User talk:Arx Fortis/Archive 1

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

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 04:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Source and details added Arx Fortis 04:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser
Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. Regrettably, I have declined your request as you do not have 500 mainspace edits. You are welcome to apply again at a later time. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 20:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I do, but they aren't all attributed to this account. As my userpage mentions, you can see my prior contributions here.  For some time, I made edits without an account, but failed to mention this upon my application.  Regardless, I worked quite a bit on the WP:MISSING project this evening and have exceeded 500 edits.   ++ Arx Fortis 08:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)



Billy Graham - my mistake
I just replied to you on the talk page. My mistake (removing your quality entry and working link on the AIDS subject). The smear/quote mine was so blatant that in my haste to delete it I did not realize the latest version had the correction. Sorry for the confusion/disruption. Mr Christopher 17:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

"Fix it and readd it"
Apropos of the article on Bush the elder: Please don't encourage somebody to "fix" and later readd what's obviously tripe. Thanks! -- Hoary 09:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please use a little more tact when criticizing the edit comments (and assumed motives) of others. I'm a bit lost here: are you referring to my criticism (a) of the trivia-adder (and, later, trivia-mass-deleter) or (b) of you? If the former, sorry [to you, not him/her] but all my patience was used up. (I'll avoid biting those "newbies" who seem to be attempting to have a clue.) If the latter, I hadn't thought I either was or seemed critical; certainly I hadn't intended to be. -- Hoary 01:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Cortes Generales
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Sagaciousuk (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You are mistaken (unless it's just your bot). I was not "experimenting" with the page Cortes Generales.  I was tracing activity from a certian user/vandal and attempted revert vandalism on that page.  After doing so, I then realized it had already been reverted, so I reverted my own edit. ++ Arx Fortis 19:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No it wasn't a bot that set the warning, but thanks to the rush yesterday, your edit that accidentally added back vandalism was picked up by the script which throws up potential vandal edits to me - and I tried to revert it and it seems you just beat me to it. When something reverts ok to the script, I leave a warning. I apologise, as the script usually detects when there has been edits after the one I try to revert - but it must have been us both trying to fix. Keep up the good work! --Sagaciousuk (talk) 02:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Wildlife of North Carolina
I have reverted your image edits at Wildlife of North Carolina. Though these images are not necessarily optimal, you can feel free to find or create alternatives before removing the existing ones. This article, like all wikipedia articles, is a work in progress. If you have a complaint with any of the photographs, please use constructive criticism, rather than destructing the available page. Nimur 18:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I respecfully disagree with your assertion that a bad picture is better than no picture (in regards to the bird and flower pictures). Further, the focus of the bridge picture was just that - the bridge - and made the river an afterthought.  I have replaced both the flower picture and the bridge picture.  I suggest removing the turkey vulture picture as there are two bird pictures on this page, while none for mammals or reptiles.  ++ Arx Fortis 05:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thoughts and contributions. Your work on the article is much appreciated.  Sorry if I was overly zealous- I noticed a new editor at the article who was making deletions, and I forgot to assume good faith.  Keep up the good contributions, I'll try to do some later this week. Nimur 06:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Issue with Redirect
I request help from an admin regarding the redirection of an article and the actions of another admin. I un-redirected an article and restored the content as I disagreed with the other users's assertion that the information doesn't belong in it's own article. I asked that the user please discuss the issue on the talk page before re-reverting, but he refused to do so. The article is part of a larger issue than just a "list." It involves succession boxes (like the one shown below) and the ability to click on the title and be directed to a complete list. (Why should users have to click through the entire succession to see the list?) I feel that starting NFL QBs are notable in and of themselves and that the lists for each team's starting QBs could be a page. It is not as if I am suggesting Wikipedia host a list of every starting player in every position in the History of the NFL.

I just simply don't understand why that user's opinion is more "important" than mine or the other 8 users who contributed to the article since its inception. This information is not in the main Miami Dolphins article and frankly doesn't belong there (that article is long enough as it is). Unfortunately, the user who reverted is an admin and, frankly, I feel intimidated by his 2nd revert for fear that the admin might ban me if I revert again. For this reason, I haven't restored the article.

What bothers me most is that this admin refused to allow any discussion of the issue before redirecting, then refused again after I requested discussion. In my two brief years of editing Wikipedia, I have never found such obtuse actions by an admin.

The article is (was) this: but has since been redirected to the main Miami Dolphins page.

Sample succession box:


 * If he really refuses to have any sort of dicussion, I would continue asking him until you are quite sure that he knows exactly what he is doing. I would then ask for maybe a mediation at the mediation cabal. If he doesn't respond to that, then he is most certainly a troublesome editor and administrator intervention is probably required at WP:ANI. Hope that helps.
 * Woah, I just realized. You are saying the reverting editor is an administrator? What is his name? GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 02:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * His name is Jaranda You can see the talk page ++Arx Fortis 03:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Silene virginica
I really like the image that you uploaded and added to Silene virginica it really captures the flowers nicely. I am a little concerned that though you gave it a GNU license you have tagged it with the summary "I am the photographer of this image and I release it to Wikipedia." This statemnent and the GNU license are, I think, contradictory. Also I know that according to Image_use_policy section "Free licenses" states that "Licenses which restrict the use of the media to non-profit or educational purposes only (i.e. noncommercial use only), or are given permission to only appear on Wikipedia, are not free enough for Wikipedia's usages or goals and will be deleted." Thus if your summary statement makes it not "free", it would be violating this policy. I would hate to see this nice image lost for this reason. I would also encourage you to write longer and more descriptive summaries of what the image is. Summaries should include: Description: The subject of the image Source: The copyright holder of the image or URL of the web page the image came from Date: Date the image was created. The more exact, the better Location: Where the image was created. The more exact the better Author: The image creator, especially if different from the copyright holder Permission: Who or what law or policy gives permission to post on Wikipedia with the selected image copyright tag Other versions of this file: Directs users to derivatives of the image if they exist on Wikipedia Hope this helps. Peace Earthdirt 02:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Details added. ++Arx Fortis 06:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Trigun
Thank you very much for putting your edits back in ^_^ I'm sorry about the reverting I keep doing, but I'm getting very tired of the article becoming a battleground for "how dare you include a section on the nature of relationships?" ~SeventhHaido 11:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

On the VHS, and in many posters, it says otherwise. Here's a picture http://www.geocities.com/cinqkingdom/trigun.jpg ForestAngel 05:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bolding links on "List of notable accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft"
No need to thank me. All I did was make a suggestion on the talk page. I understand your frustration though. Sometimes I try to move a page in a new direction and come back a week later to find someone reverted it. – Zntrip 04:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Impatiens pallida.jpg
Hi Arx Fortis. That image was actually a yellow form of Impatiens capensis (see the image now on Impatiens pallida). I moved your image to commons (Image:Impatiens capensis yellow form.jpg)... it's generally much better to upload your images there, rather than Wikipedia.

BTW, since you're interested in wildflowers, you might be interested in the Bloom Clock on Wikiversity (see BCP/Impatiens pallida for how images are used there) :). -- SB_Johnny | PA! 09:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, I might be wrong too... the first flora I was looking at doesn't agree with the second one. I'll look further into it over the next few days. -- SB_Johnny | PA! 10:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania in Atlanta!
Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 00:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Trigun and its contradictions
I went back and whatched the intro for the very first time and much to my suprise you were right! Partially. It is indeed that way in the intro but if you look at a wanted poster (ep. 1) it is very clear that the $$ is before the numbers. Gess they dicided to change it in the series but forgot to make everything match.

btw (from top poster) http://www.geocities.com/cinqkingdom/trigun.jpg


 * Crud. I want back and whatched ep 1 and what I was recalling was the tile of the episode: The $$60 Million Man. I still swear that there is a poster with a reward on it. (Can't recall whos) I will get back to you after I re-watch all of the episodes.


 * Isn't he called the $$60 BILLION Man? Doesn't Wikipedia even have Userboxes that say $$60 Billion on it? I see the spot that you're referring to, but the rest of the anime writes it as $$60,000,000,000, with the $$ first. Remember, the animators had a really tight budget at the start of the anime, so they might not have caught the mistake throughout the rest of it. See! That guy saw the same poster that I did! ForestAngel 06:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, isn't the first episode titled "The $$60,000,000,000 Man," with the $$ first? Because that's how I keep seeing it. Everywhere I go, that's what it says. The $$ go first. And if you think I'm wrong, try Googling "Trigun screenshot $$60,000,000,000." With the $$ first, you get 92 hits. With the $$ last, you get 3. The first is the Wikipedia article; The second and third don't even use the $$, because they spell out the words "double dollars." And if you try just "Trigun $$60,000,000,000," most of the hits will only be "Trigun-6,000,000,000 Man." And if you look through the hits, most of them that DON'T just say "6,000,000,000" will have the $$ first, just not highlighted. Another nail in your coffin: when you Google "The $$60,000,000,000 Man," you get 11,300 hits. Note with the $$ FIRST! Now, Google it with the $$ last, and you get 595 hits, the vast majority of them having nothing to do with Trigun. Of those hits, like I said before, most of them either had the $$ first, or not at all. I found (and yes, I actually counted this out) 10, including the Wikipedia article, that actually had the $$ last. You want me to send you screenshots for proof? Because I will if you do. ForestAngel 06:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't call the kettle black. So by that logic, in the REAL world, we put the $ after an amount of money. You're also saying that the hundreds upon thousands of users who look at this, and the even more hundreds of thousands of people WRITING these are wrong. I've also looked on the Wikipedia pages in other languages, since you mentioned that OBVIOUSLY only the ENGLISH translation must be wrong! How do you know that the Japanese writers didn't know whether or not the $ came first, since in Japanese, the Yen comes AFTER the amount of money (Like I said, low budget)? I've looked on EVERY language of Wikipedia, and they either spell out "double dollars" or they put the $$ first, so it's NOT just in English. Oh, and I DO have a screenshot! | In your FACE! ForestAngel 08:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Whoa, you're right about her 'tude. I guess you are the kettle in this case.  Anyway, the two strongest pieces of evidence of where to put the double-dollar sign is the English-translation title card for the episode and the wanted poster as seen in the episode.  Since the wanted poster is art and not actually the title of the episode, I would side with the dollar signs to go before the number.  Cheers! In Defense of the Artist 04:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

GE
Suspected sock puppetry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:General_Electric#External_link User refuses all logic; possible conflict of interest.
 * Hey, it would be better and more efficient for you to post the problem at report suspected sock puppets rather than using the 'helpme' tag.' Ryan Lupin  (talk/contribs) 10:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I know it seems odd, but finding the right page in Wikipedia on the workings of Wikipedia itself it not an easy task.  I wasn't aware that page existed.  I guess you could say that's what the "helpme" was for...I didn't know where to take the issue.  ++Arx Fortis 16:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Tagging issues
Hi!
 * Ahem, this could involve a megasearch

re: The three fact taggings in: this edit
 * Please use the format, or some such clue as your complaint. You can add a million pipetricks in a template, and imbedding a comment like that is a good practice and means of stating your concerns.


 * Further, the subst:DATE template works with MOST common maintenance tags to provide the proper date formated syntax for maintenance auto-categorization tracking, etc. and prevents the need of edits like this fixup because you didn't provid e a proper date.

Hope you had a good summer! // Fra nkB 13:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * T'would be nice if your summaries used the template NAME (i.e. {fact}&mdash; a single set of curly-braces sets it off nicely for those perusing history) and included some focus to the request on that summary too. I generally just copy the tagging line into the summary and edit there to save typing... either way, leaving clues for those who come along behind is only courteous--we all only have so much free time.
 * You seem to be keying in on the word 'experiment' in the text.
 * Someone has cleared the second, and the first fact tag should be easy enough to run down, but the third cite request seems to be both contrary to common sense, and could be a difficult time sink (as it involves 4-5 years experience with the series, upto hundreds of thousands of posts on the website 1632 Tech Manual, and so forth) and is therefore asking for an awful lot of effort to confirm the self-evident concept that making an entire town an protagonist in time travel was an experiment. I know he's written about it somewhere, but recollection of where and when is missing.
 * In short, what exactly are you asking be confirmed in the third fact tag? I don't mind investing some time for things that matter, but this seems a bit trivial. It could be a turn of phrase for example.


 * Hi Frank, I wasn't doubting that 'experiment' was the appropriate word to use. However, as it was a presumptive statement about the author's intent, it seemed a citation was warranted.  "Years of experience" and participation in "hundreds of thousands of posts on the website" could be interpreted as original research.   However, at this time it appears an edit and a citation have already clarified the assertion.
 * Thanks for the pointers on making myself more clear.  Cheers. ++Arx Fortis 04:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Removing Miranda Cosgrove Links?
why do you keep removing the external links on Miranda Cosgrove's Page? can you stop doing it please. my site is NOT a 'Spam' link and it has every right to be there. there is not reason why Fansite can not be added as links especially since it is the best source for Miranda on the internet. i don't know weather you have something against my site but its just getting rude.

i don't know why you keep removing it? but you better have a good reason. please stop doing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrf05 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * See my comments on your talk page ++Arx Fortis 03:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion area for United States General articles
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history for a common discussion area. &mdash; MrDolomite &bull; Talk 18:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Acacia
Thank you for your great contributions to Wikipedia!!!

The Meadow Argus was in the article in the pest section because it is a pest of some Acacias.

WriterHound 21:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

A star

 * Thanks, Crum. ++Arx Fortis 03:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

No offense on the 180/181 revert
Hey there, just wanted to say no offense for reverting your revert of the anon IP on the airline accidents list. The anon IP was correct: both the Wikipedia article and the sources cited by the Wikipedia article say 173 passengers + 7 crew = 180 fatalities.

I just wish these anon IPs would use edit summaries so it's easier to tell if they are correcting a mistake or engaging in subtle vandalism. heh... Anyway, no offense meant on the revert! Thanks! --Jaysweet 15:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Westboro Baptist Church
I agree with your rv comments about this so-called church on the Baptist page. However, they are front page news with their venom, and they bandy about the name "Baptist." The news media do not include a disclaimer that "they're not really Baptists." I've talked to quite a few who haven't heard the full story about them, and are lumping them in with mainline Baptists. I would appreciate it if you would put something in the place of the too-lengthy statement that you removed that would meet the concern about them really being Baptist. Thanks for considering it. Afaprof01 14:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Miranda Cosgrove.jpg
I'm sorry I was confused. I saw this image (Image:Bettis1.jpg) and didn't notice the "some" rights reserved on the bottom. You can just go ahead and delete it. --Ospinad 17:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Miranda cosgrove.jpg
Is the Flickr member (assuming they are the copyright holder) explicitly allowing the sale, redistribution, modification, and deconstruction of this image? These are the requirements necessary to be kept, and I'm not sure if "I don't mind that it's on thre." suffices. —  pd_THOR  undefined | 18:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I've passed along the question to the creator and will await a response. ++Arx Fortis 18:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You (I think) marked the image as licensed under CC-by-2.0. The flickr page disagrees.  If the user is licensing under these terms, please have her update her flickr page to note that specific license.  The cc-by-2.0 is an acceptable free license for us and allows sale, redistribution, modification, etc.  If she is not licensing under those specific terms, other licenses may be acceptable but we'd require a specific license.  See WP:COPYRIGHT.  Thanks!  --Yamla 18:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually the uploader (Ospinad) marked it with that license. Not me. I originally added the templates regarding copyright violation, then removed them per the creator's reply to my inquiry. I have placed a 2nd inquiry to ensure the understand what they are (or are not) giving permission for. ++Arx Fortis 18:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Add

Asheville, North Carolina
I have left comments regarding my B-class assessment of Asheville, North Carolina on its talk page. There's also several links to wikipedia guideline pages that may also be useful. Hope to see the article nominated for Good article status in the near future! Cheers! Dr. Cash 22:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You just beat me to reverting the vandalism on this article. Keep up the good work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agilemongoose (talk • contribs) 18:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Trigun Ep1 screenshot.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Trigun Ep1 screenshot.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 02:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Miss Pussy Galore (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Check your facts...I did not create the article. I restored the speedy deletion template that was removed by the creator of the page.  ++Arx Fortis (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
My bad.--Miss Pussy Galore (talk) 18:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

You are an idiot
Not really lol. But you put a nonsense tag on this article. It is clearly not nosense. However, it might be speediable under A7. Please make sure the tag you are placing is very appropriate. Thanks. I (talk) 18:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. From the title and my very quick glance, You are an idiot appeared to be a nonsense article.   ++Arx Fortis (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

November 2007
Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Closedmouth (talk) 02:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, all of them, but especially when you're nominating pages for speedy deletion. No offense intended, though, it's something a lot of people need to work on. --Closedmouth (talk) 02:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that is true (edits to a deleted article about some non-notable person really don't matter), but if you think about people doing things like RC patrol, it enables them to ignore the edits that have an edit summary indicating that the article's being nominated for deletion, and concentrate on more important things. --Closedmouth (talk) 03:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * OK. Will do. Thanks ++Arx Fortis (talk) 06:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Inspire Creative Studios
Can you explain me more detailed why you had placed WP:SD on Inspire Creative Studios article and what should I do to solve this? Tankbrick (talk) 00:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

RE:Tina Small
I'll read it now. Be back with a reply ASAP. Rudget . talk 16:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Regards, Rudget . talk  16:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

ollo (olive oil) deletion
I notice companies like Apple, Johnny Walker and Cutty Sark have articles explaining the company and the product, including references in popular culture. Do you have suggestions for me to re-write the article to explain the company's product? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDmalone (talk • contribs) 17:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Redstone Technical Test Center
Please confirm you are satisfied with the mil-stub tag and the website now cited by the Redstone Technical Test Center article. (sdsds - talk) 04:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes...looks good. I guess I was stepping on your toes while you were adding the citation.  My bad.  Cheers. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 04:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Questioning your proposed speedy deletions of articles I just posted.
Hi. Only minutes after I created a short article "Mobile pedestal" and a redirection from "Storage cabinet" to "Stationery cabinet", you have placed a notice on them proposing speedy deletion.

Perhaps you know the rules better than I do - but before acting further, could you please read the reasons I've placed on those articles' talk pages justifying their retention? If those articles are not acceptable, then it seems to me many others which stay in Wikipedia are also not acceptable - probably including a couple of others I've done too. Short definitions seem quite common, if they are on the topic and give a fair description of the subject; and redirections are very abundant indeed - and I think they are justified and useful, too.

If my articles must go, I would appreciate knowing the reason, and getting any suggestions on how I might be able to strengthen the articles to justify keeping them.

Thanks. M.J.E. (talk) 09:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Martin (speaker)
Could you please look at the article's talk page and help me understand how to improve it. Thanks, Ursasapien (talk) 09:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I left a reply on the article's talk page ++Arx Fortis (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Meg Campbell (poet)
I have declined to speedily delete the above page. Publishing six books and receiving awards are clear assertions of importance. If you still seek deletion, please use the WP:AFD process. By the way, speedy deletion tags should not be substituted. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I left a reply on your talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 20:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. I do think that earlier version asserted enough importance to take it out of speedy range (mentions a book award and states, though doesn't list, that she published six books). In any event, I was not trying to be too normative, though reading it over it I can see how it may have comes across that way. Sometimes I don't know how I sound at the time I write something. I just like to drop a note when I decline speedies (in this case I actually modified a standard template sdd2). You're correct that an article doesn't cite sources or list major works, the user hasn't established notability, but one needs only an assertion of importance to avoid speedy deletion under CSD A7. Everything else is for Prod or debate on the merits at AfD. I too get frustrated seeing so many articles started as sub-stubs, even when the subject is notable, and may feel that more intensely, as you do, right after posting something like this in a single edit:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Vocelli Pizza
Thanks for adding that tag. I was just about to myself. I'm not a novice at Wikipedia, and I would not create a page if it was not notable enough to create it. The person who tagged it probably isn't as experienced as you and I, and there are FAR less notable businesses with pages on here.Jgera5 (talk) 00:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Need help
I'm not sure where to go with this:  Is allmusic.com enough of a citation to merit notability for keeping an article? (Example: this page for this article.) While patrolling new pages, I've been seeing a lot of music/band/album articles with this site as the only citation. If there are no other references or assertions of notability, should the page be tagged for deletion? It seems that if allmusic.com wants to literally catalog all music, that's fine....but it doesn't mean that Wikipedia has to. Arx Fortis (talk) 00:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * If you're unsure, try undefined. This basically lists the article for deletion; if someone cannot come with a proper reason as to why the article is to be kept within five days, it'll be deleted. Bjelleklang -  talk  Bug Me  02:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Takanabe Domain
Hello; this is a response to the note you left me. As you'll note, I have added a reference to the article in question. I was creating two articles nigh-simultaneously, when you noticed the lack of citation. Thank you for your attention. -Tadakuni (talk) 00:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Popeye the Sailor: 1933-1938, Volume 1
Now that I completed working on the article, I've included appropriate citations. Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Jaekelopterus rhenaniae
Jaekelopterus rhenaniae was just discovered, so it could take some time for more information to come out. I'm sure quite a few people will want to edit this article in the coming days, and I am working on it too. Please give it some more time. Thank you. Grundle2600 (talk) 05:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Vocelli, part 2
Not a problem. I think I just got carried away with the other user. The Articles for Deletion page only had one other argument for Deletion, and I've never seen this much one-sidedness for an argument to keep the page. I think that other user probably needs to realize that there are other articles like this, and probably just doesn't have their priorities straight, as I have seen a lot of very bad articles still up untouched. Thanks for the help on the page!Jgera5 (talk) 19:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete my page!
I have seen your decision to delete my page and I do not understand why! I think that you decided that when I was just begining to write it! Please look at it now! I have seen that nobody wrote in English about the Izvoarele commune from Tulcea, Romania. My grandparents live there and I gathered a lot of information about the legends, traditions and others. I also spoke to a History teacher from Greece about the Greek Revolution and told her about the local slogans and language. I also studied this on the internet and books! I took in consideration all the possibilities! I said all I could about the village! Please this is important to me and to the greek people from there! It is about our origin! Please reconsider! Take another look! Now it's almost finished... I promise I will check it periodicaly and add new information! Please tell me if it is good! I must remind you that I was just starting it! It was 3 o'clock here in Romania so I went to sleep but the next day I finished it! Please take another look before doeing anything wrong... or at least explain to me what made you delete it.

Thank you for your understanding and for your patiance!

Alexe (Alexeiou) Stefan-Radu descendent of the Greek revolutionaries...


 * I left a reply on your anonymous talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 22:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

My page is this: Izvoarele, a commune in Tulcea County.

By the way thank you for your advice!

Re: Speedy tag
Sorry for what I did. Based on comments posted to Baseball Express's deletion talk page, I will not repost this article if it is deleted again. I was trying to confirm whether or not it was a good idea to write an article about a company that sells baseball stuff, like Modells. New York Dreams (talk) 06:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards,


 * I left a reply on your talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 15:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Here. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 17:24 24 November 2007 (GMT).

???
I'm confused about what's happening with the Pink Floyd bootleg page I created. Flickts (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I left a reply on your talk page. Arx Fortis (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Universal Florida Studio Tour
Hi Arx Fortis. Just want to let you know that while i was editing the page for the Universal Florida Studio Tour, you said that the page would be deleted if i didn't include any references or sources. I included one after you sent me that message which links to the original map for Universal Studios Florida on thepsychomovies.com. I also removed that message you posted on the page. If you think that my link isn't good enough, please do not put that box on the page again. Instead, just post me a message. If you have any questions or complaints, please post them on the FAQ section of my talk page. Thanks, and no harm done, as long as you respond with a message back. --5VH9 (talk) 00:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I posted a reply on your talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 01:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I got your message. Sorry about the misunderstanding, But i would still like to know if you agree that the reference i posted on the page for the Universal Florida Studio Tour is satisfactory. Please respond with a message back to my user page. No harm done. Cheers. --5VH9 (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I posted a new reply on your talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 01:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I see. Well, thanks for the advice. Do you happen to know any other pages that could be used as reliable sources on the page? Please respond with a message back to my talk page. Thanks--5VH9 (talk) 02:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

article
my sister wrote the article that you deleted


 * I left a reply on your talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 01:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I didn't know. But my sister hacked into my account and made that article.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mormon17 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Harassment
Zunaid thanks you for brining a new e-foe to his attention. She will be dealt with --NEMT (talk) 05:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I will be dealt with? What does that mean? I haven't talked to you, said anything to you, or edited anything on Trigun in months! Seriously, what the hell is your problem? I thought we were done with this. Are you cyberstalking me or something? That argument I had with Zunaid was a year ago about deleting an article, which ended up being kept, ending the argument. I'm free to put whatever I want on my user page, hence userboxes. It's not an article. Now I'm an e-foe? What happened to being civil, huh? Don't call the kettle black! ForestAngel (talk) 07:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I left a reply on your talk page ++Arx Fortis 03:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Have You Noticed My New Message Yet?
I added a new message under Universal Florida Studio Tour. Please take notice of it and reply with a message back to my talk page. Thanks--5VH9 (talk) 01:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:*bj*
A User is allowed to remove warnings from their Talk page. Please stop re-adding them, that's harrassment. Corvus cornix talk  04:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Even while Administrator intervention is being requested? ++Arx Fortis 04:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Read Don't restore removed comments.  Corvus cornix  talk  04:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems very counter to common sense that a user would be allowed to remove warnings from their talk page while they were in the very act of vandalism. Regardless, in addition to your "advice" to me, why didn't you also discourage the user against obvious vandalism and harassment of me?  I'm just wondering why you singled me out.   ++Arx Fortis 04:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what your disagreement is. I don't know if or what the other person did.  I'm not really interested.  I commented to you because I saw your edits in Recent changes.   Corvus cornix  talk  04:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * While recent changes is a wonderful tool, your comments "I have no idea what your disagreement is. I don't know if or what the other person did. I'm not really interested." epitomize the issue at hand. You didn't consider the context which resulted in a somewhat knee-jerk reaction.  Even under the most pedantic interpretation of WP:DRC, it is not intended as means for a vandal to hide their warnings so they can continue vandalizing.  Given the examples shown, there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell this guy was going to stop his vandalism until it was noted by an administrator and appropriate action taken...in this case a three-day ban. Regardless, I don't make it a habit of reverting talk pages. ++Arx Fortis 05:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The context of the discussion has no bearing on your repeatedly adding unwanted warnings on another User's page.  Corvus cornix  talk  05:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Regardless of whether I was wrong or right, my point is, if you're trying to make a constructive contribution to Wikipedia, perhaps you should find out the context before applying a virtual template to a page. As WP:DTR says, "for most editors that have been around a while....telling them "did you know we had a rule against this" tends to be counterproductive in resolving the issue."  ++Arx Fortis 05:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * We have nothing further to discuss. Don't attack a person for pointing out your inappropriate behavior.  I will not reply to you further.   Corvus cornix  talk  05:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't attack you? Where did I do that??? ++Arx Fortis 05:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm.....no reply. ++Arx Fortis 05:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note to self: Someone else pointing out what they feel is my "inappropriate behavior" is OK...but suggesting that that someone else could have handled the situation better himself is considered a "personal attack".
 * Second note to self: Ignore the double standard.

*bj*
It used to be considered vandalism, but now it's more or less recognized that a user has the right to do what they will to their own talk page. I don't really like the practice, but that's just the way it seems to be.  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:32, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That's why I don't like it, but revert-warring with them in their talk page for warnings is just as counter-productive.  bibliomaniac 1  5  05:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Like Arx Fortis, I have trouble understanding why we would want to let vandals get away with simply deleting vandalism and block warnings on their Talk Pages. So I raised this here and as you'll see, Alice.S was quick to point out that these are proposed guidelines only. Let me just repeat here that if we let vandals get away with removing warnings it will only make it easier for them to persist and worsen the vandalism problem, thanks. Shawn in Montreal 22:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info, Shawn. ++Arx Fortis 23:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome. And for the record, I do agree that accusing someone of harassment is not a productive way to begin an exchange on that editor's talk page, especially given the facts in this case. Have a good weekend, Shawn in Montreal 01:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Jon's Music Company
I checked out the history of the article, Jon's Music Company, and I agree with you &mdash; I think it's a hoax. I can't find the location of the place on any of the maps (i.e. Google Maps), or find it mentioned on any other site online, and the website doesn't seem professional either. The website and the article claims that they have headquarters, but there are no addresses listed anywhere. Just wanted a second opinion on this before I nominate the article for speedy deletion. — Mirlen  04:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Benjani
I have added no flags to this profile. But thanks for the info anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maracana (talk • contribs) 21:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about Benjani....I made my comment under this topic. I removed a flag from an article here.  You added it back here, so I removed it again per WP:FLAGS.  ++Arx Fortis (talk) 15:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Flag On LBH Article?
Hi Arx -

I just had a question about your replacement of the US flag on the Little Big Horn article - 36 instead of 37 stars. I appreciate your justification - but if your date of 1867 is correct, then shouldn't the 37 star flag be correct? The battle was after all in 1876, and Nebraska became a state - the 37th - in 1867. Wouldn't that make the 37 star flag correct? Sensei48 (talk) 05:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Flags
Hi. On this edit you cited WP:FLAGS to explain your edit. I looked over the page but I'm still a little unclear as to why you removed the flag icons from the article. Would you mind elaborating a little bit on your reasoning? Thanks, Natalie (talk) 21:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Orlando Bosch
Thank you, that's better. I was somewhat angry about these two  contributions, so I didn't take the time to consider carefully about how to reformulate the articles and did just a revert. --Cyfal (talk) 11:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

archiving discussions
Arx, when you have a moment in your life, can you point me to the directions to the method you used to archive the discussion page on the Asheville article? It needs doing again, and I don't think you should be the only one to have to worry about it. I tried to look it up, but I couldn't figure out which method you used. Appreciato. Zeno Izen (talk) 16:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * See that robot you set up for this. Good idea.  Thanks for taking the time.  By the way, I've made this little news and weather page for Asheville.  Zeno Izen (talk) 15:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Lamium purpureum
I've just re-removed the gallery from this page and I wanted to explain my rationale. First and foremost, the gallery was covering up the taxobox. Secondly, an article of that size has no need for a gallery, and indeed galleries are generally avoided by most at WP:PLANTS unless there is some specific reason that merits one. As the images within it were just a collection of random photographs, a link to the commons serves the same purpose without cluttering the article. If you disagree strongly, feel free to reinstate it, but please make sure that it at least doesn't conflict with the taxobox. Cheers. DJLayton4 (talk) 07:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * That looks fine for now, although the best scenario would be to integrate the photos with more text, of course. But we could say the same for any article I suppose. I like your photos by the way. Cheers. DJLayton4 (talk) 20:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Orlando Bosch
It was vandalism. User 68.54.145.83 erased two of the three quotes and left one up. The original correct text of that one quote was "There were no innocents on that plane." And User changed it to "There were only innocents on that plane." User's heart might be in the right place, i.e. with the victims of that terrorist act, but the 'edit' was out of line. -The Gnome (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Boeing 787 cabin LED lights.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:Boeing 787 cabin LED lights.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sdrtirs (talk) 03:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello! The notification went to your page because you was the first to edit the image page on Wikipedia, although the image is stored on Commons. The page that was deleted was the Wikipedia image page, that you created. The Commons image page remains unchanged. I hope I made it clear for you. Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 04:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey what wrong?
I didnt vandalise it really is delete for all i care then ill use del.ici.ou.s

About the article concerning Houston attorney and former politician Michael Fleming, what is the deal, please? Mr. Fleming was once the county attorney in the nation's third largest county, is an attorney of note and this entry was far less self-serving than others on Houston attorneys. Can I please ask what the problem is here, especially since I worked hours on this?

(---) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birddogbrewer (talk • contribs) 16:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, new to this, so be patient. What's the deal with the Fleming article? See previous questions? Thanks.

(birddogbrewer) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birddogbrewer (talk • contribs) 17:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hio
The graph is sneaky because it is racist, as has been discussed on the discussion page, there is no such graph in either of the Iraq war articles. Basically what it is is racism, ever since the Nazis people have always used Russia size against it in propaganda; Russia is so big and has so many people that is why we can not win etc etc etc. But the second anyone inserts such a graph in both the Iraq war articles I will gladly insert in the this article as well.

Sneaky vandalism is that the person who reinserted it most likely used sock puppets to form a false support for the graph, since the micro second after he posted it on the discussion page 2 fresh accounts immediate agreed with him and so did an ip address, I mean just seconds after he had posted it. And then later when he again reposted it he called it reverting sneaky vandalism Jim Furtado (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

John Crittenden
Thanks for your e-mail.

I found this on WP:MOSDAB: ''Never include external links, either as entries or in descriptions. Disambiguation pages disambiguate Wikipedia articles, not the World-Wide Web. To note URLs that might be helpful in the future, include them as or on a talk page.''

If you feel this man was important, please add the link as described above (so it won't show on screen, but only to those who are editing it) rather than as a standard reference. Some editors (I'm not really among them) have also been concerned that this website has been added to a huge number of articles, and are concerned that this is advertising - only because of the huge number that have suddenly popped up. They are therefore often deleting the information. If you think he is notable and deserves an article, it might be worth you writing one, or at least a stub that can be expanded. Red links are routinely removed from disambiguation pages because people mistakenly think they are not permitted on these pages.

I hope this clears things up a little; I found his article on the website interesting, so he sounds worth you starting an article on.

Regards, Boleyn (talk) 08:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

stokely and wakelin 1824 speedy deletion - for copyright violation
hi Regarding deleteing this article as being not notable. Hi Regarding deleting this article as being not notable. the company was founded in 1824 and was an important ant horn comb manufacturer before the advent of plastics -- it exported combs from England to America and the company was then very well known an ordinary thing like a comb used to be expensive as it was made of horn. The company Stockley and Wakelin does not trade any more so there is no commercial pourpose.

copyright speedy deletion
There is another delete tag that that the article violates copyright as the material is elsewhere on the net. There is no copyright violation as the text elsewhere on the internet is my own. I am selling a Comb from made by Stokely and Wakelin on e bay and decided to do a write-up on Stockely and wakely - The comb is being sold for six pounds - so my intention to write the article on the company could hardly be for the purpose of flogging the one ccomb. Rather a comb was and is an important article of everyday use. There are no articles on horn combs which were used before plastics on Wikipedia and I was only trying to fill a gap by writing a article and improving on horn combs about what we used before plastics. Any way the article can be undeleted so that I and other wikipedians may improve on it and contribute to the knowledge of horn combs. Jopling100 (talk) 07:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice on the user page. I recreate the article using your suggestions and I am sure there will be an improvement Jopling100 (talk) 07:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Dalestorian
Need assistance with user and article. User is Dalestorian (talk) and possible anons or sock puppets editing the article Rick Hendrix. It has become apparent that the user has a conflict of interest and may, in fact, be Rick Hendrix given the comments on. The user continuously adds back a very lengthy list of awards, commendations, and achievements without citing any of them. The user refuses to engage in dialogue, despite repeated attempts via the article's talk page, his talk page, the talk page of Order of the Long Leaf Pine.

What is especially disconcerting are edits like this, after I have made edits like this. He just change the year and added it back. (Regardless of the fact that Jim Martin was not governor of NC in either 2004 or 2003.)  In doing research on Order of the Long Leaf Pine, I requested and received a list of all 6,000+ recipients of the award from NC Governor Mike Easley's office. (This is not original research as the list is available to anyone who requests it.) Rick Hendrix is nowhere on the list.

This calls into question many of the items listed in the article. (The contributor claims Grammy awards for songs he didn't write (e.g. Butterfly Kisses); items of questionable notability (e.g. 1997 Hendrix on CBS News); items that make no sense (e.g. "1994 Recognized by President Bill Clinton in 1994" - recognized for what? why?); I could go on and on.

Of the two citations in the article, one doesn't even mention him. There are a few external links at the bottom that do mention him, but I don't see any of the assertions in the article mentioned there.

There are so many problems with this article and the contributor(s) refuse to engage in dialogue. I don't know where to start to resolve this. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 08:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I suggest you take a look at the dispute resolution pages. Take this to the article's talk page and then request dispute resolution, for example a third-party opinion or a request for comments. If the user is disruptive and does not want to participate, you can request a block at WP:ANI but from what I see there is nowhere enough disruption for anything that drastic. So I suggest aforementioned ways to request assistance with dispute resolution. Please be aware that helpme is not a good way in such cases. Regards  So Why  09:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Appalachian English &mdash; POV
Would you mind glacing over the "Origins" section of the Appalachian English article and let me know if you think it has POV issues? I basically rehashed what the secondary sources were saying. Bms4880 (talk) 18:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Invite
Still under construction! Bms4880 (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Appalachian Music
On Monday, March 9, 2009, I created the article Appalachian music after reading the WikiProject Appalachia page. Someone attempted to restore the redirect to Old-time music, telling me that there was very little information. I undid that edit. However, they were correct regarding the amount of information in the article. Thus, I have a proposal: if we can, we can work together to improve and expand the Appalachian music article. If you know anyone who can help out with the article, please let them know. If you are interested in assisting, have questions, want to talk, etc., feel free to put something on my talk page.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated. TTS51207 (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Bob Ross
I have started a discussion on the Bob Ross page concerning bringing back a trivia section ("Bob Ross in Popular Culture"). Please visit the Bob Ross Discussion page and contribute your opinion. Proxy User (talk) 22:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Cherokee OTSA
I have added a legend for File:CherokeeOTSA.PNG per your request. Regards, Q·L·1968 ☿ 13:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations Arx Fortis! Your image Image:Kalmia Latifolia.jpg was the Random Picture of the Day! It looked like this:. - Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 12:50, 2 January 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) 04:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Incredibow
Hi, I reverted your deletion of the Incredibow text in Bow (music). The Incredibow is definitely present on the American fiddle scene, and probably the UK as well. I have no association with the manufacturer, other than playing a couple of their sticks from time to time. Although it does look like a commercial link, the Incredibow is the outstanding modern example of funny looking (by established standards) bows. I'll be happy to discuss it in the article's talk page, and in the meantime I'll be looking for secondary mention of it in something like Strings magazine. Cheers, __ Just plain Bill (talk) 22:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Your definition of spam is a bit off target in this context. For Wiki purposes, Wiki spam is defined here.  We are in agreement that a 3rd party article or page would be best.  I have posted a comment on the article's talk page. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 14:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Prefix or No Prefix
There's a more structured and informed than usual discussion taking place regarding the The prefix being added to Ohio State University. As you've participated in the past, I thought I'd inform you in case you'd like to participate. Ol Yeller Talktome 15:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Digital PABX listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Digital PABX. Since you had some involvement with the Digital PABX redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). :| TelCo NaSp  Ve :|  09:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Everclear
I unprotected it, I think the edit-warring issue is over. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

True Grit
Unless "True Grit" or "True Grit (film)" redirect there, there is no reason for add a misleading hatnote. Tb hotch * ۩ ۞ 19:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Eastern Air Lines Flight 346 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eastern Air Lines Flight 346 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Eastern Air Lines Flight 346 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. William 16:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29
Hi. When you recently edited Dominique Moceanu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acrobat (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) 15:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Trigun wanted.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Trigun wanted.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  23:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Helena (Empress), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gregory III (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) 11:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks and fixed. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 03:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited North Carolina's congressional districts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (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) 00:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Arx Fortis, thanks for your contributions, I replied to your comment on talk:Iritis.Kiatdd (talk) 02:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Commercial Airports in North Carolina.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of CAV/CLV


The article CAV/CLV has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * I don't really see the point of this page, as CAV/CLV is not a particularly scientific or common term, and any user that hears this phrase could easily break it down into its components.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. One Of Seven Billion (talk) 19:51, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)