User talk:Brad/archive1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! You say you've been around as an anon IP, but welcome to your username! The Rambling Man 14:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Reply
I'm terribly sorry about that. You see, when we get new users removing large chunks of content, as you did, 95% of the time it is vandalism. Please accept my humble apologies. Yuser31415 19:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If you look you'll see I added content but as you've apologized there's no need for this to continue.Brad 19:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Waking The Dead image
I have stuck a fair use rationale on the page and removed the ifd. Thanks for the heads up. Hope the law library is as dusty as it ever was. (Quentin X 14:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC))

Kingdom (TV series)
Dropped by this article, liked it, and noticed it was written entirely by you. Checked your other contributions, and saw that you are a great writer who has not been really recognised. So, here you go-

Ahem
I on the other hand feel compelled to point out the Kingdom (disambiguation) page has improper linkage, and scold you for not being more thorough. Jush joshing, thanks for writing an article *happy happy joy joy*. carry on. --Rektide 02:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Question: What Windsor are you a fan of? --Rektide 02:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't create the incorrect link in the disamb page so there's nothing I can do about that. And it would be the delightful town of Windsor, Berkshire that I be a fan of.Brad 21:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Yeah good idea. Usually vadilism is just vandilism, but when the vandal accusses me of vandilising by reverting... well I take it personally. Gran2 18:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think as he is clearly opperating separatly as both an account and an IP, that will help our case. The guy sems to think its better to add bog standard Biography infoboxes, than Actor ones, on the pages of Actors... which of course its not. Anyway, I've told an admin, so I'll see what she says on the matter. Gran2 19:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Good good, hopefully it will be granted and all of this nonsense can come to an end. Gran2 18:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Tag
Hi, When I checked the history of the page, you sad "Mr. Yonkers Writings are highly suspect." Well on the talk page Talk:Eating Cow Poop of the article, it provides the phone number and job of Mr. Yonkers. If your still having doubts about this, call Mr. Yonkers. --C. mike smith 18:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Follow Up
Yes, it's notable, It's becoming a tradition across the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by C. mike smith (talk • contribs) 2007-05-06

Harold Saxton
There was a picture on the John Simm article portraying the actor as Harold Saxton, where did this image go? We'd like to nab it for a doctor who article, if possible. James Random

Texas A&M
Howdy! First of, I on behalf of the editors of the Texas A&M University page would like to thank you for taking the time to peer review our page. We have made a whole lot of changes since the last peer review. We have obtained good article status, and we are a FA nominee. We were just wondering if you could give us a few more comments because of the enormous amount of changes we have made. Thank you so much for your help. As we say at our school Thanks, and Gig em Oldag07 02:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Yeah I thought that was rubbish as well, I havn't really done the biography section yet, I'll get on to it later tonight, and that will almost certainly go. Gran2 18:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Pilot episode of Friends
Well done on that rewrite of The Pilot (Friends episode). It's now at least twice as good :) It may be a worthy article to improve to featured status (it's not far off Pilot (House) in terms of lead length and number of references). CloudNine 10:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tips; I'll improve the template code soon. CloudNine 10:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hustle title card.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Hustle title card.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 03:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This image has been replaced with Image:Hustle title card-640.jpg by another user. Brad 09:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Brainteaser title card.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brainteaser title card.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 06:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This image was replaced with another image by another user, which was then deleted because it lacked a fair-use rationale. Brad 09:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The One with Ross's Wedding
What an excellent job! The JPS talk to me  13:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Jekyll
I'd just like to thank you to your recent revamp of the Jekyll article; thanks to you it seems much more improved, organized and interesting, especially with all the new information you've added. Congratulations on a job well done! King Wagga 09:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi Brad.

Thanks for the compliment! Ian Dunster 21:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Memento
Thanks for your comments. I really appreciate encouraging messages like that. The only thing left to do is develop an "Analysis and Themes" section, and then off to Peer Review and hopefully FAC.--Dark Kubrick 12:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hank Azaria
Hey don't mention, and thanks for cleaning up all those errors, two solid days of work on that page, really took its toll on my typing and grammatical skills. And I'm glad to hear your gonna re-write Huff, because at the moment it is pretty terrible. Gran2 20:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 15:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, much appreciated! --Yamla 16:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply
The entire article is about the DVDs and while I agree that some could have been removed, I think it is okay to leave the basic cover. -- Scorpion0422 14:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It really doesn't matter, all I know is that several people have already looked over the page and left it alone. -- Scorpion0422 14:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks for your contributions! Daniel 02:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bleak House 2005 title card.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bleak House 2005 title card.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 13:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

This Morning
I certainly don't think the images are pointless. They are not advertising and do contribute to the article. However while I know you can write good articles you're the type of person who doesn't like images in article. I do. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      "Talk"? 12:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you on the second one as it is a promotional poster. If we could replace both with as you say one image of the presenters interviewing somebody this would be more appropriate I think. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      "Talk"? 13:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The One with the Rumor
Considering your reasoning for declining to use fair-use images unless essential, I would agree then that article is best left without - a free image of a hermaphrodite doesn't seem necessary, and if a screencap would be serving a purely illustrative purpose, you are of course quite right. Well done on the promotion! Frickative 02:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Revert
Well perhaps I should and I stand by my comments. But I didn't wish to start a conflict, I know editors who like him who then turn to your article and destroy them and I don't want undue attention brought to my articles. Anyway, with TTN it would have no affect. If I had my way he would be banned. --UpDown 17:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Episode notability
Just wanted to say I think you've done a great job on those Friends episode pages. I find it shocking that people are arguing that they should be merged, throwing around terms like "fancruft" just because they personally don't like episode articles (Eusebeus' dismissal of "The One with the Prom Video", which has ample sources and real-world notability). Keep fighting the good fight. Kweeket 17:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)