessly complicated (why isn't there a tab on the top of the page linking here? took 15 minutes to find this page). I posted additional information today to the original subject/Wiki page I created more than a year ago. I added three footnotes and cannot figure out how to eliminate the extraneous period that precedes each of them. I don't anticipate revisiting the editing site any time soon. Will someone please review the footnotes and clean up the errant punctuation? Thank you. --Santa27 (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Virgin label 2212.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Virgin label 2212.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 , 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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See 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.  Ron h jones (Talk) 23:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

CBS Records
At one point you had edited CBS Records, please join us at Talk:CBS Records to help decide what that page should entail. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Int SC 3.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Int SC 3.jpg, has been listed at 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 if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:16, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Int SC 1.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Int SC 1.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) 02:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Int SC 2.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Int SC 2.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) 02:27, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

olleH iN syaS thginK A
Hello A Knigh Who Says Ni, Hi....... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susan Michel (talk • contribs) 18:32, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Previous archive: January to December 2009