User talk:Cjs56

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages. Again, welcome!
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * Non-administrator's noticeboard
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

( ! | ? | * ) 17:24, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Katefan0,

The reason I described Mark Assini as a "Conservative" on the Randy Kuhl article was because he was the nominee of the "Conservative Party." After this was changed to Republican I added the word "independent" to point out that despite being an enrolled member of the Republican party, he was running against their endorsed candidate on a third party line. I would prefer that the page be reverted back to my terminology, but it's really not worth dithering on over semantics in this case.

-cjs56


 * You're right, it isn't, but this is all information that really is more properly the subject of an article about the challenger himself, if you feel like doing it. Also, you can just type four tildes in a row ( ~ ) to sign your comments, it'll automatically fill out your username and a time/datestamp.  Best &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 20:41, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

NY-29
No problem, my pleasure. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DemiFL (talk • contribs) 21:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

By the way - what do you want to do with the 2008 thing I just put up?

Randy Kuhl
Hello! I have reverted your recent changes to the article. Just wanted you to know why. Some feel that "conservative" is a pejorative descriptor, so I changed it to Republican, which is what he is. Also, I removed "independent," because there is no such thing as an "independent Republican" -- independent is a discrete political identifier meaning aligns with no party. If you think that there is more to say about this defeated politician than is represented on Wikipedia, why don't you start an article on him? That way you could get more into his political positions and perhaps demonstrate why he is not a lock-step Republican. Welcome and hope you enjoy yourself here. Don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or trouble. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 19:56, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

user page
Check my user page, I think you'll like one of my userboxes and one of the special categories i have below, and you should add them to your user page.

Hello
Hi Chris, it is indeed me! And I'm quite addicted to wikipedia. It's nice to see a familiar face here! --Varco 00:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Jack Davis
Your corrections are wrong, and I have reverted back to an edited, earlier version. I have also written about this on the discussion page. If you are from Buffalo, then you certainly know that the storm was not a blizzard. You have changed that twice, and you are incorrect. Further, you should read the media reports where FEMA's Regional Representative gave Reynolds the credit, and said the designation was highly unusual. Major disaster declarations are a given only with major infrastructure damage. You assertion is incorrect, however, I edited slightly. Further, your accusation that Reynolds was part of a cover-up is, as ABC News wrote, "not supported by the facts."

American Legislative Exchange Council
An anonymous user has been engaging in large-scale deletions on this article. I've reverted a couple of times, but don't want to breach 3RR. As you've edited it recently, I thought you might want to take a look.JQ 01:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Twindom
How bizarre. I thought of doing something akin to urban studies as well... -Cjs2111 20:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Arch of the Immaculate Heart...
Cjs56, if this reaches you (I have no idea where your talk page is if not this), I see no merit at all to your article on the Arch project. Your relationship with Bruce Jackson, please? I assumed you were he, but maybe you are just pals--?

You are a fetus, grown larger, do you know that? It is Latin, it means, "young one." How did you put it, the fetuses terminated by abortion? Now, that is the MEANING of tendentious! How about straight talk, that your parents would have understood before PC arrived: Unborn children killed by abortion. It is not a clinical, detached experience, to be aborted, so why use sanitized euphemisms to refer to it?

The contributions you want to preserve are mostly just snipers, having a good sarcastic run at this beautiful project. Not worth the pixels they are printed on.

I cannot see any chance of agreeing on an edit of your article, since clearly you are not at all favorable to this enterprise. I think articles should be written by LOVERS of the subjects, don't you?

I hope you will agree, and let it be.

GabrielUrsa

Roycroft
Your discussion of the Roycroft movement in the American craft article is a very helpful addition. The section on early pioneers certainly could use more development, and I think your piece on Roycroft is a great start. Klmarcus 01:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Sandhurst
I have added some comments, I hope that helps. I see you've gotten some flack over protecting the encyclopedic nature of the article on the Arch of Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary yada yada. Heh heh heh. Cornell Rockey

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

my user page
Thanks for gettin' my back, yo. Cornell Rockey 23:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

check out my newest nerdyness
2nd Rhode Island Infantry Pretty fucking sweet, eh ? God I'm a nerd. Cornell Rockey 23:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not a huge civil war person, true, but Sullivan Ballou's letter that is read in Ken Burn's miniseries always stuck in my mind. While tweaking his article and checking the sources I noticed that he was in the same unit as Elisha Hunt Rhodes, another primary source for the Civil War miniseries, and figured that unit needed an article because two of its soldiers were the authors of primary sources that many people have heard excerpts from. Too bad sullivan ballou went to that safety school in Providence.


 * As for the straphanger article, yea, it needs work, but I'm just not sure what it needs. Cornell Rockey 13:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Matt Urban
Nice work finding a Polish-Cornellian-war-hero! Cornell Rockey 21:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

License IFDs
There are two questions that need to be kept separate - (1) can the image be used freely, meaning, without significant copyright restrictions and (2) if it cannot be used freely, can we use it under a claim of fair use.

In looking at the first question, works of the United States national government are public domain. Works of state governments are subject to whatever laws the state has. Some states may, for example, specifically exclude their flags, seals, etc, from copyright. Also, if the flag or seal was created before 1923, it is public domain anyway. In the case of an official document that contains the seal, but the document is otherwise public domain, I would say that is ok to use. It's the same thing if you take a photo of 20 of your friends and one of them happens to be wearing a Mickey Mouse t-shirt. Commons:Commons:Derivative works puts it best - what is your intention - are you using the photo to try and get around Mickey's copyright or are you really wanting to show a picture of your friends? In the case of the former, no, but in the case of the latter, it's fine to use. The same would be true of the document. If the document was a court ruling and you are using it in an article about that court ruling (assuming that court rulings are public domain), that's fine.

As for the question of whether or not it can be used under a claim of fair use, it is perfectly 100% a-ok to use a non-free image in its proper context. The problem is the GALLERY of non-free images. We can use copyrighted seals, flags, cd covers, movie screenshots, etc. We just can't have galleries of them.

As for discussions, there is one right now on the talk page of WP:FAIR and there are a number of them in the archives of that talk page. There's also a long ongoing discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Removal of images from lists of episodes, though it's focused on the manner of enforcing the policy, there's no real question on what the policy is. The most important thing to see, which trumps anything else is the foundation's resolution on images. I hope this long-winded reply helps. --BigDT 16:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

zombie outbreaks
Thanks man! Cornell Rockey 19:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Politics
Hi Cjs56. I believe you and I approach U.S. politics from a very similar perspective, given some of your edits that I have seen lately. That said, edits like this one really really really need a damn good source attached. Not only does it not comport with the verifiability policy, but it has potential BLP problems as well. On top of that, we have to be careful to adhere to NPOV. Statements like "who has never served his country", while something you or I might say in casual conversation with likeminded friends, cannot possibly adhere to NPOV on Wikipedia. Please do your best to keep these considerations in mind when editing political articles. I don't mean to discourage you from contributing to these articles, quite the opposite, please keep up your good work. Cheers. · jersyko   talk  03:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

New Ivy League
You should put your vote here > Articles for deletion/New Ivy League. Cheers. Cornell Rockey 20:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary
Hello. Regarding your comment, I have started doing that. I understand that it is sooooo much easier to leave a comment, then to have too look for what that edit was.

Thank you for your suggestion,

Politics rule 22:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)=)

Naming
My original research, done when I didn't know any better, has been incorporated in name. Thanks for the heads up. Fred Bauder 04:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

re: ALEC

 * On an anon user Talk page, you asked:

Have you ever seen any of the "model legislation" that ALEC churns out? I spent some time arguing against an "eco-terrorism" bill which defined "eco-terrorism" so broadly that serving on a town planning and zoning board would make one an "eco-terrorist"-- with ridiculously steep penalties to boot. Am I biased on this issue? Yes I am, because, unlike ALEC, I give a rat's ass about freedom. They're entitled to call themselves "Jeffersonian" (unless one of their model bills eliminating the First Amendment passes) but that does not make them Jeffersonians. --Cjs56 09:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've read rather a lot of it. And while I don't agree with all of their choices (and sometimes think that they are making political compromises), for the most part their model legislation lives up to their stated Jeffersonian goals.  Based on both the written evidence and on conversations with people I know to be members, I believe that they care passionately about freedom and individual responsibility.
 * One thing worth remembering is that the organization does not draft its model legislation in a vacumn. It is usually drafted in response to what they perceive are even worse bills or proposals - bills that would inject the government even more deeply into private affairs.  Do they overshoot the mark sometimes in their zeal to fix a perceived problem?  Certainly.  Do they sometimes undershoot the ideal when they think that's the only way to get a bill through?  Of course.  Those are occupational hazards for political advocacy groups of all political philosophies.
 * At least here it's only a model for prospective law. Our respective legislatures can and should still fix sections that are poorly worded if/when they choose to take up the bill.  And unlike most other policy-making processes, private citizens like you and I have the opportunity to see the model bill and to prepare our objections and comments ahead of time.  I'd much rather have a fighting chance against a bill I don't like than to try to get a bad law overturned after the fact.  ALEC's approach may not be perfect but it's a lot better than most of the alternatives.
 * By the way, yes I am the same editor - just working from a different machine today. I've tried to elaborate on my specific edits to the article on the Talk page.  I don't consider myself particularly pro- or anti-ALEC but do think that we need to be precise and fact-based in our description of the organization.  Thanks.  12.168.68.11 16:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Gibellina pictures
The pictures were missing (at least I couldn't see them) so I followed the link to the Commons where I saw that all pictures were protected by copyright and not in the public domain. Zello 02:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Sage Chapel
When you get a chance, please check User:Cornellrockey/sandbox out and see if I have made any errors before I deploy it? Thanks cOrneLlrOckEy 15:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Greg Ball
Hello.

Fine edits to the Greg Ball article.

A few comments/notes:


 * Courage cup controversy to Courage Cup Controversy&mdash;I think we're both incorrect. Subheadings should be lowercase after the first word, with exceptions for proper nouns, so I suppose it should go to Courage Cup controversy?
 * Ranking member vs ranking minority member. I am not sure why you pipelinked it... isn't the Ranking member always in the minority?
 * I agree that sentence on Pataki should go, the 99th was Patrick Manning's seat. It was left over from when I transposed the old article which was extremely unbalanced.
 * As for the sentence about 10,000 doors, I think it is notable because it was mentioned by the Times, also, the phrase "Ran hard" alludes to the controversial race on both sides without violating NPOV.
 * I tried to make the Courage Cup section as NPOV as possible. In the previous article it was suffering from WP:UNDUE and NPOV concerns, which is why I went for the rewrite. I think the sentence you added is fair. It's a difficult phraseology here without defaming one side or the other, but I think it gives a good description as of now.
 * The term "national prominence" I got from the Journal News, dtd 2/14/2008, "Greg Ball joins national lawmakers against alien ‘invasion’" by Leah Rae. There are also numerous national political blogs concerning the 19th CD, e.g. Congressional Quarterly, Cook Political Report, Roll Call, and Rothenberg, which have mentioned Ball and his stances on immigration. We also have the sentence "The issue of where to house detainees is one that Assemblyman Greg Ball, a Republican from Carmel, wants to address. He will conduct a symposium about 287 (g) in April, inviting law enforcement officers from counties in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania." from today's New York Times, which would at least convey regional prominence, if there is such a thing. I reverted the sentence but left out the term "national", what are your thoughts on that?

MrPrada (talk) 05:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

re:
Thank you. I've placed the article up as Good Article nominee. The article is also undergoing a peer review at WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Gregory R. Ball, I would appreciate any and all contributions you may have there. Thanks again. MrPrada (talk) 06:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Twilight (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)
Just a friendly note on Twilight (Buffy the Vampire Slayer). I see you removed the notability tag on this article, with a reason of "major character in a comic book". However, the article still doesn't meet the notability requirements of WP:FICTION, specifically the part that says "fictional concepts can be presumed notable if they have received significant real-world coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Since this hasn't been met, I've re-applied the tag. However, I'd be thrilled if you cared to find and add independent, reliable sources that show notability. Thanks! --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You have a couple of valid points.

My initial placement of comments as regards uniforms was not well chosen. I think that I am accurate, but placement in a seperate paragraph was a better choice.

As regards sourse, I will have to stand on the fact that I am the sourse. As earlier stated, I am a senior officer in the NYG, have access to senior, mid-level and junior NCOs as well as the full spectrum of the officer corps, enlisted personnel, etc. As a former, carreer army officer, the think that this provides my bona fides.

Thank you for your comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.98.124 (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Friends of the Tompkins County Public Library Booksale


The article Friends of the Tompkins County Public Library Booksale has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links: Friends of the Tompkins County Public Library Booksale – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 08:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jon Powers


The article Jon Powers has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unsuccessful candidate for public office - does not meet WP:POLITICIAN

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Lincolnite (talk) 15:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Jon Powers
I have nominated Jon Powers, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Jon Powers. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Lincolnite (talk) 22:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Cjs56! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 12:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Adam Zyglis -

Speedy deletion nomination of Matthew Zeller
A tag has been placed on Matthew Zeller requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Tommy (msg) 21:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

George D. Maziarz
Re: George D. Maziarz page

If you do not see the need for the section "Being Elected by the People, for the People" that is fine, but yet that is one opinion. It is information that people may not have known before but can now find it due to the references and it being on the wikipedia page. Someone trying to learn more about their representative can now find that he is committed to representing the people of his district and can see how he is doing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk • contribs) 13:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

George D. Maziarz
Re: George D. Maziarz page I am taking down the section you chose to put up about the 2009 coup because it is inaccurate. You have not cited any sources that show that the information you have posted on this topic is factual. For the record, citation of a news article is not a sufficient source. In reality, unless you were in the room, you have no confirmation of what actually transpired in relation to the coup. Please refrain from posting your misguided perspective on this matter or furthur action will be taken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk • contribs) 14:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * While I was not in the room when the coup transpired, I have watched the video recording of the Senate chamber during the coup. I saw the Republicans choosing to organize with Pedro Espada and Hiram Monserratte. --Cjs56 (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * And yet your references do not show factual documentation of what transpired in regards to Senator Maziarz. You have referenced what transpired with the coup. I could hypothetically say myself was involved in the Civil Rights Movement and reference the civil rights movement. How is it shown I was involved or not involved unless it is proven? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk • contribs) 16:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

George Maziarz Communication
en•cy•clo•pedia or encyclopaedia en•cy′•clo•pae′•dia (en sī′klə pē′dē ə, in-) noun 1.	a book or set of books giving information on all or many branches of knowledge, generally in articles alphabetically arranged

Why is it that you up feel that this section about communication is not encyclopedic? Everything is referenced and is not written in any form to be puffery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk • contribs) 16:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

George Maziarz - Legislative Accomplishments
Your knowledge of the New York State senate seems to be a bit fuzzy. You have removed legislation from the section that has bill references showing that Senator Maziarz was the sponsor or co-sponsor of a bill that is then voted upon by the Senate. Yet you left some legislation in there that was sponsored or co-sponsored by Senator Maziarz. All of the listed legislative accomplishments have been either sponsored or co-sponsored by Senator Maziarz and then made law. There is no reason to keep certain ones and delete certain ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk • contribs) 16:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * As I said, "a senator cannot pass a bill." If you would like to write that Maziarz sponsored a particular bill or voted for a bill then, please do.  He cannot, however, "pass" a bill and to write that he "championed" a bill is biased and non-encyclopedic.  --Cjs56 (talk) 17:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree! I did not notice that I had wrote it like that. One comment though, I dont understand your reasoning behind your edits. You say that having wording such as "Pass" is not correct then that is fine, I agree...you took down language that didnt have such wording, and you actually left up some legislative accomplishments that had the wording "passing a bill"...I just ask that you make sense with your edits since your saying one thing and are doing something else. Thanks --Niagara-Orleans-Monroe (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Sandhurst graduates
Category:Sandhurst graduates, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Notability Vouching
Hi, we're currently working on an assignment for a Cornell class where we have to create a Wikipedia article; we have chosen to create an article for Cornell Concert Commission. We're looking for people to help with the article and also to voche for its notability to prevent deletion. We feel that with the sources we have (NYT), it should meet the threshold of notability worthy of an article. Thanks for any and all help. Kl462 (talk) 02:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2015
Your recent editing history at Sanford I. Weill shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 2600:1006:B119:F71A:59F:BBA0:64EA:CE63 (talk) 23:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Kathy Hochul NY LG Official Portrait.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kathy Hochul NY LG Official Portrait.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 17:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kathy Hochul as New York Lieutenant Governor official portrait.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Kathy Hochul as New York Lieutenant Governor official portrait.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. , and it was either uploaded on or after 19 May 2005, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
 * state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
 * add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Train2104 (t • c) 21:41, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Kathy Hochul as New York Lieutenant Governor official portrait.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kathy Hochul as New York Lieutenant Governor official portrait.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ~ Rob 13 Talk 21:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Arch of Triumph of the IHM
I have no problem with this article if it were anything other than a proposal. Most of the newspaper coverage dates to 2002. I tried to PROD this in 2013, but it was contested so I let it drop. But I stumbled on it again today, and don't find where there has been any progress. Their 990N for 2103 shows $4,650 in income for a total of $40,457 towards a $100M project. In a 2016 interview with the diocesan paper, Behr reported that they had not as yet acquired any land. His remarks suggest he might be rethinking the location. All he's got thus far are expensive drawings, parts of which someone appears to be hawking for a architectural "Cliffnotes". If they ever get something built, it's worth an article, but I doubt it will, particularly since Francis fired a German Bishop for exorbitant expenses. I bring this up because you indicated sometime previously that "I'll look to see if there has been any progress, otherwise I'll consider deletion." -and I don't know the correct template for "pipedream". Mannanan51 (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

By all means, feel free to delete. I wrote that article a long time ago, and there is no way that it meets notability guidelines. I kinda forgot about it. Cjs56 (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Arch of Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and International Shrine of the Holy Innocents for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arch of Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and International Shrine of the Holy Innocents 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/Arch of Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and International Shrine of the Holy Innocents 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. ansh 666 18:43, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Matthew Zeller for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matthew Zeller 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/Matthew Zeller until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:38, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks
You might enjoy Greenwood, New York, insurrection of 1882 or Hornell Traction Company. I grew up in Canisteo (village), New York. deisenbe (talk) 18:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Robert H. Treman
Hello from a fellow Cornellian. I noticed you had Robert H. Treman on the to-do list on your user page. I created that article today. Feel free to contribute further to it if you'd like. — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 06:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)