User talk:Ataricodfish/Archive1

Welcome
Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Five pillars, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not, How to write a great article

Welcome!! --Gurubrahma 19:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Phil Collins image violations
Thank you for your contributions to the Phil Collins article. Regrettably, the images Youngphilcollins.jpg, Earlycollins.jpg and CollinsBBC.jpg have been removed from the article because of their copyright status. Please refer to WP:Copyrights for detailed information on Wikipedia's image policies. If you are able to ascertain the copyright information of these images and are able to use them, under the permission of the current copyright holder of the images, please supply that information as part of the image tag. Also, please continue to contribute and provide your valuable insight to improve the quality of the Phil Collins article. Thanks AreJay 04:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Noel
Alright? Cheers for yer comments on Noel Gallagher. I would like to know why you feel its necessary to remove the trivia and controvercy sections.

I dunno about you, but I like easy to digest stuff like the trivia section, and it is the only way to present a lot of the the interesting facts in there which I would have trouble comfortably fitting into the main article without a) making it too long or b) making said facts appear out of place.

As for the controversy section, it's hard to expand because often what we have are the quotes - nothing more or less - and I can't really work them into to the main article for the same reasons as with the trivia section. I think it should stay because it gives a flavour of the man, coz, he's famous for saying controvercial things.

What do you think? Got a miricle solution? Any feedback would be great, and maybe also some money.--Crestville 15:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, [].


 * ha ha, I just knowck the trivia section on the head while you were saying that. The thing about the contrvercy section is, no one really has responded. Robbie Williams and that's about it. I'll try and expand it like you sed (which btw was helpful), but it won't be as good as Mansons.--Crestville 18:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: FAC
Thanks for the message; I'll reply on the FAC page. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Phil Collins
Well done on the Phil Collins article reaching featured status. It's a very good article and I know you put a lot of effort into it. Kudos to you. Rossrs 09:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all of the work you did to improve the article and nominate it for FA status. I saw your nomination on the FAC page, and now I regret not voting to support it, but the important thing is that he will be honored here on Wikipedia for his work. Be sure to tell me when a date has been set for it to appear. Captain Jackson 19:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Phil Collins FAC
''Just a quick thank you again for your vote of support for Phil Collins during its FAC review. I just learned that it won its nomination. (See []). Thank you again for taking the time to review it. --Ataricodfish 06:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)''
 * You are welcome! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

We Belong Together FAC
Thanks for attempting to lift my mood. Perhaps I'll return when the bedrock is broken and the second FAC commences. I'm also fairly new to Wikipedia so receiving this gulp of medicine three weeks in is sort of... brutal. Thanks for the ".OGG" tip, I'll get around to downloading and processing the files eventually! See you for now. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 14:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * A sound sample has been added and the article is back up for nomination. The writing has improved significantly as well. &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 20:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Good luck to you as well! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 20:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

FMP
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Featured Music Project by signing up on the status page. What you'd do is sign up for one (or more) of eight categories, such as the discography or lead section. No more than once a month, you'd be given an article which is getting close to being ready for WP:FAC, and is only deficient in a few categories. You'd do what you can in your section (and, of course, anything else you like). If a couple of people specialize in each category, we should be able to take some concrete steps towards improvement on a wide range of articles. In addition, you can sign up as a "shepherd" to take articles that meet all the criteria through a peer review and (hopefully) successful candidacy. Tuf-Kat 04:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit late, but congrats on Phil Collins
You've done great on that article. Who would have known that mistaken nomination for Featured Article would lead to somebody completely rewriting the article and making a brilliant page out of it. Thanks for the message on my talk page. I know I am a bit late replying but I don't like the internal politics of this place. Nevertheless I am looking at Phil Collins and it's totally different from what I remembered seeing the last time. Brilliant piece of writing. Phil can be proud of you. KittenKlub 05:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Phil Collins Single's Collection
Hello Again! Can You Please Check On The Articles I've Written On Phil's Early Singles...I'm Up To I Don't Care Anymore. If You Can Check The Last Artciles For Me That'd Be Great Help, Thanx. And Once Again, Congrats On The Phil Collins Article, I'm Sure Phil Would Be Pleased, But I'd Prefer To Have Phil The First Musical Artist On Wikipedia That Has All His Singles With One Wikipedia Article... Skully Collins 14:27, 6 March 2006 (GMT)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page .

CafePress
Hi Ataricodfish, I just saw your recent remarks on the Phil Collins page (re: CafePress). It looks like the user User:Jamesonking is relatively new here (signed up for an account on 3/8) and may not be fully aware as to the guidelines and rules that govern Wikipedia. It might be helpful if you leave a message on the user's talk page, perhaps pointing him/her in the direction of WP:EL for any questions he/she may have on what links are permissible. Let us assume good faith in the recent edits since quite clearly the intention of the user, although possibly misguided, was to improve the quality of the Phil Collins article.

On a side note, I admire your work on the Phil Collins article and the effort you put into getting it to an FA status. I was listening to Duke and Face Value in the car today and the music and production quality still blows me away! :) AreJay 03:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, 

Van Halen
Thanks for your critical and informative comments about the Van Halen article. Chevan 18:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

No Problem!
It comes with the turf, a little dirt on your badge ;) I saw you reverted that there and figured it out.  Happy editing! TKE 02:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Genesis
Hi again, Ataricodfish...I'm in the process of revamping the Genesis article, and I would like to get to a point by the middle of next month where I can request a peer review and hopefully, eventually, nominate it for an FAC. Can you please glance through the article as it stands now and provide some feedback on the progress? There's still a ways to go &mdash; the article is glaringly lacking in audio samples...I'm working on that as I write this...I will also import the whole article into a text editor for spellcheck, because quite clearly, I can't spell! But I'd love to hear your thoughts on how the article is progressing. Also, I'd like to know what material you referenced for the criticisms of Phil's music that you had to incorporate into the PC article to maintain NPOV. Thanks! AreJay 01:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Genesis PR
Hi Ataricodfish! Genesis is now on peer review. I like the article as it stands now but this is my first major overhaul of a music related article so I could definately use your insight and guidance in improving its quality. Any suggestions and recommendations you can provide will be greatly appreciated! Link: Peer review/Genesis (band)/archive1. Thanks! AreJay 21:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, 


 * Hi Ataricodfish...thanks for your suggestions. I've made some changes over the past couple of days. Can you please take another look at the article and tell me if this is any better? It still needs some copyediting. Also, I have posted my responses/queries to some of your comments here. Thanks AreJay 14:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Ataricodfish &mdash; you are awesome! I will review and respond to your comments tomorrow morning if that's okay. AreJay 00:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Ataricodfish &mdash; just wanted to know if I have your vote for pushing Genesis for FAC. Do you think we should wait a little longer or does this look good IYO? AreJay 15:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello again, thanks for all your help! I'll try to address some of the questions you had before pushing the article for FAC. I don't think there's a clear reason why Ray Wilson was terminanted &mdash; in fact I remember him saying in an interview that Mike and Tony just called him up one day and said, we're not continuing...and that was that. I'll try to see if I can get a more concrete answer though. As far as the voting...I was actually only asking for a "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down" from you on whether or not the article looked good enough to push for FAC. :) I normally try to get the buy-off of editors that have helped me during an article's PR before listing it as an FAC. I wouldn't try to influence the decision of an FAC article by asking for contibutors' votes &mdash; its not Wiketiquette. As you say though, I think the article looks fairly good and I forsee any objections that crop up during the FAC process to be minor ones. Thanks for all your help, and I'll definately keep you posted on the progress! AreJay 03:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Ataricodfish &mdash; just wanted to let you know that Genesis is now a featured article candidate.AreJay


 * Hi Ataricodfish, yeah I'm glad things are moving smoothly...I wish they could move a lot faster though! I was just a little concerned because I've had many people express their opinon (Support/Oppose) on my previous FACs within the first day of me putting the articles up for FAC and I released that after 3 or 4 days that I had just one support and a bunch of comments for the Genesis FAC. I perceived that to be because of a lack of interest in Genesis from the general wiki public &mdash; now I know how Tony and Mike must have felt after Calling All Stations bombed here in the States! :) Anyways, thanks for your kind message, I am currently combing the article for any traces of "slant" towards the band, since that was one of the concerns expressed by a conditional support voter yesterday. Thanks AreJay 14:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Jack Tatum
I commented to your objections to the article in FAC. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 01:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, .

RE: Torchic
I do apologise for deleting those - it was totally by mistake and I don't know how it happenned (perhaps it has something to do with one of my typing fingers being out of order and me missing keys now and again). Please ceept my apologies. --Cel es tianpower háblame 14:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, 

Torchic
Hey Atari, thank you for helping with Torchic's FA. I was wondering if you could look at what I've done so far, here. Any comments are welcomed. Thanks again, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers


 * Thanks, I need to get back to doing my other stuff (I'm cleaning Princess Peach at the minute, horrible :S) Thank you for helping, "you need to improve this" is much more welcoming than "you need to delete this", as you can imagine. Talk you later. Cheers, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers


 * I share a common opinion, I am a reviewer at Good Article Nominations and I've passed about 4 out of 25.. no one likes me there really. I personally didn't think Torchic stood a chance, someone else said I should. I'm not sure if I'm going to regret it, it's too early to tell.. depends on how many of the "Strong Oposse"s are counted valid... H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 17:22, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Huh?
I can't remember either ... say, what were we just talking about? ==ILike2BeAnonymous 00:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, .

Molly the cat
No problem. The only reason that was there at all was that another user moved all that content on Molly to Molly (Disambiguation), and then put just the paragraph about the cat in its place. Definitely not a good edit :-/ I had a heck of a time undoing his work. He apparently has/had done similar things elsewhere, where he replaces pages just because the (usually less important) item is in the recent news. Thanks for cleaning that up! -- Kickstart70 - T - C 01:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Posted by (^'-')^ Covington 07:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC), on behalf of the the AID Maintenance Team

Blocking
Hey Atari. Vandals like 216.56.4.194 (talk &bull; contribs &bull; [ page moves] &bull; block user &bull; [ block log]) are blacklisted once blocked, so when they're editing, all of their contributions show up in places like the IRC channel #vandalism-en-wp, making it easier for vandalism patrollers to revert harmful edits and quickly issue or request a block. That's about as close as you can get to "immediate" without making it so. ;-)

By the way, 216.56.4.194's first block was actually only 24 hours, as the shorter block is the one that takes effect in block conflicts, iirc. :-) Thank you for being alert, and also for your kind words of thanks on my talk page. Regards,  Sango  123    (e)  20:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on his talk page, .


 * Glad to help. :) I'm a she, by the way.  Sango  123    (e)  20:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded to editor on her talk page, .

An award
Hi Ataricodfish, just wanted to let you know that Genesis is now a featured article. I would not have been able to achieve this without your continued support and helpful suggestions. I found working with you to be a very pleasant experience and I hope we'll have an opportunity to work together on another article sooner than later! Thanks. AreJay 02:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, BTW, I've put Phil Collins up for Tomorrow's Featured Article. Not sure if you ever got around to nominating it...I can't recall seeing it on the main page (I could be wrong!) Thanks AreJay 03:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Socratic Club pages
By all means, delete them. My interest was in the Oxford Socratic Club founded by CS Lewis, and if you take a look at the history log for the Socratic Club article you'll find a spitting contest between the University of Michigan and Oregon State students. If you delete these two, you may want to consider moving Socratic Club (Oxford) to Socratic Club. I added this comment to the deletion discussions, too. David Bergan 22:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for informing me of the deletion nomination of the Hunted Fish article. They are an extremely local New York band. Hopefully, an article will be available in the future when the band has become more "notable" and finishes recording their album.

Best regards, Jules 06:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

re:Speedy
Sorry for the late reply, it looks like you have already taken care of the situation. As I was only just recently promoted as an admin, I'm still kind of new to the admin privelidges. I believe that the WoW template doesn't actually block the user, but is used by the blocking admin as a label on the userpage of the vandal. Regards, AndyZ t 22:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Go away
Please don't leave your tired comments on my userpage. A Few Good Socks 16:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Always good to know I've made a new friend. :) My original tired comment was here . --Ataricodfish 16:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Notton
I like you.

You're helpful.--Crestville 14:37, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Socratic Club (University of Michigan)
Done. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 03:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks like you've issued a note about it, so I don't think there isn't anything to add on for now. Speedied the recreated page. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 14:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Gracias :)
Thank you so much for reverting the vandalism done to my user page. Today it was vandalized again. Would you mind deleting the article called "Rosamelia is a f**** greaser" which was created today? (it's in my user page's history). Rosa 16:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

In The Air Tonight Article
Hello Again :) - I'm here to ask on your opinion of the article In the Air Tonight, now one thing I'm not sure about is the amount of POV statements I've put in the article so can you give it a quick "scan" for POV statements. Factually I KNOW it's correct, because I have Asperger Syndrome and can remember things much more easier then people without it, sadly however my English grammer really and I MEAN REALLY sucks...so a grammer check would also be much appreciated, once again thank you so much :) --Skully Collins 15:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Phil Collins prose
Don't worry about it too much; it's tough enough putting an FA together (says he, never having done it, although I have several likely candidates when I get around to fixing them up). Anyway, I thought I could phrase my complaint in a helpful civil way, given that I took this counterexample a little personally, as you can see.

I may yet do that master edit. Daniel Case 03:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and as for the vandalism don't be surprised. It's a rite of passage for every Main Page FA. Daniel Case 05:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?
How about you get your facts right before warning me for vandalism. I have reworded my edit, and am expecting an apology at the least.



-How about waiting for the edits to show up before replying in such a condescending manner. Now where's my apology?

-Opinions? The article is full of yours - how would you like it if I deleted every one of those? And tell me what is 'unverified' and I'll do my best to verify it - although seeing as you seem so keen to upkeep the page maybe you should be doing this yourself?

Leslie Nielsen
Hi! Thanks for your note, I hope you don't mind my comments - as I said, most of the article is very good and well-referenced, I just thought that that section in particular needed a little tidy before passing it. Other than that, it's all quite interesting. Bob talk 19:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I have been reworking the article for the last two weeks and have nominated it for GA just now. Thanks for your hard work on the article previously, you made it a much easier start for me to begin modifying it to meet GA standards. Hopefully the GA goes well. I just read your message on your user page, and I would like to welcome you back, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! --Nehrams2020 23:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair-use images in discographies
I don't understand how you don't see that this discussion is directly relevant to the issue with discographies. Yes, its main subject was lists of TV episodes, but the key thing in any fair use on Wikipedia is the inclusion of critical commentary - see Non-free content for clarification. If anything, there is more of what might be called "critical commentary" in the synopsis of episodes on a typical episode list - these discography articles are almost all simply a list of pictures, titles, and some statistics. If the bar has been set above the use of fair-use images in "List of X Episodes", then discographies should not be using them either.

I also still don't really understand your reading of our fair-use policy to determine that they are acceptable. My two main points are thus: (1) Non-free content criteria #8 explicitly says fair-use images may not be used in lists and galleries, and (2) Non-free content states that all fair-use images, with the exception of logos, must be accompanied by critical commentary in the article in order to justify their use. Either you must not believe that one or both of these points is true, or you must not believe that one or both of these applies for some reason. I am genuinely curious as to your reasoning on that. (ESkog)(Talk) 05:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Brotherbearost.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brotherbearost.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Lovesongsphilcollins.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lovesongsphilcollins.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Whitenightssoundtrack.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Whitenightssoundtrack.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Karmichael Hunt
Could you peer review Karmichael Hunt. That would be much appreciated.

Article:Karmichael Hunt Peer Review:Peer review/Karmichael Hunt

Thanks

SpecialWindler 07:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for giving your time to review the article it's much appreciated... Special Windler  talk 12:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Nielsenforbiddenplanet.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nielsenforbiddenplanet.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —  pd_THOR  undefined | 22:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Preznielsen1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Preznielsen1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —  pd_THOR  undefined | 22:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nielsenforbiddenplanet.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Nielsenforbiddenplanet.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 04:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Preznielsen1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Preznielsen1.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 05:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:UnorthodoxBehaviourCDcover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:UnorthodoxBehaviourCDcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Atlantisost.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Atlantisost.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CruelintentionsOST.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CruelintentionsOST.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

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

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Leslieneilsennakedtruth.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Leslieneilsennakedtruth.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Helloimustbegoing.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Helloimustbegoing.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:SeriousHits.jpg
I have tagged Image:SeriousHits.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Whitenightssoundtrack.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Whitenightssoundtrack.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Testify.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Testify.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)