User talk:Astrale01/Archive

License tagging for Image:Forest Foggy.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Forest Foggy.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 00:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Help!!
helpme Just one question: what is the difference between WP:PROD and WP:AfD? Thanks, Astrale01talkcontribs 02:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

With proposed deletions, articles are deleted if no one objects after five days. With Articles for Deletion, there is a discussion amongst users about whether the article will be deleted. Hope this helps.  W ODU P  02:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict, wah) It's not obvious, at first, but in retrospect, it makes a lot of sense. Originally, we just had "votes for deletion" at VfD, but as the project grew in scale, that was divided into a number of areas -- categories for deletion, articles for deletion, images for deletion, and so on. Obviously, AfD sees the most activity of the bunch. A lot of articles don't quite meet the speedy deletion criteria, but nevertheless don't need much discussion before deletion (between prior discussions, precedents, and such) -- to avoid clogging up the AfD daily logs with such cases, proposed deletion ("prod") was devised. Where AfD tags a page and creates a discussion page where the community as a whole is invited to participate, prod only tags the page for five days. During those five days, anyone can remove the prod tag; if the tag remains for five days, an admin has a look and usually decides to delete the page, or to open up an AfD discussion. So, in other words, prod is a special case designed to avoid excessive discussion in obvious cases, if that makes sense. If that's confusing, it doesn't hurt to just stick with AfD until you get a feel for the whole concept. – Luna Santin  (talk) 02:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I have another question. For WP:ACC do you have to be an admin to create an account for someone else. I would be interested in doing this, and I would like to know if I can. Thanks, Astrale01talkcontribs 23:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This question was answered on IRC. Astrale01talkcontribs 23:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for not being able to help you on time; I was ill, and not on the computer. If you need any more help, I should be on a bit more often now. :) · AndonicO Talk 23:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I know oversights can permanently hide revisions, but is it possible for an administrator to delete just a revision, not a whole page? Astrale01talkcontribs 16:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but they have to delete the whole page temporarily in order to do it (and unlike oversighting, the revision can be undeleted again and viewed by any admin). --ais523 16:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Three Hares Article
Would you mind giving a reason for your revert? I left a note on the talk page about why I removed the "Cultural References" section -- specifically the fact that there is no proven relationship between the "three hares" image and the cover of the AFI album; perhaps you could find a source to back up the inclusion of the trivia? Thanks. 74.134.228.189 01:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Unblock Confirmation
This is a conformation for an unblock discussed on IRC. Astrale01talkcontribs 00:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

 * 206.110.20.2 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • block user • [ block log]) might be under a CheckUser block at this moment. I've asked Jpgordon to look into it in the meantime. --   Netsnipe  ►  15:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Request passed on to blocking admin. --Yamla 15:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Jpgordon's OKed the soft block now. --  Netsnipe  ►  06:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There seems to be an awful lot of vandalism coming from this IP. Thy true power was clearly a sock, taunting user's to block him.  I have noted your request and will investigate if there is a better way to handle this. Dina 17:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Süleyman Başak
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Süleyman Başak. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. R andom  H  umanoid ( &rArr; ) 17:42, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know, deletion review lead to it being relisted for AfD. -- R  andom  H  umanoid ( &rArr; ) 18:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT
Your recent bot approvals request has been Declined. Please see the request page for details. . — xaosflux  Talk  02:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Herbert Midgeley
I said why I removed the tag. It asserted notability and that isn't speedy. It indeed was not notable, and perhaps could have been closed quickly under SNO, but for speedy tags, I follow the rules literally, as they are written. DGG 07:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Test message
I never really tried if this link works. Astrale01talkcontribs 01:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gollywhopper2 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gollywhopper2 1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Google favicon.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Google favicon.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 13:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)